From: briank@ars2.uucp (D. Brian Kimmel)
Newsgroups: pnw.general,seattle.admin
Subject: Re: Newsgroup Creation (Was Proposal for pnw.motss)
Date: 9 Oct 92 21:21:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: ars2.BvvI0A.GwG
Distribution: pnw
Organization: Automated Retail Systems, Seattle, Wa

In <1992Oct7.025245.26404@seanews.akita.com>
	billmcc@seanews.akita.com (Bill McCormick) writes:

>In article <BvpxMs.Gxo@ars2.uucp> briank@ars2.uucp (D. Brian Kimmel) writes:
>>In <1992Oct5.045443.1553@seanews.akita.com>
	billmcc@seanews.akita.com (Bill McCormick) writes:
>>>I propose that we adopt a protocol similar to the mainstream Usenet
>>>heirarchy, adapted for the fewer readers of the pnw newsgroups.
>>>Specifically that votes be held according to the newsgroup creation
>>>guidelines and that instead of the 100 votes with a 2/3 majority we
>>>use 25 votes with a 2/3 majority.
>>
>>I think this is overkill, requiring 25 votes.
>> [method deleted]
>>Thus with 4% of the computer population (based on uucp maps) this proposal
>>would require 25% of the worldwide vote.
>>
>>This seems to me to be much too restrictive.
>>
>>As I see it, the purpose of news is to allow a free flow of information
>>and ideas between people with similar interests/needs.  Balanced
>>against this need/desire for free information flow is the requirement to
>>keep the news system manageable.
>>
>>I would therefore offer this counter proposal:
>>    In the seattle and pnw local heirarchy a newsgroup may be created
>>    *except* if at least 50% of the people voting object and at least
>>    5 people vote.  

>The reason for a vote *is not* to see if anyone objects -- it's to make
>sure there is sufficient interest to create a group.  Otherwise e-mail
>is a better alternative.

We are in agreement here, but I phrased my proposal poorly.  It would
take at least 5 votes and the group would be created unless the
majority of the voters objected.

>A while ago someone did some analysis for the mainstream Usenet
>heirarchy that the breakeven point was 100 readers.  That is, once
>100 people joined a mailing list it was cheaper and more efficient
>to make it a newsgroup.  This was when the main links were 2,400 bps.

>I simply made the assumption that people transfering news are now
>using at least 9,600 bps modems (true) and that the set of pnw
>systems is about the same size as the entire Usenet at the time
>(close enough).

I fail to see how modem speed changes the breakeven point between mail
and news.  In fact, since news is batched and compressed and mail at
best will only be compressed and then only on some links, the balance
should have shifted slightly in the favor of news.

But then, economics should not be the only factor in deciding between
mail and news.  Perhaps not even any factor considering that this is
a local hierarchy we are talking about.

Lets do a little math:
      2000 bytes per average message
     /1000 characters per second via higher speed modems
     /   2 average compression factor
-----------
         1 second (approx) per article for each link.

>The point remains that the Usenet group creation process is not
>intended to make sure *someone* is interested, it's intended to
>make sure *enough* people are interested.

>Bill

I agree in principle.

My basic consideration is to keep *frivolous* newsgroups from being
created (remember alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork?).
Otherwise, the creation process should be fairly simple; a few
people put forth a reasonable proposal, there is not a major
uprising of opinion against the new group, and the group is therefore
created.

If any local group starts to get out of hand (sending megs of data
that is only useful to a few people for example), then the news
administrators should get together and restrict or remove the group.

I think we try to make it overly hard for people to create and use
a tool (the newsgroup).  Way harder than IMHO it ought to be.

Brian
-- 
D. Brian Kimmel           /    briank@ars2.UUCP   \   The Emerald City....
Director of R & D        \  Voice: (206) 325-8922  / Seattle, Washington.
Automated Retail Systems  \  Fax: (206) 325-9127  / Standard disclaimer(s).