riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) (01/21/84)
Sigh. The mobocratic nature of the net strikes again. Sometimes a
newsgroup is proposed, minimal discussion follows, and bang! for better
or for worse, a superuser somewhere creates it. Other times a proposal
can be followed by intense discussion, a consensus can be reached, and
yet no superuser takes it on himself to do the job of creating the
newsgroup.
In my opinion, one victim of the latter phenomenon was net.bio.
Proposed in early December, the newsgroup quickly received approval
from all of the following users:
aecom!yechiel denelcor!neal uokvax!rigney
alice!alb ecsvax!emigh ut-sally!riddle
cae780!chuqui elsie!mark utzoo!david
Although this number might seem small, several of the users were from
sites where a significant amount of biological work was being done, and
indicated that such a newsgroup would interest numerous users at their
sites. Other users pointed out several biological topics which had
come up in other newsgroups and which demonstrated widespread interest
in biology. Perhaps most important, there were no negative votes; all
who mentioned the issue were for the newsgroup's creation.
One small disagreement confused things, however: some users proposed a
subgroup, net.bio.expert, for discussion at a professional level.
After some argument about whether the subgroup was justified, those who
had made the suggestion agreed that, once net.bio had been started up,
subgroups could be added as their need was demonstrated.
Nevertheless, n o b o d y c r e a t e d i t .
So, all you superusers out there: where is net.bio?
--- Prentiss Riddle
--- ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.")
--- {ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddleriddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) (01/21/84)
In my last article I talked about how the nature of the net and a bit
of bad luck resulted in the stillbirth of net.bio. This article is
about an even sillier case: the consumers' newsgroup.
Originally proposed in net.general and debated in net.followup as well
as net.news.group, the suggested group quickly received a warm
response. The following users cast votes for some form of consumers'
newsgroup:
coevax!croteau proper!gam uicsl!wombat
dciem!ntt rabbit!ark uiuccsb!leimkuhl
druxt!mcq rayssd!hxe umcp-cs!liz
ihuxm!spear rayssd!wjr ut-sally!riddle
ittral!pellegri root44!addw
micomvax!pace sii!mem
There was only one vote cast against the idea:
pucc-h!ab3
The only real disagreement surrounding the newsgroup was about its
name. By my tally, votes were cast for the following names:
net.caveat 3 net.products 1 net.ripoff 2
net.consumer 2 net.review.product 1 us.<whatever> 1
(It should be added that net.ripoff was the first name proposed, and
that the other names gained their support from people who thought that
"ripoff" was a little too negative. Us.<any-of-the-above> was
suggested by a European who felt that the newsgroup was a good idea but
needn't be transatlantic.)
With a clear consensus that the newsgroup would be a good idea but no
enthusiastically agreed-upon name, discussion died down. No superuser
happened to come forward (as in the case of the much more controversial
net.veg) and end the dispute by arbitrarily picking a name and creating
it. For even this simple task, the anarchic nature of the net proved
ineffective.
So once again: is there no superuser out there willing to take the
bull by the horns and create a consumers' newsgroup?
--- Prentiss Riddle
--- ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.")
--- {ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddlemcq@druxt.UUCP (McQueerRL) (01/21/84)
[]--- I agree. Let me reiterate my position that the consumers newsgroup is one of the few "new newsgroup" suggestions I've heard that I really agree with. For the proposed purpose, the newsgroup concept as handled today should work well, unlike some other areas. I believe I suggested "net.ripoff". I was being facetious. I'm sure a name discussion would have evolved without my sticking my oar in, and a certain amount of discussion to settle on a good name is needed, but let's not lose sight of the fact that a fair number of people think the newsgroup is a good idea. Bob McQueer ihnp4!druxt!mcq
mark@elsie.UUCP (01/23/84)
>>Proposed in early December, the (net.bio) newsgroup quickly received approval >>from all of the following users: >> >> aecom!yechiel denelcor!neal uokvax!rigney >> alice!alb ecsvax!emigh ut-sally!riddle >> cae780!chuqui elsie!mark utzoo!david >> >>Although this number might seem small, several of the users were from >>sites where a significant amount of biological work was being done, and >>indicated that such a newsgroup would interest numerous users at their >>sites. Other users pointed out several biological topics which had >>come up in other newsgroups and which demonstrated widespread interest >>in biology. Perhaps most important, there were no negative votes; all >>who mentioned the issue were for the newsgroup's creation. >> >> Nevertheless, n o b o d y c r e a t e d i t . >> >>So, all you superusers out there: where is net.bio? >> Well. I am a superuser, and I guess I could creat it. But... what do I have to say? If I had anything to say would anybody care? When I first supported net.bio I added a little postscript asking that trivia be kept out of the new newsgroup. I immediately got a flame from Ms. Riddle saying, in part, "I don't care about two-dimensional gel electrophoresis" and that it was not my duty or responsibility what would go into it (I don't have a copy of the reply; that's approximately what I remember and if I've misquoted you please accept my apologies). Fair enough, and a good point. Do I really have anything of burning importance to contribute to a net.bio? For now the answer, I feel, is no. Hence, I have not and will not creat it. -- UUCP: decvax!harpo!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!elsie!mark Phone: (301) 496-5688
ntt@dciem.UUCP (Mark Brader) (01/24/84)
Since ut-sally!riddle (Prentiss Riddle)'s summary of the history of this discussion did not repeat this point, I'm reposting it. I think the restriction of the newsgroup to this side of the Atlantic is a good one, but I don't think it should be kept out of Canada. Therefore the proper prefix is "na.". (By the way, I believe the proper prefix for the United States is "usa.", not "us.".) I still say na.consumer. Mark Brader
pellegri@ittral.UUCP (Dan Pellegrino) (01/26/84)
For the title of the consumers' newsgroup, "net.consumer" seems to be the most apropos. "Consumer" seems to be the best single word that implies the function of the newsgroup accurately. I propose that we name it thusly. What do you say, gang?