Xref: utzoo sci.physics:4206 news.admin:3312
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!gargoyle!tank!ncar!woods
From: woods@ncar.ucar.edu (Greg Woods)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,news.admin
Subject: Re: Is it time for sci.physics.only?
Message-ID: <641@ncar.ucar.edu>
Date: 26 Aug 88 16:50:10 GMT
References: <1094@sri-arpa.ARPA> <2765@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <1189@anasaz.UUCP> <134@laffu.UUCP> <3732@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: woods@handies.UCAR.EDU (Greg Woods)
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 15

In article <3732@polya.Stanford.EDU> andy@cayuga.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
>Fine, most people seem to feel that sci.physics should carry physics
>politics as well as physics.
>
>Is there interest in sci.physics.only "for the rest of us"?

  Past experience has shown that this DOESN'T WORK. We've tried it a number
of times, with net.women.only (the failure of which was directly responsible
for the start of the very successful feminist mailing list) and 
net.astro.expert. In the more modern era, we have comp.unix.wizards vs.
comp.unix.questions (the latter was supposed to keep the novices out of the
former). In every case it has not worked. Please DON'T create another new
newsgroup that has virtually zero chance of accomplishing its intended purpose.

--Greg