From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.frp.campaign
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:48:00 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

I don't think the first posting of this note got through, so here's a
second try.

In article <Bx6600.K72@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>, cbnorman@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu writes:
> You have completely ignored everything I listed as the topics which would
> be acceptable for posting in Rec.games.frp.campaign.  These include the following.
> 
>   - FAQ (including many things NOT on the rec.games.frp.archives FAQ)
>   - Campaign moves (these are posted currently in rec.games.frp.archive
>     by some people.  How many might I ask? Are there eight or more campaigns
>     going on in rec.games.frp.archive?)
>   - GM Move updates.  Certainly haven't seen any of these.
>   - Player Responses to Moves.  Nada yet again.
>   - Discussion of Campaigns.  Once again, no.

To take on your topics in order:

1. You can post the FAQ to rec.games.frp.misc or .dnd until it's
complete enough to post to .announce yourself. (There's no FAQ in
rec.games.frp.archives, which makes me think you haven't even read it.)

2. Chapters in campaigns are currently posted to rec.games.frp.archives,
not because they are complete and done with, but so they can easily be
archived and stored for the future. As for quantity, there are not eight
currently, but there are exactly as many as people want to post.
rgf.archives does not restrict how many people can post to it.

3. Some GM move updates are posted in rec.games.pbm. Not many, however,
since each one is presumed to be of interest only to the people in the
campaign. I don't think this belongs in a newsgroup.

4. Player moves aren't posted anywhere. They're only of interest to a
few people (usually two) and thus fall into the category of personal
messages. Sometimes you claim this is a part of your proposed newsgroup,
and sometimes you claim it isn't, but in either case it doesn't belong
on a newsgroup.

5. Discussion of campaigns. Pardon me, but you say that no campaigns are
discussed in rec.games.frp.*? Are you out of your mind? The campaign
includes every single piece of rolegames: setting, characters, rules,
and everything else. EVERY SINGLE ROLEPLAYING DISCUSSION NEWSGROUP IS
FULL OF CAMPAIGN DISCUSSIONS! If you have seen no discussion of
campaigns in these newsgroups I can only assume you have never read
them.

>>Just because the group is called rec.games.frp.archives DOESN'T mean
>>it's only meant for "finished, complete stories".
>>
> A point of difference in opinion between you and me which you cling to as
> justification for your dislike of the group.  Even if (for argument's sake)
> ongoing campaign posts are classified as archives, that doesn't change
> the other four points lack of representation.
> 
> They deserve to be together in one centralized group.

And here's the central problem with your proposal. We used to have a
single group to discuss everything to do with rolegames. It was called
rec.games.frp. It was the largest discussion group on usenet, with well
over one hundred messages per day. Internal pressures forced us to
subdivide it into several newsgroups, some for discussion and some for a
low volume of high quality postings. Now you want to start a newsgroup,
your very own newsgroup which you will moderate, that covers everything
that was in rec.games.frp. Now if your newsgroup works as a discussion
newsgroup everything in any one of the other rolegame discussion
newsgroups should also be posted to it. Are you ready to approve 100
messages per day, every day? Do you have enough disk space and a large
enough mailbox to handle all the messages? If you don't intend to make
the newsgroup that large, then what will be your charter? Every time you
post you say something else about your charter, until it has become as
paradoxical and all-encompassing as a book of zen koans.

If I thought you were reasonable and would take my advice, I would
advise you to drop this newsgroup proposal for the moment, sit back and
read the frp newsgroups for about six months, and then decide if there's
a need for a new newsgroup to discuss play by e-mail frp campaigns or
some other issue. If you then decide there is a place for such a
newsgroup then make sure to write a brief charter and proposal, keep it
brief through the discussion period, and be prepared to change the
proposed name in response to objections that it is unclear or overly
general. Since you haven't been reasonable up 'til now, I expect you to
slog forward through the RFD and CFV process until your proposal fails,
and then wonder why everybody gives you such a tough time.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth