Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: brunix!news.Brown.EDU!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!stanford.edu!CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU!Xenon.Stanford.EDU!jek
From: jek@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (James E. Kittock)
Subject: Re: Is a new newsgroup appropriate?
Message-ID: <1993Feb2.204556.28018@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
References: <1kc1b3INNocv@golem.wcc.govt.nz> <59414@dime.cs.umass.edu> <MULLER.93Feb2110752@honeydew.cs.rochester.edu>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1993 20:45:56 GMT
Lines: 34

In article <MULLER.93Feb2110752@honeydew.cs.rochester.edu> muller@cs.rochester.edu (James R. Muller) writes:
>
>Chalk up another probably-yes vote for breaking
comp.robotics in two.  

Okay, folks, there are a lot of suggestions for HOW we
could break up comp.robotics, but there first should be
a discussion of WHY comp.robotics should split.

I can give two good reasons why comp.robotics should
NOT split:

1. It doesn't have the bandwidth to justify it.  I get
about 10-12 articles a day.  Groups don't usually split
until that number gets above 30 or 40...

2. Splitting just encourages cross-posting, which
further wastes time and bandwidth.  With some
newsreaders, if I read in newsgroup X an article that
has been crossposted to newsgroup X and Y, I still have
to go through it in newsgroup Y, assuming I read that
newsgroup.

Splitting comp.robotics would be pointless and self
defeating, IMHO.

Regards,
--james

-- 
 james kittock :: stanford cs grad student :: duke '92 :: go blue devils!!
 Understatement of the month award: "It is easier to marvel at the web of 
 intricate dependencies of an ecosystem with its thousands of components 
 than to model it." -- Hofbauer & Sigmund
