cher@ihlpm.UUCP (Mike Musing) (01/22/85)
I am sure quite a few people would be interested in having
net.xxxxx.tennis.
Does anybody know how new groups are originated?
If it's a vote, then who's counting?
If it's petitioning who decides?
Thanks for replies.
Mike Cherepovrry@homxa.UUCP (R.YADAVALLI) (01/23/85)
Excellent idea!! If Baseball can qualify to be a sport, there is no reason in the world why Tennis isn't. Sorry about the earlier zero length posting. Raghu Yadavalli AT&T Bell Labs Holmdel, NJ
gam@amdahl.UUCP (gam) (01/25/85)
If I may interject (never mind! I am anyway!) it seems that
the groups under net.sport are oriented toward fans rather
than players, while net.rec has groups oriented towards people's
hobbies or recreations.
Is this not correct?
You may want to consider this in deciding where the group should be.
"always willing help out"
--
Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,sun}!amdahl!gamcher@ihlpm.UUCP (Mike Cherepov) (01/30/85)
> the groups under net.sport are oriented toward fans rather > than players, while net.rec has groups oriented towards people's > hobbies or recreations. > > Is this not correct? > > You may want to consider this in deciding where the group should be. > It is correct but does not provide automatic answer. Funny thing is that for me it is a major recreational activity, but at the same time (especially during big tournaments) tennis becomes a source of all kinds of fan hoopla. Its a jungle out there. Subjectively I value recreational aspect more, but would that still be the case without all the pro-commercial glitter? Conclusion: net.sport looks a bit better to me because it puts tennis together with skiing, hockey, etc. , rather then coins and nude sunbathing (in case of net.rec) Mike Cherepov