Machiel de Wit <machiel.de...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman schreef op 23-10-2009:
>>Machiel de Wit <machiel.de
...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>-= Hawk =- schreef op 22-10-2009
>>>>G. Morgan <usenet_ab
...@gawab.com> scribbled:
>>>>>This is just an informal proposal f
>>>>Do it right or don't do it at all...
>>>Where can i find how to do it right?
>>The right thing to do is to wait for the inevitable comp.* group to be
>>proposed.
>>I'm sure there will be microsoft.public.windows7 shortly on
>>msnews.microsoft.com.
>>Could you have a tiny bit of patience? It only went on sale today.
>Insiders tell that MS no longer wat to extent theire webbased forums to
>usenet and stops whith the MS newsserver. It's likely they don't add
>new newsgroups.
microsoft.public.* newsgroups. They do offer a Web interface to the newsgroups
from http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/default.mspx
I have no idea who their News administrator is, but there's no announcement
on the Web site that the public News server is being eliminated.
>>Since you're Dutch, one of your fools newgrouped a Windows 7 group nobody
>>wants just the other day, so use alt.nl.os.windows.windows7.
>>I'm sure it
>>will be the same extraordinary success as all the other Dutch language
>>alt groups are, gah.
>>msnews also has Dutch language groups.
>I know and because it's not done the right way most newsmasters won't
>add the new group.
You don't need any microsoft.public.* newsgroup added to your server. Just
use it on their server.
>I second that and therefore i like to do it the right way. Mostly because
>i prefere the way usenet works. Im experienced whith the procedures at
>nl* groups, but not whith alt.* groups.
>Im not only asking for a dutch windows7 group now, but basic for an
>other group i have in mind.
I told you that someone had already sent the newgroup message for the
Dutch-language newsgroup, so if you want to use that one, request it from
your News administrator. I gave you its name.
There shouldn't be alt groups for computer-related topics, unless that
computer related topic is already being discussed in similarly named
alt groups. What I'm telling you is that someone is likely to propose a
comp.* group, which will be sufficient for English-language discussion of
Windows 7 for those who refuse to use the forthcoming microsoft.public.*
group, regardless of what the unnamed insiders told you.
That is my opinion. If you have a different opinion, write a charter.
In alt, the procedure is that the proponent writes the charter and does
his own work. He may choose to post it to alt.config for comment and to
seek suggestions on the proper name for the newsgroup.
The main part of the procedure is that the proponent works hard promoting
the group. He looks for current discussion of the topic in other newsgroups
and promotes discussion in the newgroup and the fact that users must request
creation of the group from their own News administrators.
Of course since the product is barely on the market, justification will be
difficult, but you can look for the discussion anyway. Look in the alt.comp
and comp groups and windows newsgroups outside alt.comp, since a few operating
system groups are elsewhere. Look for discussion over the last 90 days.
Of course this discussion won't count toward justification because most of
the messages will be, "I wonder if Windows 7 will suck a lot less than Vista."
That's not the kind of discussion you want in the group. Till the product
has been on the market for a few months, there won't be any discussion of
the kind you are looking for to be held in the group you haven't proposed
on Usenet.
For the fifth time, have patience. There is never a need to have a newsgroup
in advance of discussion. Never, ever, ever.
That is my opinion, and the opinion of a lot of other people who have a lot
of experience observing failed newsgroups. If you have a different opinion,
do what you want.
Once upon a time, computer related newsgroups tended not to fail on Usenet
as long as they were named according to the proper naming hierarchies.
That is no longer the case. Even on Usenet, computer related groups fail.
So, do you really want to go ahead with this before the group can possibly
be justified?
|
