spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) (09/12/85)
Once again, someone has decided to create a newsgroup without going
through the proper procedure. "net.music.guitar" showed up on our
machines without having been discussed in net.news.group, and without
any word of explanation.
Since procedure was not followed, I have sent out a "rmgroup" on it and
it will not be added to the semi-official "List of Active Groups."
For future reference, the proper procedure for creating a new group
is:
1) Establish a definite need. This is done either by noting an
existing high volume of postings in a current newsgroup (or groups),
or by picking such a group and getting discussions going to show
such a need. A volume of at least 40 to 50 articles a month on the
subject which would be the purpose of the new group would constitute
an appropriate volume to justify its own group.
2) AFTER establishing a need, the proposed group should be suggested to
the net in the group "net.news.group" and any related group (such as
net.music, in this case). The new group is discussed both pro and
con, along with options for mailing lists, moderated newsgroups,
limited geographic distributions, and alternative names. Any
significant objections raised here must be addressed before
proceeding to the next step.
3) A netwide "vote" is taken, with the person(s) making the suggestion
for the newsgroup tallying all responses sent BY MAIL. A minimum of
40-50 votes more in favor than opposed are required before starting
the group. The vote results (preferably along with the login/site
names of the people voting) should be published in net.news.group.
4) Only if all the other steps are followed is the group created.
By this point, anyone reading net.news.group should be aware of the
situation and willing to create the new group. Many of them may
very well do such a thing; I usually do. Multiple instances of
"newgroup" messages help make sure the group is created at every
node in the network. I add an entry in the list of active groups,
and we all observe how the group is used.
As far as net.music.guitar goes, I don't read net.music, so I don't
know if #1 has been met, but I read net.news.group all the time and I
have seen no evidence that #2 and #3 were done. If there are large
numbers of you out there interested in starting such a group, follow
the procedure and see what happens.
--
Gene "3 months and counting" Spafford
The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332
CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ CSNet-Relay.ARPA
uucp: ...!{akgua,allegra,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spafbob@ulose.UUCP ( Robert Bismuth ) (09/23/85)
> Once again, someone has decided to create a newsgroup without going > through the proper procedure. "net.music.guitar" showed up on our > machines without having been discussed in net.news.group, and without > any word of explanation. > > Since procedure was not followed, I have sent out a "rmgroup" on it and > it will not be added to the semi-official "List of Active Groups." > While I realize that the required procedure had not been followed, maybe you should have given those using the group the chance to poll for it using the procedure before you removed it. It would just seem a bit more friendly that way around. -- bob (decvax!ulose!bob)
nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (09/24/85)
>>[net.music.guitar has been created improperly and is now deleted.] > >While I realize that the required procedure had not been followed, maybe >you should have given those using the group the chance to poll for it >using the procedure before you removed it. It would just seem a bit more >friendly that way around. I must disagree. While it may seems a friendly thing to do, it sets up an awful precedent. (unfortunately, that was what was done with net.bizarre.) If that were done, how soon would it be before people, in order to create a new group, just created it and then polled people? -- James C. Armstrong, Jnr. {ihnp4,cbosgd,akgua}!abnji!nyssa It is a highly directional ultrasonic beam of rock and roll! It kills! -who said it, what story?
edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (09/25/85)
In article <123@ulose.UUCP>, bob@ulose.UUCP ( Robert Bismuth ) writes: > > Once again, someone has decided to create a newsgroup without going > > through the proper procedure. "net.music.guitar" showed up on our > > machines without having been discussed in net.news.group, and without > > any word of explanation. > > > > Since procedure was not followed, I have sent out a "rmgroup" on it and > > it will not be added to the semi-official "List of Active Groups." > > > > While I realize that the required procedure had not been followed, maybe > you should have given those using the group the chance to poll for it > using the procedure before you removed it. It would just seem a bit more > friendly that way around. > > -- bob ABSOLUTELY NO! If that were to become the standard group creation procedure, we would every Tom/Dick/Harry/Bob/Carol/Ted/Alice/Harold/Maude creating things like net.art.painting.impressionist.europe.mid1500s.blue just because they want to ask a question about it. Envision net.lang.c becoming net.lang.c.style net.lang.c.shortvsint net.lang.c.pointers with a thousand other splinter groups throw in the mess as well. What I'm getting at is that there are established rules for the creation of new groups. Stick to them! Net.bizarre got started illegally and look at the trouble we are having in killing it. -- Edward C. Bennett UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward /* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */ "Goodnight M.A."
tim@cithep.UucP (Tim Smith ) (09/29/85)
Why would anyone WANT to discuss rogue in net.music.guitar? -- Tim Smith ihnp4!cithep!tim
ericksen@unc.UUCP (Jim Ericksen) (10/02/85)
> What I'm getting at is that there are established rules for ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > the creation of new groups. Stick to them! Net.bizarre got started > illegally and look at the trouble we are having in killing it. > > -- > Edward C. Bennett But does that make them GOOD rules? Comparing net.music.guitar and net.bizarre is hardly applicable. While net.bizarre is glutted with garbage, net.music.guitar (in it's few days of existence) saw some very worthwhile postings, the likes of which are seldom seen among the dreck which fills its parent group. Perhaps there are enough people on the net who are interested in discussions of serious musical pursuits, but are not (and have not been) willing to sift through 50 articles a day on whether Madonna or Prince is the sex symbol of the 1980's; so even though there has not been a large traffic on guitar- related articles in net.music, might it not be possible that there would be a large audience for such a group anyway? My point is not just that net.music.guitar should be allowed to exist, but that the idea that a newsgroup can only be created due to a large volume of news WITHIN A PRE-EXISTING NEWSGROUP on a particular subtopic of that newsgroup is not the optimal (or even a desirable) solution. In fact, it is obviously self-defeating, in that the trivial subjects that are endlessly harped upon should apparently be awarded their own subgroups at the expense of other topics (let's see, we'll have net.music.trivia, net.music.trivia.followup, net.music.trivia.followup.followup, net.music.mtv, net.music.censored-lyrics, net.music.censored-lyrics.louie-louie, ...). -- Jim Ericksen UNC Chapel Hill