[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: alt.dinosaur open for posting

Bob Myers wrote:

> On Oct 11, 14:25, Flyinggoat@aol.com wrote:

>>   I got one of the guys at AOL to post a 'seed' message in alt.dinosaur, on
>> the INTERNET to start it out.
> alt.dinosaur is not exactly a widely recognized newsgroup.  I've never seen
> a newgroup message for it, and I've run news services for Unocal for more
> than 4 years.  It's pretty poorly named, besides.

It doesn't exist at my site either.  Does anybody know who it is that
created it?  I agree that it's probably a good idea to create a
newsgroup; this list is relatively large and growing quickly.

>I've got a better idea.  Let's start up a real USENET newsgroup in
>the sci hierarchy instead.

I also agree that this is probably a good idea.  Given the typical
discussion here, I think that something in the sci hierarchy is

Bob, unless you tell me not to, I'm going to forward your RFD to
talk.origins.  That's another place where dinosaurs are occasionally

and in a later message Bob wrote:

> I'm particularly interested in how you think this should relate to
> the mailing list.  Do we want to gateway the mailing list and
> newsgroup?  

In the past some people have stated a preference that the mailing list
remain in existence regardless of any newsgroup creation because not
everyone with e-mail has access to USENET or whatever hierarchy the
newsgroup may be created in.  Listproc makes it very easy to gateway
mail to and from an associated newsgroup (Bob, I'll send you some info
about that).  We have a few options that we can pursue in terms of the
relationship between this list and any particular newsgroup.  We can
choose to have all mail to the list forwarded to the newsgroup, or
have all articles posted to the newsgroup forwarded to the mailing
list, or both, or neither.

Working under the assumption that the group will get created, I think
it might be a good idea to get a quick vote on peoples'
preferences. We may be able to reduce some of the burden on the list
that way.  That is, you can wait to see what the majority opinion is
before you start trying to make a case for your own preference.  To
make my life easier, please just send me a one-line message containing
one of four options (unless you can think of others):

a) send only                       i.e. mailing list ---> newsgroup
b) receive only                    i.e. newsgroup ---> mailing list
c) send and receive                i.e. mailing list <--> newsgroup
d) neither send nor receive        i.e. mailing list <||>  newsgroup

Ok, the ball is in your court (all 534 of you!)

Mickey Rowe     (rowe@lepomis.psych.upenn.edu)