karen@everexn.uucp (Karen Valentino) (02/23/90)
lear@turbo.bio.net (Eliot) writes:
: Actually, I have only one problem with Ed's proposal. I am worried
: about people going off in a stampede and placing a group in the wrong
: hierarchy. If we had much better definitions for the hierarchies,
: this wouldn't be so much of a problem.
emv@math.lsa.umich.edu (Edward Vielmetti) replies:
: If there were good descriptions of the existing hierarchies,
: especially the more convoluted ones, it would probably generate
: both ideas for new groups and a more clear sense of where new
: groups would fit in.
And I say, that's right. These fellows are both dead-on. I *still*
don't have a completely clear picture of what newsgroups each hierarchy
is "allowed to" or "supposed to" encompass. No wonder there are wars
over newsgroup creation! The hierarchical system as it exists is pretty
much of a mess, especially in the broader areas (comp, which has a
relatively narrow scope, is unwieldly--but at least everything that's
in there belongs in there; whereas soc boggles the mind--I still am
incredulous at the mishmash that's thrown in there together).
Every top level domain should have a charter. The charter should
describe in some detail what territory the domain encompasses. Each
charter should delineate its turf from that of other domains. I was
amazed that this hasn't been done before--we're so much more careful
and descriptive with newsgroup charters than we are with our
classification system!
Karen
--
Karen Valentino <> Everex North (Everex Systems) <> Sebastopol, CA
karen@everexn.uu.net ..{apple, well}!fico2!everexn!karen
"Clearly, the idea of human beings as units remains at war with the
notion of the interdependence of all things." -- Salvador Minuchin