freeptos@mips.UUCP (Dan Freitas) (10/16/87)
I recently posted a proposal for starting a radio-controlled-modeling
news group. The response rate has been very encouraging. I have
about 65 "official" supporters for the group, so far. There have been
two areas that have been most commented about: the name of the group
and the scope of the group.
Comments on the scope of the group generally stated that the subject
focus should include cars, boats, control-line, etc. and not be limited
RC-planes. This is absolutely what I had in mind. In order to generate
the number of subscribers necessary to justify this news-group, we
can not limit the scope to aviation only. Also, most of the respondents
indicated that they were interested in at least two different RC
categories anyway (planes/cars, planes/boats, cars/boats, etc).
Most of the comments about the name were that "rec.RC" is not
descriptive enough. Fair enough, how about rec.rc.modeling.
The only no votes (3) were from people concerned that there may not
be enough subscribers to justify a news-group. There isn't any hard
number of subscribers that MUST exist, but the rough break even number,
I am told, is somewhere around 100. I believe it is actually
based more on posting traffic, as opposed to absolute subscribers, so
the "100" number is more of a guideline than a rule. As I stated
before, we have about 65 supporters already. We are actually closer
to 75 supporters since a few of you indicated the news-group would
benefit 6-7 others at your office (I didn't have their net address, so
I did not include them on the "official" count. If any other of you
have friends that may be interested, have them send me a note
saying so).
PROPOSAL-REV1:
I would like to have a new news-group created, rec.rc.modeling, that
would address the subject of RC modeling. Topics would be focused on
all aspects of RC modeling including RC-cars, boats, planes, control-
line * ,etc.
* Control-line models are not actually "RC" models, however most of
control-line subject material (building, engines, AMA events, etc)
is relevant to this news-group.
REQUEST:
Please send me your thoughts, for or against, such a group.
If you have already responded and have no objections to the rev-1
proposal, then you don't need to respond again.
Remember: We could still use some more support, so tell a friend....
Thank you,
Dan Freitas
UUCP: {decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4,hplabs}!decwrl!mips!freeptos
USPS: Mips Computer Systems; 930 Arques Ave; Sunnyvale, Ca 94086jerry@oliveb.UUCP (Jerry Aguirre) (10/20/87)
In article <806@obiwan.UUCP> freeptos@mips.UUCP (Dan Freitas) writes: > Most of the comments about the name were that "rec.RC" is not > descriptive enough. Fair enough, how about rec.rc.modeling. Right :-) Then if we want to add more groups later we can have: rec.rc.fullsize rec.rc.cola rec.rc..... Seriously, in terms of recreation, isn't RC a subdivision of modeling rather than the opposite? I suggest that you move towards "rec.model" (or "rec.modeling" if you like to type a lot). It can be a place for general discussions of model airplanes, cars, etc. (But no railroad, see "rec.railroad.) Then if the RC portion of modeling needs its own group you can split off "rec.model.rc" later. Jerry Aguirre