From: ramap@spatial.com (Rama K Pidaparti)
Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: soc.culture.indian.american
Organization: Spatial Technology, Inc. [Boulder, Co]
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 21:47:52 GMT

In article <1992Apr2.215432.28235@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades) writes:
>ramap@spatial.com (Rama K Pidaparti) writes:
>

>    Your personal opinion of Alok aside, if you felt that the group was
>a joke and shouldn't be created then why didn't you vote no? If you had,
>we might not be in the situation we are in now...

Seriously,

I was busy at that time and didn't vote. Also One vote was not a big diference
at the time it was created.  Not that it is an important point.

>>My 2 cents as to why SAY NO to scia.

>>There are many Non-Resident-Indians in many countries and US just
>>happens to be one of them.  So the formation of SCIA can create more
>>S.C.I.* groups for Indians from other countries and to handle so many
>>groups belonging to Indians would be a waste of MONEY for somebody.  As
>>for somebody willing time waste heir time with ALL these news groups
>>belonging to Indians, it is their funeral.

>    Read many soc.culture.* groups? If you had you would know of the
>existence of s.c.asian.american and s.c.african.american. These are 2
>fairly active and popular groups that meet the same criteria you are
>using against s.c.i.a. The precedent is there for the creation of this
>type of subgroup in s.c.* and it has not gone any further than the
							   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>.american group yet, so I'm certainly willing to add another to the
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I just saw a suggestion for S.C.I.Canadian yesterday on SCIA by Alok.

I am sure if allowed it can go to S.C.I.British etc., soon.  The point is
I read SCIA and it is not any different from SCI.  I mean the quality of
articles and the volume is not low either.

>list, as long as there is an actual audience for the group.

>    If you read and participated in the straw poll for the name of the
>group why didn't you suggest this name? if you didn't take part in the
>straw poll then you are operating with incomplete information and should
>find a copy of the straw poll and the results to be better informed of
>what has taken place in choosing this particular name.

I do understand your point.  I was extremely busy at that time.  I could not
participate in it.  Now any way we still have an RFD and I doubt if that can
not include any discussion on appropriate name, which if especially can avoid
the creation of a host sci* groups.  That's my main intention in suggesting
what I did.  I found a copy of the Straw Poll and all it has is how many
people opted for which name.  Besides it is a choice among A-H options to
avoid name confusion.  The reason I proposed NRI (may be a better word can be
found if more time is spent in thinking about it) is to avoid creating more
groups(Yes, I am just repeating what I said).

>--
>-Hades  (Brian V. Hughes)   | "When you get right down do it there is only

Regards,

Ramakrishna.
-- 
Ramakrishna Pidaparti               |  I am a firm beleiver in LUCK!
Spatial Technology Inc              |  The harder I work the more I have of it.
email: ramap@spatial.com            |           ......Thomas Jefferson