From: mick@maxine.wpi.edu (Ravi Narayan)
Subject: Re: rec.moto.harley
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:08:52 GMT

Somewhere, Sometime, Thus Spake karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish):
:- In article <1992Jul22.211619.16488@wpi.WPI.EDU> mick@maxine.wpi.edu
:- (Ravi Narayan) writes:
:- >	if people who *want* r.m.h *want* my
:- >	vote, *they* have to make out a case as to why the group is
:- >	needed. "just because we need it" is not enough reason for me.
:- 
:- For just about every other new group I've ever seen
:- discussed, a demonstration that the new group is
:- *wanted* by a sizeable constituency is adequate.

	if that be the case i wonder why we require a voting process at
	all. we could just change the usenet guidelines to say that if a
	new newsgroup proposal has x people supporting it then it is
	created. as long as the guidelines mention that the group has to
	be voted upon, i shall certainly ask for some justification
	before i cast my vote. as you point out later in your post,
	problems with other groups/usenet methods are not reason for
	accepting an arguement.

:- >:- and the prevailing wisdom tells us that the proposed
:- >:- newsgroup would be cheaper for the net at large than the existing
:- >:- mailing list.
:- >
:- >	if this were true (supported by valid statistics) i would
:- >	certainly understand the creation of the group.
:- 
:- A newsgroup would probably be more expensive, netwide,
:- in terms of communications resources.  It would be
:- cheaper in the resources of which there's a critical
:- shortage: administrative attention.  With a newsgroup
:- there's no need for a list administrator who keeps
:- track of 250 subscribers and no headaches for mail
:- administrators on dozens of subscribers' machines
:- trying to sort out bounced mail.
:- 
:- If you've never managed a big mailing list, try it some
:- time.  It's a lot more work than just editing a subscriber
:- list once a week.

	fortunately or unfortunately i or any other person who is not on
	the mailing list has nothing to do with its costs. if you take
	on the job of managing the mailing list it increases your work
	load. your arguement is entirely baseless since for
	joe-administrator the probability of even having an user on the
	list is infinitesimal. the list to 99% of the world causes no
	strain in terms of "administrative attention". such is not the
	case with a newsgroup. i am *not* a news administrator, but i
	have seen enough of it, and know enough people who do it, to
	know that its not all automated or easy to maintain and manage.
	the admin would not have to put in any work due to the new
	newsgroup but the probability that he might have to is more than
	in the case of the mailing list. but all this doesnt matter a
	bit if instead there were some other justification for the
	creation of the group.


:- The claim all along has been that at least part of the
:- motivation for segregating Harley discussions is to
:- mitigate some of the effects of that division.  I don't
:- see any need to question peoples' motivations.

	the division i refer to is not the division in rec.moto but on
	the road and in people's minds. people arguing on either side
	must understand that rec.moto does *not* (when it boils down)
	need the harley riders. arguements of the type "they are already
	gone", "you pushed them out", etc.,. rec.moto is not a consensus
	and one must not lose track of that. it is a forum for
	discussion about motorcycles. the basic assumption that
	rec.moto stands to lose thru the creation of the new group and
	that arguements against the creation are based upon this (at
	least in my case) is false. this is not a case of war against
	rec.moto, which everyone seems to have forgotten, is just a
	newsgroup. that leaves the pro-rec.moto person with two reasons:
	1. he considers harleys motorcycles and h-d issues relevant to
	rec.moto (or) 2. he hates harleys for some reason. i would
	believe that the first stated is the reason in an overwhelming
	majority. i have not heard any arguements for the formation of
	the group other than of the form "they want it. what do you have
	against it?" (something that assumes 1. i have something against
	it, 2. that such an arguement is reason for voting for the
	group). the entire debate has been misdirected by this one
	question by turning the roles around in such a way that the
	arguements for creation of the group has directly become verbal
	wars against apparent anti-harley bigots. thru this the need to
	clearly state the purpose of the group and the justification for
	its creation has been side-stepped.

:- >	how many of the proponents have cited it?
:- 
:- It's not as much an immediate issue now as it was a year
:- and a half ago, because the Harley folks aren't around
:- in rec.motorcycles to provoke flames or to return them.

	well then, we really do not know about now do we? anti-harley
	threads a year and a half ago could well have been prompted by
	equally anti-jap posts etc.

:- They're consistent and predictable and very tiresome.

	as is most of usenet.

:- rec.motorcycles.  A comparison may say more about the
:- lameness of other groups in failing to find a way around
:- their problems than about the merits of r.m.h.

	hence it is time to drop the anti-rec.moto arguement and come
	out with arguements in favour of r.m.h which for all we know
	might go the same way.


:- >   why do posts of the form "I am proud
:- >	to be a Harley rider and would like us Harley riders to stick to
:- >	rec.moto" appear every now and then?
:- 
:- I've never seen one.  I've seen posts from Chuck Rogers,

	i sadly do not remember the name of the person who did recently
	post about staying with rec.moto. i mention that not to make out
	a case, but just to point out the influence of such posts on me
	as a voter (after all i need not prove the existence of such
	posts to myself, coz i *did* read them).

:- So what?  There was almost no overt racism visible in
:- the town I grew up in.  There were also no blacks;
:- they'd been driven out years before.

	driven out??? could you explain further the parallel between
	blacks being driven out of your town and harley riders
	*apparently* leaving rec.moto? the inconvenience of ignoring
	obvious flame-bait is comparative to physical intimidation and
	racial persecution? let me give you another analogy... as a
	person from another country, i do live with quite an amount of
	overt racism (and sometimes not so overt) directed towards me,
	but i prefer to stay in the united states due to a whole lot
	of positive aspects. its a conscious choice to overlook a few
	inconveniences to reap a greater benefit. something i believe
	harley riders could do by using rec.moto as a forum for
	discussion. if they do want a separate group they are welcome 
	to it if they can muster the support for it. if they want my
	support i wish them to state their case.

	happy riding,

	- ravi

	disclaimer: i do not represent worcester polytechnic institute
	in any manner. i do not speak as a representative of the office(s)
	of computer administration. however i do draw upon my experience
	in administering systems at wpi to express my opinions.



'''---```---^^^^^^-----#-----~~~~~----'''------~~~~-----````~~~---------=\ /=
.sig (n): a piece of mail with a fool at one  :  Ravi Narayan, CS, WPI   (0)
          end and flames at the other. (C).   :  DoD# tan90-SuzukiGS500E  H
   o     _          _           _           _ :         _           _     H
 _/\_> =| |========| |=========| |=========| |=========| |=========| |=======
0,> /0,=|w|,,=====,|,|.,===,,==| |,,===.,==|.|..======w| |..,,.====| |====,,=
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.models.rc,rec.models.rockets,alt.models,rec.models.railroad