jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (09/22/89)
In article <19363@looking.on.ca>, brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes: > In article <34922@apple.Apple.COM> chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) writes: > >>What's your beef against the creation policy, Brad? > > > >Brad's primary beef is that the policy isn't his. Same argument he's been > >using for years, too. > > That's a pile of crap, Chuq and you know it. Maybe. But maybe not, Brad. You do tend toward immaturity. > > By beefs with the current guidelines are, to summarize what I have > written (I admit) several times are: > a) They are too bureuacratic A legitimate gripe. I think the system works, but perhaps it could be simplified. > b) They take too long to create a group. True. How about a 21-day voting period? Or a shorter discussion period? Or both? > c) They create far, far too much noise and flamage to no good end. Ah, lighten up. I think you object to the rest of us posting as much as we do, not because it's so much, but because it *is* the rest of us -- folks you seem to consider your lessers. > d) They inspire others to be overly bureaucractic about other things > on USENET. Perhaps, but how about a f'rinstance? > e) They don't seem to be doing all that good a job at picking groups > which make sense to be sent to all USENET sites. Is there such a thing? My site doesn't get rec, talk, alt, nor most sci. Thus, no group in the first three hierarchies should -- if one takes your statement literally -- ever be created, because none would go to all Usenet sites. And what's wrong with groups that are only carried by a small portion of the net? They have value, too. > > In fact, the only thing the guidelines are doing well right now is their > 2nd official purpose -- shutting up the champions of failed groups. But > the amount of after-the-'vote' flamage we are getting is increasing, with > Unitex the most obvious recent example. But this seems to be coming from opponents, not supporters, of groups, with the complaints mostly being "my 'no' vote wasn't counted!". We could eliminate this by eliminating 'no' voting. A groups gets 100 votes for creation, it gets created. Jeff Daiell