mlf@teddy.UUCP (Matt L. Fichtenbaum) (10/18/84)
Using net.wobegon as a general group for things of folk-music interest sounds like a good idea (but why not name it something more descriptive?). It's a category worth having. Here's at least one voice expressing interest. Matt Fichtenbaum @ GenRad PTD 617 369 4400
khw@drutx.UUCP (WilliamsonK) (10/21/84)
I disagree about expanding net.wobegon. It is more efficient for me to get my newsgroups down to as specific areas as possible, so that it is easier for me to separate the wheat from the chaff of the things I am interested in. Thus I would prefer a net.auto.honda (since I have a honda), which I would subscribe to, but could unsubscribe to, say, net.auto.corvette, (Of course I would want to keep a net.auto or a net.auto.general for articles that apply to autos in general, and I can't see having a net.auto.brakes vs. a net.auto.transmissions, or some other compartmentalization.) Now I realize that this splitting up of groups into tiny areas is not likely to happen in the near term, but I don't support any effort to go the other way, and generalize a news group beyond what it is already. Here we have a nice specific news group, with very little traffic. I can confidently subscribe to this and want to read most every article, and know that I won't be deluged with lots of irrelevancies. I can see having general folk music discussions on the net, but lets do it with a group made for the purpose, instead of trying to twist the definition of an already existing group. Remember the dictum, "Use the right tool for the job"? Well, I think it applies to news groups as well. Karl Williamson ATT ISL Denver ..druky!khw 303-538-4583
mej@ptsfc.UUCP (Mary Johnson) (10/26/84)
> I disagree about expanding net.wobegon. ... I can confidently > subscribe to this and want to read most every article, and > know that I won't be deluged with lots of irrelevancies. Karl has a good point. Also - people interested in folk music who don't know about PHC would not recognize wobegon as a group to explore. (My current list of net groups runs to 4 pages.) How about a net.music.trad group for folkies in general and people interested in the music of other cultures? Mary Johnson dual!ptsfa!ptsfc!mej
chabot@amber.DEC (L S Chabot) (10/29/84)
I agree with Mary Johnson and Karl. Although I don't mind too much the extra articles, other people might, and there is no sense at all in "hiding" folk music stuff in net.wobegon. (It's bad enough as it is--some people think this is the place for the melancholy or jilted.) L S Chabot UUCP: ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot ARPA: ...chabot%amber.DEC@decwrl.ARPA USFail: DEC, MR03-1/K20, 2 Iron Way, Marlborough, MA 01752 shadow: [ISSN 0018-9235 v21 #10 p81, bottom vt100, col3, next to next to last]
stuart@rochester.UUCP (Stuart Friedberg) (10/29/84)
> I disagree about expanding net.wobegon. ... I can confidently > subscribe to this and want to read most every article, and > know that I won't be deluged with lots of irrelevancies. Unless some site previously refused to forward "wobegon", there was NOTHING POSTED in this group for a period of over 7 months (as received at this site) until just a week or so ago when the question came up about folk music and so forth. Certainly you won't be deluged with irrelevancies when there's nothing there, relevant or not. Frankly, I'm just delighted to see a little traffic in this area, whether it's specific to PHC or not... Folk music and other items have my vote. Stu Friedberg UUCP {seismo, allegra}!rochester!stuart ARPA stuart@rochester
ericf@uwvax.UUCP (Eric Feigenson) (10/30/84)
I tend to agree with the idea that folk music discussion may not belong
in net.wobegon (though I was one who instigated it initially), however:
1. As previously noted, there has been hardly ANY traffic in the
group for months, and in fact had been threatened with
extinction a couple of times.
2. Previous discussion in net.music from people who wanted such things
as net.music.classical were outvoted (or outshouted).
3. PHC does feature folk music, so this is CLOSE to the correct group
4. If there is enough traffic in this group about folk arts, then
perhaps TPTB (The Powers That Be) will create net.folk-arts,
without raising the ire of the net.musicoids.
I noticed that someone posted a note to net.news.group, announcing
whats been going on in the group. I'm going to get my asbestos
underwear ready...
--
-Eric Feigenson
Usenet: {seismo, allegra, ihnp4}!uwvax!ericf
Arpanet: ericf@wisc-rsch.arpascot@dartvax.UUCP (Scot Drysdale) (11/02/84)
> I agree with Mary Johnson and Karl. Although I don't mind too much the extra > articles, other people might, and there is no sense at all in "hiding" folk > music stuff in net.wobegon. (It's bad enough as it is--some people think > this is the place for the melancholy or jilted.) Add another vote for splitting the general discussion of folk music from things specifically related to PHC. I might end up subscribing to both, but I would hate to see all the shy people who once in a while post a gem get squeezed out by high-volume discussions of folk music. Scot Drysdale (scot@dartmouth) {decvax, cornell, research, }!dartvax!scot
barnett@ut-sally.UUCP (Lewis Barnett) (11/02/84)
[ --- ] From: chabot@amber.DEC (L S Chabot) >I agree with Mary Johnson and Karl. Although I don't mind too much the extra >articles, other people might, and there is no sense at all in "hiding" folk >music stuff in net.wobegon. (It's bad enough as it is--some people think >this is the place for the melancholy or jilted.) I suppose these are valid concerns, but isn't the suggested combination better than having no place at all for folk oriented topics? The problem of folk stuff being "hidden" could be remedied by contacting the person who keeps track of currently active newsgroups and having them add "and other folk-life topics" to the description of net.wobegon. Personally, the reason I was first attracted to PHC was the great folk music featured on the program every week. The rest of the show has, of course, grown on me, but the music on the show and (by extension) the genre of music featured on the show is one of the obvious topics for this group. As for being worried about being deluged, the quoted message was the first one that has shown up at our site in two or three days. That's not even a light rain. And then there is the notable silence of several months duration recently when nothing at all was posted. I'd be all for a separate group for folk music and other things, but I think it's been suggested before, and not found to have sufficient support to justify its creation. As I said, I'd rather be able to talk about it here than not have anywhere to talk about it at all. Lewis Barnett,CS Dept, Painter Hall 3.28, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 -- barnett@ut-sally.ARPA, barnett@ut-sally.UUCP, {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!barnett