heiby@mcdchg.UUCP (Ron Heiby) (01/26/88)
Since my LIB/newsgroups file doesn't contain an information line for the alt.hypertext newsgroup (although it does for some other alt groups), I can't say for sure, but perhaps it is perceived that alt.hypertext is not necessary given the existence of comp.sys.mac.hypercard, hmm? My apologies if that group is an inet-only group. As we have seen, any news administrator who is part of the "alt" net can create a new alt newsgroup pretty much at will. Perhaps some thought should be given to how to go about deleting an alt newsgroup. Or, maybe I should just issue an rmgroup on alt.hypertext, since this is an anarchy? Of course, since this is an "alt" group, where the participants couldn't care less about the total number of newsgroups, we don't need to worry about a group that isn't serving a useful purpose. :-) (Followups going to alt.config.) -- Ron Heiby, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP Moderator: comp.newprod & comp.unix "Intel architectures build character."
baparao@uscacsc.usc.edu (K.V. Baparao) (01/28/88)
Is there a reason why the hypertext discussion group is named "alt.hypertext" as opposed to "comp.hypertext"? I was under the impression that the "alt" newsgroups were meant for "fringe" topics. --Bapa Rao.
webber@brandx.rutgers.edu (Webber) (01/28/88)
[Summary: As quasi-group creator of alt.hypertext, below I am claiming that it was right to create the group and that it is now right to rmgroup the group and wait a week to see if anyone else feels strongly enough to want to create the group. It is probably best that the rmgroup come from the same place as the create, but in the face of an rmgroup from somewhere else, I would not be the one to request a new create in the forseeable future.] In article <3585@mcdchg.UUCP>, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP (Ron Heiby) writes: > Since my LIB/newsgroups file doesn't contain an information line for > the alt.hypertext newsgroup (although it does for some other alt groups), > I can't say for sure, but perhaps it is perceived that alt.hypertext > is not necessary given the existence of comp.sys.mac.hypercard, hmm? > My apologies if that group is an inet-only group. That group is not inet-only. alt.hypertext is needed IF anyone wanted to talk about hypertext or hypermedia in general. To say that such discussion should go to comp.sys.mac.hypercard is like sayinng that comp.arch discussion should go to comp.sys.sun . > As we have seen, any news administrator who is part of the "alt" net can > create a new alt newsgroup pretty much at will. Perhaps some thought > should be given to how to go about deleting an alt newsgroup. Or, maybe > I should just issue an rmgroup on alt.hypertext, since this is an anarchy? > Of course, since this is an "alt" group, where the participants couldn't > care less about the total number of newsgroups, we don't need to worry > about a group that isn't serving a useful purpose. :-) The main reason rmgroup doesn't work in Usenet is that there are too many sites running on autopilot from bi-wing days. That should not be the case on alt net. With the exception of the last flurry of response to the question of whether or not the group was around, alt.hypertext has been inactive since a week after its creation. The group was created by pleasant@rutgers.edu in response to my request for a group to discuss hypertext in general as opposed to the mac product. Although I still feel such a discussion would be interesting, it seems to lack posters (although not readers). I PROPOSE THAT WE RMGROUP THE GROUP WITH A REQUEST TO WAIT FOR A WEEK TO LET THE RMGROUP SETTLE. THEN IF SOMEONE ELSE FEELS THAT THEY WANT TO CREATE ALT.HYPERTEXT, THEY ARE WELCOME TO. Mel, will you do the honours? > (Followups going to alt.config.) I disagree that the followup should restrict to alt.config. The notion of deleting the group is clearly of interest to the readers of the group. >From: baparao@uscacsc.usc.edu (K.V. Baparao) Message-ID: <353@uscacsc.usc.edu> >Is there a reason why the hypertext discussion group is named "alt.hypertext" >as opposed to "comp.hypertext"? I was under the impression that the "alt" >newsgroups were meant for "fringe" topics. comp.hypertext presumes following usenet procedures to secure backbone approval whereas alt.hypertext does not. It is up to the people who don't get alt.hyptertext, but want it, to either find an alt feed or create an analogous comp group. It's placement among the different hierarchies has nothing to do with the subject but only with the inclinations of the person interested in creating a discussion. Welcome to the world of alternate news hierarchies. ------ BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)
sdp@zeus.hf.intel.com (Scott Peterson) (01/30/88)
In article <772@brandx.rutgers.edu> webber@brandx.rutgers.edu (Webber) writes: >hypertext in general as opposed to the mac product. Although I still feel >such a discussion would be interesting, it seems to lack posters (although >not readers). I PROPOSE THAT WE RMGROUP THE GROUP WITH A REQUEST TO >WAIT FOR A WEEK TO LET THE RMGROUP SETTLE. THEN IF SOMEONE ELSE FEELS >THAT THEY WANT TO CREATE ALT.HYPERTEXT, THEY ARE WELCOME TO. Mel, will >you do the honours? > I don't think a couple of weeks is enough time for a new group to get up to speed. Maybe you should wait a while longer before giving it the axe. Scott Peterson OMSO Software Engineering Intel, Hillsboro OR sdp@sdp.hf.intel.com uunet!littlei!foobar!sdp!sdp Can you run fsck on your brain?
deh0654@sjfc.UUCP (Dennis Hamilton) (02/03/88)
In article <772@brandx.rutgers.edu> webber@brandx.rutgers.edu (Webber) writes: >[Summary: As quasi-group creator of alt.hypertext, below I am claiming >that it was right to create the group and that it is now right to >rmgroup the group and wait a week to see if anyone else feels strongly >enough to want to create the group. . . . >. . . I PROPOSE THAT WE RMGROUP THE GROUP WITH A REQUEST TO >WAIT FOR A WEEK TO LET THE RMGROUP SETTLE. THEN IF SOMEONE ELSE FEELS >THAT THEY WANT TO CREATE ALT.HYPERTEXT, THEY ARE WELCOME TO. . . . >------ BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber) No, No, don't do that. You over-estimate the speed with which alt.hypertext has become known across the net and attracted attention. For example, we haven't seen anywhere nearly as many messages here as they have in Cupertino, and it took the query about whether the group even existed to start filling the article directory here. So you haven't really determined the interest level. Also, I'm not even sure that alt.config is present here! I certainly wouldn't have known to follow it for a discussion about creating and rm-ing a group. The dispersal of alt-groups is still very dodgy and takes quite a while for the news-trickle to percolate out here to the distant leaves. (Your proposal just arrived this a.m., for example, ok?) I think if you rmgroup alt.hypertext, the attendant confusion and ripples will muck it up completely for those of us who are just warming up to this group. Please wait a couple of months and see what happens then, ok? Dennis E. Hamilton -- -- orcmid {uucp: ... !rochester!sjfc!deh0654 vanishing into a twisty little network of nodes all alike}