Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site topaz.RUTGERS.EDU Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!columbia!topaz!lear From: lear@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (eliot lear) Newsgroups: net.news.group Subject: Re: Put bad newsgroups on probation before killing them. Message-ID: <4181@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> Date: Sat, 9-Nov-85 14:54:24 EST Article-I.D.: topaz.4181 Posted: Sat Nov 9 14:54:24 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 11-Nov-85 05:38:27 EST References: <148@sdcc7.UUCP> <8998@ritcv.UUCP> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 48 I would like to say that I agree with Mike Lutz's article <8998@ritcv.UUCP> in principle. I believe a milder change might be in order first. If a group is being considered for removal, it would seem to me that a message should be sent to BOTH net.news.group and that group saying so. Maybe the best thing to do would be to ask for votes (including reasons why the group should exist when that is in question) as to whether there is still enough interest in the group. If the group doesn't pass the parameters needed to create a new group then it should be aliased to a group like net.sb. [The rest of this article applies to creation of new groups as well as those being considered for removal.] As far as who votes... I don't care but 2 things MUST be taken into consideration: 1) Is the group constructive? Is it of any practical / intellectual value or is it more net.garbage? 2) Is there an audience among the net.community for such a group? I would love to see a group like mod.economics but I cannot imagine such a group attracting a large audience. (Maybe I'm wrong about that too.) The problem with only polling SAs of backbone sites is that they cannot show interest in EVERY group on the net. Maybe the SAs of all sites should locally poll their users and report the info to their nearest backbone SA who can then vote from that information. (I guess that is like the Senator/constituent method.) Of course, the problem here is that the burden falls upon too many people to take a survey for a group like net.cooking.soups.... In any event, the "Powers that be" (ie Spaf and company) could use these figures to guide (but not necessarily govern) them in creating/removing groups. All I am really trying to say (in an admittedly verbose manner) is that the views of the masses must be taken into account. Using this method, of course, would eliminate suprise rmgroups too. Comments? Flames > /dev/null. eliot -- Should the opinions expressed above be those of someone else besides the author.. Well.. it ain't my fault. [lear@topaz.rutgers.edu] [{allegra,seismo}!topaz!lear]