Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site houxa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!houxm!houxa!9212osd
From: 9212osd@houxa.UUCP (Orlando Sotomayor-Diaz)
Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.music
Subject: Re: net.music should be split
Message-ID: <354@houxa.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 9-Feb-84 16:06:15 EST
Article-I.D.: houxa.354
Posted: Thu Feb  9 16:06:15 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 10-Feb-84 05:15:06 EST
References: <349@houxa.UUCP> <449@pyuxn.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 65

[]
Rich says:
	>It's one thing to separate net.games from net.games.video, but quite
	>another to create net.movies AND net.movies.color, net.movies.b&w,
	>net.movies.3d, etc.

Remember Rich, there is net.movies.sw serving a very useful purpose,
mainly isolating the discussion of the Star Wars movies to a subgroup
so that people interested in other movies can talk about them in
net.movies without having to read all the Star Wars trivia.
And why do you think net.startrek was created? Of course, the
flood of articles everywhere else when the movie came out.


	>The problem is not that there is not enough interest in a given topic, such
	>as classical music (there obviously is), but that there's no reason not
	>to submit such articles to net.music.

I'm glad you admit there is interest in net.music.classical (or whatever
you want to call it). However, the fundamental problem is not the
posting of articles but rather the reading of articles (or headers) which
are of no interest to those supporting the idea of
splitting net.music.  And this is not a question of claiming that
their tastes in music are more sophisticated or superior to anyone else's,
it's because they like that kind of music and KNOW about it.  For example,
I read net.lang.c and not net.lang.forth, not because FORTH is
a bad language, but because I don't know it, and don't have any interest
in learning it at this time.


	>I really don't like the idea of newsgroups to begin with, but if we're
	>going to have them it's counterproductive to have one for every person's
	>individual taste, which is what we'd be approaching.  

What software do you use to 
read news, an AI project that scans all the text in the netnews
directories and let's you pick things that you are interested in only?
Your argument also sounds like the domino theory, persuasive but
usually lacking a fundamental reality to back it up.
Consider, no one is proposing the multiple groups that you
and others have suggested with some sarcasm.  You are committing
nixoicide.

We must live with newsgroups while a better software package comes
along.


	>What it boils down to is this---I hear people saying "There's too much
	>noise (??) in xxx newsgroup, and we would like to see a separate group
	>for articles on the yyy type of xxx, so let's make a subgroup".  If you
	>don't like the way a newsgroup "looks" and you'd like to see more articles
	>on your subject of interest within the newsgroup topic, THEN SUBMIT SOME!!!!

We are not saying that there is noise in net.music. We are
proposing to separate the information content into subgroups so
that THE PROCESS OF READING THE INFORMATION BECOMES MORE EFFICIENT.
Believe me, that's what it all boils down to. A subgroup might
be of some inconvenience to a submitter (really?), but it is
highly convenient for the readers (which are the BIG majority in USENET).

This is enough for this week.
-- 
Orlando Sotomayor-Diaz /AT&T Bell Laboratories, Crawfords Corner Road
Room HO-3M-325	201-949-1532	Holmdel, New Jersey, 07733
Path: {{{ucbvax,decvax}!}{ihnp4,harpo}!}houxa!9212osd