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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------