peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (02/21/89)
Unnecessary. It's already split up... on subject lines. Geographical areas are of less and less relevence as time goes on. -- Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation. Work: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. `-_-' Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.uu.net. 'U` People have opinions. Companies have policy. And typos are my own business.
evan@telly.UUCP (Evan Leibovitch) (02/21/89)
In article <3146@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >Geographical areas >are of less and less relevence as time goes on. I have to disagree. About 18 Toronto-area sites post their news/mail stats each day to tor.news.stats. It helps point out local backlogs to/from one's uucp neighbours. The number of sites posting to this group (and thus its traffic) has been growing steaily, just as the number of sites in the area has been growing. Local groups here have included discussions of area radio stations, restaurants, singles gatherings, club meetings and so on. Newsgroup creation is a far less formal procedure than on Usenet as a whole, and the groups are mostly devoid of flame wars because many of the posters have met face-to-face. Would YOU have any interest in seeing Toronto UUCP stats? Or discussions of our radio stations? Or Atlanta's or Stockholm's, for that matter? I feel more comfortable about the distribution of such limited-value postings, knowing that nobody has to pay long-distance charges for their transmission. That doesn't make them less relevant than mainstram groups. --- Evan Leibovitch, SA of System Telly, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario evan@telly.on.ca / {uunet!attcan,utzoo}!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504 You can lead a herring to water, but you have to walk really fast or he'll die
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (02/23/89)
In article <717@telly.UUCP>, evan@telly.UUCP (Evan Leibovitch) writes: > In article <3146@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: > >Geographical areas are of less and less relevence as time goes on. > I have to disagree. About 18 Toronto-area sites post their news/mail > stats each day to tor.news.stats... [ more about local area groups ] True, but that's not what's being discussed. The suggestion was that usenet be split into (say) east coast, west coast, and central divisions, with only moderated groups going from one division to the other. I think this is a bad idea, because *for the majority of the groups* geographical area is not relevant. You don't have a tor.sys.amiga, do you? Besides, we get fed from the east coast but we're in the central region... -- Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation. Work: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. `-_-' Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.uu.net. 'U` People have opinions. Companies have policy. And typos are my own business.
brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) (02/24/89)
Of course geography is (largely) irrelevant. The point is, so is everything else, except some mystical criterion you might call "only the best people." Since we can't really enforce such a criterion, all the other criteria are just about the same, and geography was suggested because it's the easiest to work with. Let's face it. Sometimes having too wide a membership spoils a group. How many of you participate in small local groups and find them far more enjoyable than similar large net groups? They are more manageable and understandable. And they are quieter. Of course you don't get every opinion but you sometimes don't want every opinion. Certainly in areas like politics, religion and many others, this is the case. After all, these are (according to worldwide polls 8-)) the most popular discussion topics in the world, yet their netwide groups have relatively low readership compared to other things. After all, who has time for the netwide political groups? -- Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (02/25/89)
In article <2814@looking.UUCP>, brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes: > Of course geography is (largely) irrelevant. The point is, so is everything > else, except some mystical criterion you might call "only the best people." > Since we can't really enforce such a criterion, all the other criteria > are just about the same, and geography was suggested because it's the > easiest to work with. But it isn't. As I pointed out we get a lot of stuff from the east coast, uunet to be precise, and we're certainly not in their geographical area. If people started trying to implement this, I for one would just tell uunet to feed us the rest regardless. And certainly a comp.lang.c with dmr@alice's postings never getting out of the northeast US wouldn't be the same. A comp.sys.amiga missing the CATS people. A rec.arts.sf-lovers without Chuq. What a poor net it would leave. -- Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation. Work: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. `-_-' Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.uu.net. 'U` People have opinions. Companies have policy. And typos are my own business.
evan@telly.UUCP (Evan Leibovitch) (02/25/89)
In article <3174@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <717@telly.UUCP>, evan@telly.UUCP (Evan Leibovitch) writes: >> >Geographical areas are of less and less relevence as time goes on. >> I have to disagree. [reasons...] >True, but that's not what's being discussed. >The suggestion was that usenet be split into (say) east coast, west coast, >and central divisions, with only moderated groups going from one division >to the other. I think this is a bad idea, because *for the majority of the >groups* geographical area is not relevant. Sorry. Didn't see the original proposal. I read your original posting as saying that local groups weren't relevant anywhere. I bristled with the thought of internationally posted Amiga-for-sale ads or nightclub assessments. Never mind :-). -- Evan Leibovitch, SA of System Telly, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario evan@telly.on.ca / {uunet!attcan,utzoo}!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504 You can lead a herring to water, but you have to walk really fast or he'll die
pell@isy.liu.se (P{r Emanuelsson) (02/27/89)
Peter da Silva wrote: >The suggestion was that usenet be split into (say) east coast, west coast, >and central divisions, with only moderated groups going from one division >to the other. I think this is a bad idea, because *for the majority of the >groups* geographical area is not relevant. You don't have a tor.sys.amiga, >do you? Actually I wouldn't be surprised if they had. In Sweden we have the following *.sys.* groups: swnet.sys.amiga swnet.sys.dec swnet.sys.dnix swnet.sys.hp swnet.sys.ibm.pc swnet.sys.mac swnet.sys.ncr swnet.sys.sun Granted, they don't show much traffic compared to their USENET counterparts, but I feel it's the way it should be. Breaking USENET up in geographical divisions could be a remedy for the low signal/noise ration, provided that the competence exists in all the divisions. E.g. if I have some SUN questions I always post to swnet.sys.sun instead of comp.sys.sun. The SUN competence is very high in Sweden and virtually no noise exists in the group. The moderated groups could provide USENET-wide communications, filtering the noise to an acceptable level. I think the idea has some merits. Probably no action or "split" is needed. I see USENET moving away from world-wide communications to smaller geographical areas. It will happen by itself, I think. /Pell -- "Don't think; let the machine do it for you!" -- E. C. Berkeley Dept. of Electrical Engineering ====>>> pell@isy.liu.se University of Linkoping, Sweden ...!uunet!enea!isy.liu.se!pell