kriz@skat.usc.edu (Dennis Kriz) (03/12/91)
From last week's discussion the following proposal seemed to get the most support. It would break the existing "misc.jobs.offered" news-group into: misc.jobs.offered.sci.comp -- job offerings in CS misc.jobs.offered.sci.engr -- job offerings in engineering misc.jobs.offered.sci -- job offerings in the sciences misc.jobs.offered -- all other job offerings Any further comments/suggestions? dennis kriz@skat.usc.edu
kriz@skat.usc.edu (Dennis Kriz) (03/12/91)
In article <7066@idunno.Princeton.EDU> vnend@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (D. W. James) writes: |>In article <30942@usc> kriz@skat.usc.edu (Dennis Kriz) writes: |>)From last week's discussion the following proposal seemed to get the most |>)support. It would break the existing "misc.jobs.offered" news-group into: |>) misc.jobs.offered.sci.comp -- job offerings in CS |>) misc.jobs.offered.sci.engr -- job offerings in engineering |>) misc.jobs.offered.sci -- job offerings in the sciences |>) misc.jobs.offered -- all other job offerings |> |>)Any further comments/suggestions? |> |> Sure. This is shooting a gnat with an elephant gun. The last |>two arbitrons showed: |> |> 3 140000 3402 92% 228 465.7 11% 0.00 9.9% misc.jobs.offered |> 3 150000 3262 92% 384 755.7 18% 0.01 10.1% misc.jobs.offered |> |> |> or only 612 articles over a 61 day period. That's 10 per day folks. |>We don't need more groups, especially since the cross posting to |>misc.jobs.offered will be fierce. Would not this be in fact a very good reason to spit the group? There is no reason why a non-CS major would want to read the CS listings. Perhaps a moderator could be used to ensure that CS jobs really do get put into the CS group. Or perhaps job-search groups could be put on a different heirarchy: sci.chem.jobs.offered sci.bio.jobs.offered sci.engr.jobs.offered (and corresponding groups for resumes) sci.chem.jobs.resumes sci.bio.jobs.resumes sci.engr.jobs.resumes Perhaps this is the better way to go ... because it does nothing to disturb the existing "good thing going" for the CS/EEs on the net. If this is the way to go ... I will pursue trying to get the *.chem.* The way I see it, I don't see *any* reason why a non-chem major would possibly care one way or another if the chem groups are created (the same would go for the *.bio.* groups). Only the *.engr.* groups would have problems with cross-posting ... but that would be up to them to decide on (if they chose to try to create a similar heirarchy). dennis kriz@skat.usc.edu