bryce@cbmvax.UUCP (Bryce Nesbitt) (10/19/89)
I hereby formally propose a new newsgroup to be called "rec.aquarium". This group is intended as a simple mainstream translation of the currently successful and high quality group "alt.aquaria". The charter remains the same: OLD: alt.aquaria The aquarium & related as a hobby. NEW: rec.aquarium The aquarium & related as a hobby. Mail your YES or NO vote one of the addresses listed below. Vote changes are allowed, note in the subject and body that you are changing. uunet!cbmvax!bryce bryce@commodore.COM rutgers!cbmvax!bryce bryce@cbmvax.UUCP Your subject line must contain your YES, NO or CHANGED vote. The body of the message must contain the vote, your full name, and net address. Improperly formatted votes will be returned to sender uncounted. Posted votes do not count. Voting will be from Thursday October 19 until Thursday November 9, 1989. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The name "rec.aquarium" was chosen for several reasons. I feel that distribution in "sci" would be inappropriate. The justifications given by Mr. Sexton are neither sufficient nor correct. Quality "rec" groups *are* distributed in Europe, including Holland. Here is a quote from Mr. Sexton's formal proposal: > Whats (sic) the difference ? It turns out that sci goes to Europe > and rec, for the most part, doesn't. (rec, for example > doesn't go to Germany and Holland). A grab for better distribution is not reason for a new "sci" group. The name "aquarium" is used for absolute clarity. Artistic expression should be used in the body of messages, not the name of group. A rec.aquarium group probably makes sense even if a more technical aquarium group is passed. Please decide for yourself based on the wealth of opinions expressed in news.groups. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- |\_/| . ACK!, NAK!, EOT!, SOH! {X o} . Bryce Nesbitt, Commodore-Amiga, Inc. (") BIX: bnesbitt U USENET: bryce@commodore.COM -or- uunet!cbmvax!bryce Lawyers: America's untapped export market.
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (10/19/89)
In article <8219@cbmvax.UUCP> bryce@commodore.COM (Bryce Nesbitt) writes: > >I hereby formally propose a new newsgroup to be called "rec.aquarium". Cripes! Can't you wait until the current vote is over ? Both Chuq and Nelson intend on running a rec.aquaria vote when the results of the sci.aquaria vote are over. Bryce is one of two people who thought "aquaria" was new age astrology stuff. An analysis of posted comments reveals that .aquaria is the preferred name. As is shown by the results of Nelsons survey. Now, will you all send Bryce a no vote and let's do this properly. -- Help wipe out BBQ lighter fluid in your lifetime richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV
daver@tekfdi.FDI.TEK.COM (David Robinson) (10/20/89)
In article <8219@cbmvax.UUCP> bryce@commodore.COM (Bryce Nesbitt) writes: > >I hereby formally propose a new newsgroup to be called "rec.aquarium". >This group is intended as a simple mainstream translation of the currently >successful and high quality group "alt.aquaria". The charter remains the >same: > > OLD: alt.aquaria The aquarium & related as a hobby. > NEW: rec.aquarium The aquarium & related as a hobby. > Nelson: Have you gone bonkers or what? Do you see a call for votes for all the suggested names? ONE AT A TIME! (By the way, does anyone know if this is legal? NO discussion occured reguarding Nelson's call. Only one vote should be called for each disscussion... not multiples). The proposed group sci.aquaria IS "a simple mainstream translation of the currently successful and high quality group "alt.aquaria." You have been complaining about not wanting your messages moderated. NOBODY SAID THAT YOUR MESSAGES WOULD BE MODERATED. Next time, listen to what you are reading. The moderation did not even refer to you. The moderation clause would *ONLY* effect the feed to Europe, so that news-group traffic is reduced due to the costs of keeping the European network operating. What you are proposing is the exact same thing as Richard, with the exception that none of rec.aquarium will get to Europe, while SOME of sci.aquaria will. -Dave Robinson a.k.a. Digital Dave daver@tekfdi.fdi.tek.com
gary@sci34hub.UUCP (Gary Heston) (10/21/89)
In article <3556@tekfdi.FDI.TEK.COM>, daver@tekfdi.FDI.TEK.COM (David Robinson) writes: > In article <8219@cbmvax.UUCP> bryce@commodore.COM (Bryce Nesbitt) writes: > > > >I hereby formally propose a new newsgroup to be called "rec.aquarium". > Nelson: > Have you gone bonkers or what? Do you see a call for votes for all > the suggested names? ONE AT A TIME! (By the way, does anyone know if this > is legal? NO discussion occured reguarding Nelson's call. Only one vote > should be called for each disscussion... not multiples). He hasn't gone bonkers (that's what 'Frisco did...), I think you have. You even included in your posting his statement that he was (note this real well, please, I don't like to shout) proposing a new group. He, and anyone else on the net, is entitled to propose any group they wish (just like Richard Sexton). Did you read the rest of his posting? It clearly stated a proper discussion period would be held, giving start/end dates, and his intention to call for a vote afterward. His posting is quite in order. I don't believe yours is, however. > The proposed group sci.aquaria IS "a simple mainstream translation of the > currently successful and high quality group "alt.aquaria." Please indicate where in the UseNet guidines it is stated that there cannot be two competing group proposals going at the same time? Or are you simply concerned that the latest proposal, which seems to have much more support on the net, might win out instead of the name you (I assume) prefer? > You have been complaining about not wanting your messages moderated. > NOBODY SAID THAT YOUR MESSAGES WOULD BE MODERATED. Next time, listen to > what you are reading. The moderation did not even refer to you. Moderation affects (or should, anyway--there shouldn't be automatically passed-thru posting in a moderated group) ALL postings to a group. Including his. Including yours. > The moderation clause would *ONLY* effect the feed to Europe, so that > [.......] with the exception that none of rec.aquarium will get to > Europe, while SOME of sci.aquaria will. This has been repeatedly stated as not being the case, by people in Europe. It has also been repeatedly stated that if the Europeans are interested in the group, they'll get it--no matter what the name is. Might I suggest that you read more of the postings about this, or do you need to change the water in your tanks? > -Dave Robinson > a.k.a. Digital Dave daver@tekfdi.fdi.tek.com Based on net traffic, sci.aquaria will probably not pass. Rec.aquarium probably will. Read it or post to it as you wish, or don't. But flaming someone for following the guidlines? Are you bonkers? :-) -- Gary Heston { uunet!gary@sci34hub } System Mismanager SCI Technology, Inc. OEM Products Department (i.e., computers) Hestons' First Law: I qualify virtually everything I say.
csu@alembic.acs.com (Dave Mack) (10/22/89)
In article <21096@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: >In article <8219@cbmvax.UUCP> bryce@commodore.COM (Bryce Nesbitt) writes: >> >>I hereby formally propose a new newsgroup to be called "rec.aquarium". >Now, will you all send Bryce a no vote and let's do this >properly. Nope. I intend to vote "yes" for both sci.aquaria and rec.aquari{a,um}. The people who are involved in the technical aspects of "experimental marine ecosystems" deserve a place for their discussion. So do those who keep fish purely as a hobby, and couldn't care less about the mutation rate in Anemonidae. We need both groups. I would suggest, however, that sci.aquaria be a moderated group, while rec.aquarium remains unmoderated. Love and kisses, Tiresias
kevinf@infmx.UUCP (Kevin Franden) (10/25/89)
I started reading alt.aquaria (yes, I did think it was new.age wierdness
by name) about a year ago.
I was impressed by the high quality of postings and information that
was delivered by the beloved alt.aquaria of old. I stopped reading
comp.lang.c because the boneheads there loved to debate miniscule and
unimportant things (a debate raged for 2 months over random numbers...
and I mean RAGED. A heated discussion was carried on for about 3 weeks over
the comma.)
It seems that this group has turned away from it's unspoken charter
to mere pettiness. Bummer for most of the people who read (or used
to read) this group.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Kevin Franden UUCP: {pyramid|lll-crg}!infmx!kevinf
Informix Software Inc
disclaimer("I said what I said and not my employer");
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
There are Lies, Damn lies, Statistics, Benchmarks, and Delivery datesBRIDGE@rcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (JOHN BRIDGE) (10/26/89)
Kevin,
Be patient. Hopefully the forum will return to its old good-
natured self in a month or two. Cheers, John