gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg J Kuperberg) (11/29/84)
In fact, net.politics is about eight times as busy as, say, net.math or net.physics. I suggest we split it up into some or all of the following: net.politics.abortion net.politics.economic net.politics.foreign net.politics.nukes net.politics.rights net.politics.sevener :-) Yes, I think that net.abortion should really be part of net.politics. In any case, whether or not my choices for subgroups are appropriate, net.politics really is getting too much traffic these days. Lobbying from others would be appreciated. --- Greg Kuperberg harvard!talcott!gjk "Eureka!" -Archimedes
steven@mcvax.UUCP (Steven Pemberton) (11/30/84)
In article <137@talcott.UUCP> gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg J Kuperberg) writes: > In fact, net.politics is about eight times as busy as, say, net.math or > net.physics. I suggest we split it up into some or all of the following: > > net.politics.abortion > net.politics.economic > net.politics.foreign > net.politics.nukes > net.politics.rights > net.politics.sevener :-) > Well, perhaps it's because I use rn and so can kill a whole subject that the traffic in net.politics doesn't bother me. For instance I never read anything on libertarianism, which seems to cause a lot of traffic. But still I'm very unsure about this division; another abortion group? And what does 'politics.foreign' mean in the context of an international net? Steven Pemberton, CWI, Amsterdam, apparently in Sweden :-)
gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg J Kuperberg) (11/30/84)
> In article <137@talcott.UUCP> gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg J Kuperberg) writes: > > In fact, net.politics is about eight times as busy as, say, net.math or > > net.physics. I suggest we split it up into some or all of the following: > > > > net.politics.abortion > > net.politics.economic > > net.politics.foreign > > net.politics.nukes > > net.politics.rights > > net.politics.sevener :-) > > > ... > But still I'm very unsure about this division; another abortion group? > And what does 'politics.foreign' mean in the context of an international net? > > Steven Pemberton, CWI, Amsterdam, apparently in Sweden :-) No, I think we should get rid of the old abortion group. It is really a political subject. By net.politics.foreign I mean international politics, not politics of foreign countries. I was thinking of the term "foreign politics," which is almost synonymous with international politics. Oh no!!!! You're in Amsterdam also? I seemed to think that you were in Stockholm. Surely *someone* is in Stockholm. I'm so confused... --- Greg Kuperberg harvard!talcott!gjk "Everyone's a critic!"
robert@erix.UUCP (Robert Virding) (11/30/84)
In article <137@talcott.UUCP> gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg J Kuperberg) writes: >In fact, net.politics is about eight times as busy as, say, net.math or >net.physics. I suggest we split it up into some or all of the following: > > net.politics.abortion > net.politics.economic > net.politics.foreign > net.politics.nukes > net.politics.rights > net.politics.sevener :-) > As net is distributed world-wide, what is net.politics.foreign foreign to? Wouldn't it be more logical to create a us.politics for for strictly local politics in the USA. Unfortunately much of US politics is not local as we (the rest of the world) are expected to follow it if we want to be kept safe from the evils of Communism (N.B. capital 'C').
faustus@ucbcad.UUCP (12/01/84)
> In fact, net.politics is about eight times as busy as, say, net.math or > net.physics. I suggest we split it up into some or all of the following: > > net.politics.abortion > net.politics.economic > net.politics.foreign > net.politics.nukes > net.politics.rights > net.politics.sevener :-) > > Yes, I think that net.abortion should really be part of net.politics. In > any case, whether or not my choices for subgroups are appropriate, > net.politics really is getting too much traffic these days. Lobbying from > others would be appreciated. > --- > Greg Kuperberg > harvard!talcott!gjk I agree. Of course, one subgroup has to be net.politics.libertarianism... Wayne
jhull@spp2.UUCP (12/04/84)
In article <137@talcott.UUCP> gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg J Kuperberg) writes: >In fact, net.politics is about eight times as busy as, say, net.math or >net.physics. I suggest we split it up into some or all of the following: > > net.politics.abortion > net.politics.economic > net.politics.foreign > net.politics.nukes > net.politics.rights > net.politics.sevener :-) > > Greg Kuperberg I agree! I don't know what subgroups are appropriate, either, but I sure would like some way to exclude the articles I'm not interested in while keeping up with the others. -- Blessed Be, jhull@spp2.UUCP Jeff Hull trwspp!spp2!jhull@trwrb.UUCP 13817 Yukon Ave. Hawthorne, CA 90250
rohn@randvax.UUCP (Laurinda Rohn) (12/04/84)
>In fact, net.politics is about eight times as busy as, say, net.math or >net.physics. I suggest we split it up into some or all of the following: > > net.politics.abortion > net.politics.economic > net.politics.foreign > net.politics.nukes > net.politics.rights > net.politics.sevener :-) > > Greg Kuperberg I think creating a subgroup or two might not be a bad idea. As an initial experiment, I would propose creating net.politics.libertarian. This might cut down the traffic substantially. I don't think net.politics.abortion would help much. Abortion isn't strictly a political issue. I don't think anything is wrong with keeping net. abortion as it is. Lauri