mesard@bbn.com (Wayne Mesard) (10/19/89)
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: >So we have sci.chem, sci.physics and sci.math and the rest get moved >to misc, right ? > >Or do we allow a few technical groups than aren't *pure science* in sci ? Look, it's a subjective call. I don't think anyone would argue with that. Of course, there's going to be various degrees of technical discussion in the various sci groups. What we're trying to decide is: If the discussion is likely to be mostly scientific. ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ Note the three points for subjectivity in the above sentence. We're not going to achieve unanimous agreement. [And we (the Net) have been wrong in the past.] The best we can hope for is general consensus. There are two ways to reach that: by discussion or vote. You've called for the vote, let's see what the Collective Net thinks. Not everyone's gonna be happy. You can always start your own network. Wayne();
hougen@umn-cs.CS.UMN.EDU (Dean Hougen) (10/20/89)
In article <47126@bbn.COM>, mesard@BBN.COM (Wayne Mesard) writes: >What we're trying to decide is: > If the discussion is likely to be mostly scientific. > ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ Actually I doubt that there are too many sci.* groups which are above the 50% level for scientific content. But that aside, one problem is that a large portion of the "we" that are trying to make that decision know very little about aquarium keeping. They reason that since there was very little science involved in their keeping a bowl of guppys as a kid, there will be very little science in a news group about guppy-keeping. It is very easy to become obsessed with the idea that what you do is much better in some way (e.g. scientific) than what the next gal is up to. I have seen claims by *ologists on the net that no * Science is really a science, and by * Scientists that no *ology is a science. I would urge those temped to vote no on sci.aquaria for net.purity to monitor the alt.aquaria traffic for awhile, go to their local aquarist shop and buy a few magazines, and/or check out some recent books on aquarium keeping from their local library. If you still feel a no vote would be justified, by all means vote your mind. But don't kill a chance for those of us who care about aquaria out of some misplaced feeling of superiority. (Note, I am not accusing any particular individual, Wayne Mesard included, of acting out of ignorance. I do hope that all those who take time to vote on this proposed group will also take the time to make that vote an informed one.) Dean Hougen