From: cstuckless@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Re: call for a few new newsgroups
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 21:42:19 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.165657.6829@ms.uky.edu>, kherron@ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron) writes:
> dtiberio@csws17.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
> 
>>In article <1992Apr9.03551.7561@ms.uky.edu> kherron@ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron) writes:
>>>dtiberio@csws7.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:

[Stuff Deleted]

>>>>Many groups who
>>>>do not currently receive Amiga video information can benefit greatly
>>>>from this group.
>>>
>>>Two objections:
>>>
>>>1)	Groups contain discussion, they don't create it.  Can you show
[More Deleted]

>>	Is there one devoted to the Video Toaster, which involves
>>one system designed for all of the above? Are you saying that Mac/IBM/Amiga
>>users should all share the same graphics group? Wouldn't the specific
>>hardware and software of the Toaster warrant its own newsgroup?
> 
> You've missed the point.  The fact the toaster exists doesn't mean
> it automatically deserves its own group.  There are already low-volume
> groups devoted to the general purpose the toaster serves.  Unless toaster
> discussions are already crowding these groups (not happening) or there's
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  Check out rec.video.production. It's not only crowding this group 
with very general Toaster questions, but the talk has even spawned 
into the "Can I get a Toaster for my Mac" and "Is it true that there's 
a Mac emulator for the Amiga" type questions.
  Even if the Toaster had it's own group, the discussions would be 
very diverse. I can imagine there would be questions about hooking it 
up to your VO9850, and deleting points from 3D objects in LightWave's 
modeler. 

> By putting it under an existing graphics or video hierarchy, you'll
> make it more noticeable and convenient to people interested in these 
> topics.  That's the point of group placement, not rubbing peoples'
> noses in the fact that the toaster only runs on the Amiga.

  I agree. Comp.video.toaster makes the most sense, although 
Rec.video.toaster would align it better with Rec.video.production, 
where a lot of the discussion currently is.

[Stuff Deleted]

> You'll notice that up to now, it's just been you and I posting on this
> subject (at least in news.groups).  The lack of other interested parties
                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> is the best evidence that the toaster doesn't deserve its own group.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  I think this statement is a bit premature. The discussion hasn't 
been open to all the interested parties who don't regularly read 
comp.amiga.advocacy, and .graphics. The kind of peargument that you'
you've ignited is probably part of the reason why.

> -- 
> Kenneth Herron                                       kherron@ms.uky.edu
> University of Kentucky                                  +1 606 257 2975
> Department of Mathematics
>                                               Flame early, flame often.
-- 
  
Colin Stuckless          \  The bottleneck for every computer 
FutureVision Ltd          \  platform is the mind's ability to invent 
CStuckless@kean.ucs.mun.ca \  creative new applications for the system