jerry@oliveb.UUCP (Jerry Aguirre) (05/15/84)
A large portion of the articles in this group seem to be the justification for/against the creation of news groups. The discussion concerning the creation of net.music.clasical is an example. Several articles have been written concerning the requirements for creating a new group. Let us for a moment disregard the people who will vote against anything new (and the people who will vote for anything new). I wonder how people feel about the creation of a sub-group verses a new group. For example net.polls vs. net.music.clasical. One of the big arguments I have heard against having too many groups is complexity. It seems to me that a sub-group adds less to complexity than a new top-level group. Where would net.micro be without a subdivision for each processor? Should there be different "requirements" for a sub-group than a top-level group? Jerry Aguirre {hplabs|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!jerry
alb@alice.UUCP (Adam L. Buchsbaum) (05/16/84)
The requirements for a subgroup are the same as those for a new group, i.e. there must be a justified need for the group. Whether to create a new group or a subgroup depends on the groups already in existence. If a newly proposed topic falls under an existing one, it should be a subgroup; otherwise, it should be a top level group.