[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: 2nd CFV: sci.agriculture.fruit



In article <4t2c68$gqq@solaris.cc.vt.edu> adamf@vtaix.cc.vt.edu (Adam Finkelstein) writes:
>Yes I would agree with you, although what's to stop these off topic posts in
>sci.agriculture.fruit, if created?  But, my point is fairly clear. You have
>rushed this proposal through, and the way the charter is now will only
>cause problems later on. A newsgroup in the sci.* hierarchy should be well
>thought through-- not only the rationale, but also the charter. The need
>for this group is apparent. Making the group with a durable charter is as
>important--otherwise you just have another "alt" style group within the
>sci.* hierarchy.
>
>This group is a good idea, but again, the proposed charter has problems
>that need to be resolved. Why not do it right the first time?
>
>Adam Finkelstein                    
>adamf@vtaix.cc.vt.edu

Since the discussion started around the 1st of May it hardly seems like 
this is being "rushed" through.  I believed I had responded to and 
or incorporated the discussion input.  I would have been happy to 
incorporate any reasonable suggestions from Adam on what the Charter
should have read during the discussion period (and I have no reason to 
believe his suggestions would not be reasonable).  I saw none. If as Adam 
hopes the vote fails, I hope Adam will propose a new Charter (and group)
that he considers acceptable.

As to what stops off-topic posts, as I said in the Rationale, there is
nothing that can entirely eliminate off-topic posts from Usenet newsgroups.
Even moderation is not 100% successful.  My experience indicates groups
in any of the big seven newsgroups are subject to considerable less
off-topic posts than the alt newsgroups.  alt.agriculture.fruit is 
generally around 50% trash.  Other newsgroups I read are less than 10%
totally off-topic.

joel clark





Follow-Ups: References: