From: pvanheus@frodo.cs.uct.ac.za (P A van Heusden)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Should there be Pre-RFD discussion? (was Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy)
Keywords: fantasy RFD arts
Date: 19 Nov 92 12:16:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: frodo.pvanheus.722175366
Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Cape Town

Now that I'm at my trusty terminal at our university, I will reply
to each post as best I can. I'm going to handle posts in groups though.

The following raised the points that rec.arts.sf.* stands for speculative
fiction, and that there is no real distinguishing point between fantasy
and sf.

Stephen Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu	 uw-beaver!june!graham

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)

--
Eric Alfred Burns                        "Life is full of decisions
IK20001@maine.maine.edu                           --Linus Van Pelt

--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.

-- 
Kurt Bose (as in Daisy, not Rose) * kbos@carina.unm.edu * Make outs, not walks!

Lorren Miller internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu 

Dennis Brennan djb6@midway.uchicago.edu
 There is a point of Dennis's I wish to query in more detail, though. He
 says, and I have read, the charter of rec.arts.sf.* states that sf is
 whatever I point to when I say sf. Fine, but that is just what scared me
 off .sf.*. No one points at Tolkien and says sf. 

kroth@wheaton.uucp 

Micheal Qvortrup  qvortrup@inf.ethz.ch

Geoffb@Dartmouth.edu

D. Jay Newman  dn5@psuvm.psu.edu

Larry Smith smith@ctron.com

Ian Sutherland ian@eecs.nwu.edu

Alan P. Barrett 

Well, that's a lot of people against it. (14 by my count) I see the point, it 
is a valid one. I speak about it in my more general post. 

*****************************************************************************

A comment from elmo (morrow@physics.rice.edu)
>	First, put the words Request for Discussion at the top of your RFD,
>or have you missed the "ambiguity" flamewars raging in news.groups?

Yes, I did miss those flame wars. Sorry.

Furthermore, Elmo points out that the content of the group is going to
be of the "I love this artist rave rave rave" type. True, especially given
the contents of rec.arts.sf.written, but the only way to stop this is to
have a community discouraging such posts, or *gasp* a moderator. Neither
exist in rec.arts.sf.written, and the result seems to be a very trivial
newsgroup.

****************************************************************************

Dani Zweig  dani@netcom.com asks if there was not a pre-RFD discussion.
 Well, there was, amongst the USENETters on the Camelot mailing list, a
 list related to matters Arthurian, the closest I could find on the net to
 anything fantasy related. I have pointed out before why I shied away from
 rec.arts.sf.*.
 This should also (hopefully) cover Geoffb@Dartmouth.edu's comments. BTW.
 what would be the difference between spending time discussing this as an
 RFD and discussing as a non-RFD? Same topic, thus equal discussion.
 Richard H. Miller spoke of a discussion in alt.config. Hey, it wasn't me!

****************************************************************************

Just for some variety, Jennifer (jlevine@apollo.hp.com) agrees with me, that
rec.arts.sf. is a confusing name for a fantasy group.

****************************************************************************

I hope no one complains about my generalised way of handling discussion. 
That seems to sum up the response to the RFD so far. Some valid points,
some flames, but I still feel there are significant areas not covered.

Anyway, read my other post for details

Peter

--
*******************************************************************************
Peter van Heusden              "The extreme always makes an impression"
CS2, UCT, Cape Town, RSA             J.D. - Lethal Attraction 
pvanheus@frodo.cs.uct.ac.za              
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy