Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!yeshua.marcam.com!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!hobbes!earth.armory.com!rstevew
From: rstevew@armory.com (Richard Steven Walz)
Subject: Re: Splitting comp.robotics
Organization: The Armory
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 10:19:10 GMT
Message-ID: <Cw47Bz.7Bp@armory.com>
References: <19940906.083332.579775.NETNEWS@CC1.KULEUVEN.AC.BE> <34ko3d$m3k@lastactionhero.rs.itd.umich.edu> <JLA.94Sep8102723@sandshark.cs.indiana.edu> <GAMIN.94Sep12065835@amadeus.ireq-robot.hydro.qc.ca>
Sender: news@armory.com (Usenet News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: deepthought.armory.com
Lines: 45

In article <GAMIN.94Sep12065835@amadeus.ireq-robot.hydro.qc.ca>,
Martin Boyer <gamin@ireq-robot.hydro.qc.ca> wrote:
>>>>>> jason almeter writes:
>
>>Perhaps...
>
>>	comp.robotics.homebrew
>>	comp.robotics.industrial
>>	comp.robotics.research
>
>At first, I like this idea, but in practice, industrial may be a very
>low traffic group.
>
>What distinguishes industrial from research?  "Industrial" traffic is
>rare on the Usenet, except for computer hardware and software
>companies.
>
>I'd split first into homebrew and research, and add industrial later
>if there is a need.
>
>--
>Martin Boyer				mboyer@ireq-robot.hydro.qc.ca
>Division Robotique			mboyer@ireq-robot.uucp
>Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec    +1 514 652-8412
>Varennes, QC, Canada   J3X 1S1
-------------------------------------
*IF* there is a need! Someday, sure. But there still needs to be a parent
group to these third order newsgroup names!! Just as alt.sex has numerous
other alt.sex.* hung off it, so should comp.robotics have comp.robotics.*,
but retaining the original group for introductory material or presentation
of material for every year's crop of up and comings folks and those who
want OPEN discussion and eclecticism!!! So keep c.r, and make c.r.research
or c.r.advanced or c.r.snobby-expert or WHATEVER! But there is NO need with
this small a group to kill it by trying to arbitrarily kill eclectic
discussion in favor of specialized and myopic foci in harshly divided and
fought over little bailiwicks! I'll just bet that the EXPERTS will be
hashing with each other in a week for splitting their group some more and
in labarynthine ways we generalists couldn't give a fart about! So KEEP
comp.robotics and make a comp.robotics.expert or whatever for the snobs and
the specialists who just HATE having to sort through a bunch of genuinely
different people's interests!! This would solve BOTH desires! No need to
lose plain old general comp.robotics for newcomers and generalists and
people who have broad but not awfully "deeeep" (sic) interests!
-Steve Walz   rstevew@armory.com

