mehuld@APEE.OGI.EDU (Mehul Dave) (02/08/90)
There seems to be good support for creating a new hierarchy for humanities. I think its a great idea. Well, so how about it? Any suggestions/opinions/disagreements etc? This should also be accompanied by shifting the existing newsgroup relating to humanities scattered in the other hierarchies right now. From the postings in the past few weeks here, I gather that creating a new hierarchy would is quite difficult and takes a lot of effort. Any USENET gurus have any suggestions on this? Someone mentioned that he helped create the sci hierarchy. May be he or someone else who knows how to do this can comment on this. -- --Mehul Dave-- (INTERNET :- mehuld@apee.ogi.edu) "But I lean on no dead kin, my name is mine for fame or scorn And the world began when I was born and the world is mine to win" --Badger Clark--
karl@ficc.uu.net (Karl Lehenbauer) (02/09/90)
A new hum hierarchy isn't free. Ten thousand site admins have to do some fiddling to set up support for it. I'm not sure it's worth it for such a minor, and still endlessly debatable as to meaning, subdivision. One the other hand, it would be a whole new hierarchy to propose newgroups for, and to propose groups to be moved to, etc, etc, so it should generate a lot more traffic in news groups, so that's real good, right? :-( -- -- uunet!ficc!karl "...as long as there is a Legion of super-Heroes, uunet!sugar!karl all else can surely be made right." -- Sensor Girl
jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (02/09/90)
In article <HIM16_2xds12@ficc.uu.net>, karl@ficc.uu.net (Karl Lehenbauer) writes: > A new hum hierarchy isn't free. Ten thousand site admins have to do some > fiddling to set up support for it. I'm not sure it's worth it for such > a minor, and still endlessly debatable as to meaning, subdivision. > Karl, I see your point (remember that when considering your insurance needs! <inside joke>), but I also see the value of distinguishing between 'hard' and 'soft' sciences (that sounds better than saying 'natural' and 'unnatural' sciences {|8^)] ). So perhaps we should divide sci? sci.hard and sci.soft? Or sci.nat and sci.hum? Regardless, the distinction should be made. Your loyal friend who always tells charming single women how great a guy you are, Jeff -- Thank you for not coercing.
scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) (02/09/90)
Hmmmm . . . sounds good to me.