From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.sf.babylon5
Date: 28 Aug 92 19:39:55 GMT
Reply-To: hades@Dartmouth.Edu
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Disclaimer: Personally, I really don't care who you think I speak for.
Moderator: Rec.Arts.Comics.Info

techy@iastate.edu (Troy A Rutter) writes:


>Please let me explain...

>I DID follow the correct procedure.. according to the FAQ I can do the
>following: 1) Post a message to the moderated group and wait for the
>message to be dispersed to the other groups.  2) Post 2 messages.. one
>to the moderated group, another to the other groups to have immediate
>discussion.

>If in doubt, read the FAQ.

    Not in doubt, just not used to seeing someone post twice. Aside from
that the accepted procedure is to post one message to all the groups
involved and let David Lawrence to the actual posting so that he can put
it into his schedule of group proposals with the correct date rather
than having to remember that you posted the same message earlier.

>As for startig the new group, rec.arts.startrek.misc and the other trek
>hierarchies ALREADY have enuff B5 traffik to warrant the new group..
>Quite frankly, there is more talk about B5 going on than a lot of other
>things.

    Well, what actually constitutes "enough traffic to warrant a new
group"? I'm not expecting an answer to this, just pointing out that
definitions will vary quite widely. I personally, have been happily
ignoring the posts in r.a.s.misc and it hasn't hampered me in any way.
In fact I only remember seeing a few posts about this show, and until I
read this aricle I didn't even remember that I saw them in r.a.s.misc.

>I appreciate your concern, but I am positive i have followed procedures
>and there is sufficient interest to warrant the creation of this
>newsgroup.

    I'm not trying to stop you, I would just like you to consider the
other options before you invest the time in getting a mainstream
newsgroup (especially a rec.arts.* group) created. It would be easier
for you to create an alt.* group for this show, which is the accepted
practice for television shows (cf. alt.tv.simpsons, alt.tv.twin-peaks).
This is because there are no guarantees that a tv show will last more
than a season or two (Note: this is one of the reasons that there was no
rec.arts.startrek.tng group in the r.a.s.* reorg proposal) and if it
bombs then there is this extra group woth no traffic sitting around. If
it were an alt.* group and the show was cancelled then it would be a
lot easier to just send out an rmgroup control message to get rid of it.
    Of course alt.* groups generally have a much lower distribution than
the mainstream groups and if you see this as a problem then there is one
other option open to you: namely the creation of a babylon5 mailing
list. If you do this then not only will you be assured of getting it
created (there are no votes needed to start a mailing list) and there is
the potential to have an even larger distribution than a UseNet group
because there are a lot of sites that don't get UseNet, but their users
can still belong to mailing lists (ie. compuserve, Genie and AOL).

    All I ask is that you consider the other options. And to those
people who were talking about creating rec.arts.babylon5, and siting
r.a.drwho and r.a.startrek as precedents you should know that those 2
groups existed before rec.arts.* existed and that is why they have their
own groups. I seriously doubt you would get anyone to vote for
rec.arts.babylon5 anyway. That kind of newsgroup naming is frowned uopn
in news.groups these days, just look at the r.a.manga flamewar if you
don't believe me.


--
-Hades (Brian V. Hughes) Moderator: Rec.Arts.Comics.Info
		   "A clear case of curare poisoning
	       of one of her Majesty's Cold-Cream Guards"
						   -- Durlock Holmes
Newsgroups: news.groups