Re: On moderated newsgroups
- From: Rob Morley <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:31:04 +0000
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:07:31 +0000
Tony <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
In uk.net.news.management, Simon Brooke <stillyet+nntp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Careful - you're addressing the actual situation, rather than the one
wrote:
So my view is that if twenty people actually make long term use of a
group and enjoy doing so, it was worth creating. If they don't, it
can be rmgrouped. Neither of these is a big deal.
And there's *plenty* of room in Usenet for those folk, like the whole
of alt.* or free.*
How does that impact on what the uk.* hierarchy provides?
It's much easier to argue that spreading a limited number of people
over a wider namespace reduces the chance of a community forming than
it is to argue the opposite, in my view.
If anything, we should be reducing the size of the uk.* hierarchy so
that communities can form.
Ever increasingly specific charters and tiny moderated groups dilute,
not strengthen, usenet.
that he thinks he wants to address.
.
- References:
- On moderated newsgroups
- From: Ian Jackson
- Re: On moderated newsgroups
- From: Simon Brooke
- Re: On moderated newsgroups
- From: kat
- Re: On moderated newsgroups
- From: Simon Brooke
- On moderated newsgroups
- Prev by Date: Re: UK Usenet Committee Elections 2009 - Confirmed Candidates
- Next by Date: Re: Vote canvassing?
- Previous by thread: Re: On moderated newsgroups
- Next by thread: Re: On moderated newsgroups
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|