From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.manga
Date: 13 Apr 92 19:40:47 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

dcb@wdl1.wdl.loral.com (David C Blume) writes:

>Yes! Brian and Jeff seem pretty level headed!

    Thank you.

>hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades) writes:
>>moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (The Napoleon of Crime) writes:
>>
>>>Suggestion: try posting in rec.arts.comics with the keyword "MANGA: " at the
>>>beginning of the subject line for a month or two, and we'll see how the
>>>traffic stacks up to everything else there.
>>
>>    A number of people stated that they think their manga discussions
>>would get lost in the normal rec.arts.comics traffic.

>The traffic on rec.arts.comics overwhelms me.  Teach me about the kill-file.

    Whether or not you can use kill files is dependant on your news
reading software.

>>                                                      Oh, yeah, and
>>manga aren't comics, so why would they talk about them in r.a.c. 

>That's baited.  The argument is that it is mis-leading to put manga under
>comics because *discussion* in the comics group tends to be western, and
>so it is unintuitive to find a manga group under that.  Like finding
>cubism.impressionism.

    It is true that the focus of r.a.c is "western" comics, but that is
due largely to the fact that manga posters use alt.manga, which they
started because they felt that r.a.c was for western comics. God I love
circular logic ;->.

>>                                                                 In fact
>>I remember one person saying he would post a manga related discussion to
>>rec.arts.anime before he posted it to r.a.c.

>That was me, Brian. Before alt.manga it was the rule rather than the exception
>to put your manga posts on rec.arts.anime and soc.culture.japan.  Those
>readers were the ones who had similar interests.  And the ones who knew
>what the connotation of "H" was.  It had nothing to do with pride or
>prejudice.

    Probably because many people felt that they couldn't handle a group
with the traffic volume of r.a.c. Therefore they decided to post to
other, lower traffic groups that basically seemed to talk about a
similar topic, but it doesn't change the fact that manga discussions
should have taken place in r.a.c before there was alt.manga.

>So, as far as determining the need to for rec.arts.{comics.}manga, please
>refer to archived posts from alt.manga and rec.arts.anime. 

    I don't need to. I happen to think that a mainstream manga group is
a good thing.

>BTW: How do either of you feel about my post where I tried to sum up the
>ideas of the two sides?  Was I wrong?  Why are people continuing the
>argument over the name so vehemently?

    It certainly seemed reasonable, but you have to realize that until
the results of the Straw Poll come in, there will continue to be a
heated discussion over the name. And try to realize that those of us
arguing for r.a.c.manga aren't doing so to cause your group to fail, we
just want to see it placed correctly within the rec.arts.* hierarchy. As
for why we are so vehement about it, please refer to a previous post by
Lazlo Nibble, he talks about this.

--
-Hades  (Brian V. Hughes)   | Common Taxpayer Q&A: Q. If I use the 1040 how
 hades@Coos.Dartmouth.Edu   | do I indicate my preference for the Elvis stamp?
 Mac Database Developer     | A. You write THIN ELVIS or FAT ELVIS in the box
 Dartmouth Medical School   | "Spouse's Social Security #." -Dave Barry
Newsgroups: news.groups