Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cheviot.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!cheviot!ncx
From: ncx@cheviot.uucp (Lindsay F. Marshall)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: Reform net.internat
Message-ID: <482@cheviot.uucp>
Date: Mon, 28-Oct-85 05:57:18 EST
Article-I.D.: cheviot.482
Posted: Mon Oct 28 05:57:18 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 30-Oct-85 07:33:32 EST
References: <5717@fortune.UUCP> <629@ecsvax.UUCP> <10820@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: ncx@cheviot.UUCP (Lindsay F. Marshall)
Organization: U. of Newcastle upon Tyne, U.K.
Lines: 39

In article <10820@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> fair@ucbarpa.BERKELEY.EDU (Erik E. &) writes:
>
>This is absolutely, uncategorically false. Cite an example, if you can.
>
fa.* -> mod.completely.ridiculous.long-names (which never saw an votes
on, but of course not every article actually makes it out of the US) and
werent some of the stargate (whatever that is) groups started at BOF sessions???

> >No newsgroup creation or deletion should be excepted from the usual
>consensus building procedure.  > Wait a second... whose consensus????
There WAS a consensus reached by a group of people, they just didnt
happen to waste money posting it to the net.If a consensus is reached at
an official user group meeting (NOT the Auchtermuchty UN*X hackers
society sort of group) how can it be different from doing it on the
net??? The same people would have voted, the same result would have
pertained and somebody would have done a create group. Yes, but
who?????? One of the netlords of course, who werent at the
meeting........ How would it be if I told you that the discussion HAD
taken place, but only with a non-US distribution (yes that would be
insular, but consider it) - yes you would have a grouse when you got the
create group message. OK then why does the rest of the world have to put
up with showers of create group messages for groups that dont appear
outside the US and are of no interest to us and for which we have seen
almost no discussion. When the "usual procedure" starts to take into
account such things as distributions etc. then the net will start to
look a lot healthier tahn it does at the moment.

>
>You should be offended by the high handed manner in which the EUUG presumes
>to dictate to the USENET. USENIX has never done so.
>
Come off it!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lindsay F. Marshall, Computing Lab., U of Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne & Wear, UK
  ARPA  : lindsay%cheviot.newcastle.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa
  JANET : lindsay@uk.ac.newcastle.cheviot
  UUCP  : !ukc!cheviot!lindsay
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------