From: mike@raven.alaska.edu (Mike Kienenberger)
Subject: Re: Status: New alt.* groups as proposed by me [Sean Ryan]
Organization: University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 23:28:34 GMT

[Comments at the bottom  -Mike]

In article <12NOV199219182362@acad3.alaska.edu> sean@freds.cojones.com writes:
>On October 13, I proposed a slew of new alt.* groups.  On October 25,
>after hearing all the discussion both pro and con, I posted a summary. 
>From that, there were five of the proposals which saw no objection
>from anyone.  They were:
>
>alt.culture.alaska
>alt.culture.oregon
>alt.rock-n-roll.classic
>alt.rock-n-roll.symphonic
>alt.tv.infomercials
>
>I decided not to issue these newgroups myself, as it has been
>established here that some sites do not honor newgroups issued by
>users.  Since these are serious proposals and I desire not to see the
>propagation of the groups suffer as a result of any technicalities,
>not to mention the fact that I learned my lesson last year with
>alt.fan.tom_peterson, I asked the news admin here, Mike Kienenberger
><mike@raven.alaska.edu> to issue these newgroups on my behalf.
>
>Rather than accept what transpired here in alt.config and simply issue
>the newgroups, Mike basically chose to subject them to a process
>entirely of his own, using criteria entirely outside of the altnet 
>guidelines, both formal or informal.  The result of all of this is the 
>traffic of the past week or so which Mike has initiated, in which he 
>re-introduces the group proposals which were already previously 
>proposed last month, and which already passed muster with the folks on 
>this newsgroup.  This has caused all sorts of problems.
>
>In short, I made the decision to bypass all of this silly bullshit. 
>Since I already went through the proposal process with these groups,
>I've asked another admin to issue the newgroups.  This has already
>been done from freds.cojones.com.  The messages should be making their
>way out to the net within 12 hours or so after you receive this
>article.
>
>The point I'm making in all of this is, if you see newgroups being
>issued for groups that are currently being hashed out in alt.config,
>these were already originally hashed out last month and what you see
>going on right now is the product of one admin who is currently
>interfering with the whole process because he has little idea of how
>the process works.  So consider that these newgroups are valid,
>regardless of what it may appear to be.

Yep. That's me.
For some silly reason I decided that I wasn't going to create groups
that no one was interested in:

	name		number of interested people (excluding S.R.)

alt.culture.alaska		0
alt.culture.oregon		2
alt.rock-n-roll.classic		0
alt.rock-n-roll.symphonic	0
alt.tv.infomercials		1

Feel free to make your own decisions.  We don't carry any of Jyrki's
groups either.

=============================================================================
-Mike Kienenberger                       FXMLK@ALASKA           (BITNet)
 Academic Computing                      FXMLK@acad3.alaska.edu (Internet)
 News Administrator                      mike@raven.alaska.edu (also news@)
 University of Alaska-Fairbanks
 "I'm a computer programmer....<link><link><kludge><kludge> say-no-more!"
Newsgroups: alt.config