From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Geoff Bronner)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Even more on the rec.*.manga debate
Date: 17 Apr 92 12:36:10 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Amos Tuck School

In <1992Apr16.072950.14059@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bn510@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Matthew L. High) writes:

>r.a.manga was beating r.a.c.manga by a 3 to 1 and even 4 to 1 margin.
>Towards the end of the voting, however, more r.a.c.m. votes were
>coming in than r.a.manga votes.

I think this is a reflection of the staggered posting of the Straw Poll
and has little relevance. If the readers of rec.arts.comics had had an
equal amount of time to vote would they have caught up and passed the
votes for r.a.m? Maybe... doesn't matter though. 

>Both sides of the naming debate have
>been going at it for some time now, and neither side seems to be
>gaining any significant support.  

You keep forgetting, the people who oppose r.a.m on the basis of the name
alone do not need a majority of votes, they only need 1/3. "Significant
support' would only be needed by anyone who carried r.a.m through to a
CFV.

>We (the readers of USENet) write up a mutually agreeable definition
>for COMICS and for MANGA.  

Not my pet newsgroup. Write an RFD with a proposed charter that doesn't
conflict with the proposed name and I will be out of here. Agreeable? Try
coherent and logical.

>In a somewhat inflammatory message (directed at noone in particular)
>I posted to alt.manga, I asked people to vote for the proposed
>manga group REGARDLESS of whatever name is chosen.  Although I would
>prefer rec.arts.comics.manga, I'll also support rec.arts.manga (with
>reservations, and an understanding that it will be moved under the
>rec.arts.comics.* heirarchy when the Great R.A.C. split finally
>happens), or rec.arts.comics.asian.  I urge others to do so as
>well.

Not.
Moving a manga group into rec.arts.comics later would be impossible. Why
not put it there now and get the reorg properly started by following up
with an RFD for rec.arts.comics.misc?
By arguing for a later move you are undermining your entire argument (oh,
btw thanks!) and making it clear that your only concern is some misguided
impression that hierarchies carry 'value judgements' and aren't a way to
make the daily life of admins a lot easier. If you have no objection to
the presence of manga discussion in a comics hierarchy you should really
reconsider this whole line of reasoning.
A great R.A.C split is IMO a bad idea. Chaanging r.a.c to *misc and
spinning groups off it as volume requires would take longer but would be
much easier to get passed. The hierarchy already exists for all intents and
purposes. r.a.c.strips and .marketplace are here to stay.

>Based on the level of support shown in the straw poll (149 votes -
>egads!  Much more than I expected!), I think enough of us agree that
>a rec.*.manga group is wanted.  Does it really matter THAT MUCH what
>the name of the group is - in the long run?  Let's all get our
>priorities straight here - the need for the group outweighs the 
>naming issue.

The naming issue is more important to me. I'm voting based on the name.
I refuse to allow r.a.m to be created just so we can go through this again
when you decide to move it. No way.
The other alternative is to vote no anyway and let you wait 6 months until
the comics reorg has expanded the hierarchy by a few more groups. Take your
pick.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU  -  Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business

	"Don't believe the hype!"
		-Public Enemy
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.mud