In article <D6ox1C....@pell.com>, o...@pell.com (Orc) once again applies his highly personal interpretation to public events:
> However, that's not what I was talking about in my rebuttal. >This whole thing was beaten up in rec.railroad several months ago >and the most popular name ended up being rec.rail. However, the >RFD magically changed after it was threatened with a pocket veto -- >although I'm sure the official story now is that rec.rail was never >even considered, there are some people who do remember it. And if >the straw poll is any indication of the final vote, it will fail.
Nobody's ever denied, to my memory, that there was an original intent to use the name rec.rail.
> You're stating that I think that only the members of the group >will vote. You are wrong -- if I thought that only the members of >rec.railroad were going to vote on a CFV which calls for >destruction of the group, I would have only posted my >counterargument there. I am trying to convince non-readers to vote >against this stupid CFV, because it's inappropriate to destroy an >existing group to seed another group that's located well out of the >way in misc.
On the contrary. While there are several good reasons to consider this move, none of them involves "seeding another group" (hierarchy?) for the purposes of that hierarchy's success.
> The intent, from what I've been able to guess from rumor, is that >tale and group-advice want to make misc more popular by seeding it >with groups that won't be missed elsewhere. I think this will >fail, for the reasons I've already stated.
This is of course a complete misunderstanding, probably deliberate, from what I'd guess at this point. The purposes surround this group specifically and rec more generally, not the popularity of misc.*. One problem with rec.* is that a lot of groups were created there simply because for the original computer geeks and scientists who built the net, they were strictly hobby activities, ergo "rec". There are, however, many more aspects to railroads than just those of hobbyists, and this is what we seek to recognize.
Prior art has
>recreational groups in rec, and, at least from the existance of, >oh, rec.audio and rec.autos, being a 'non-specialised' topic is not >a necessary condition for being in rec.
That other guy's bad group name is never a justification for your bad group name. As I've said before:
-- there are a number of railfans who post to rec.railroad, arguably the vast majority -- they do this as a recreational activity -- this is not, however, an argument for staying in rec, as it could reasonably apply to almost any given Usenet group -- the majority fo the CONTENT is "non-recreational", i.e. discussing particulars of rolling stock, routes, etc.
If this CFV passes, I
>expect that the resulting newsgroups will stagnate and by simple >attrition lose all the North American railroad enthusiasts who >currently post to rec.railroad. And in this regard I don't give a >fig about the non-north american traffic, because none of those >regional groups are being killed by this proposal, and so won't be >harmed when misc.transport.rail dies from unuse.
It will only die from unuse if you choose not to post to it. If, as we invite them to do, all readers of rec.railroad, whether self-identified railfans or not, choose to use the new groups, they will be just as successful and retain the same character.
The situation you threaten as a negative outcome is, in fact, entirely in YOUR hands, so I'm not to concerned about it; if it comes about, the blame will rest squarely on those of you who have chosen to place petty politics above the success of the newsgroup.
The rest of us will use and enjoy the new groups. I predict it'll be a blast. Just come on over, have a drink; you're welcome.
-- Daniel A. Hartung * dhart...@mcs.com * http://www.mcs.net/~dhartung/home.html \\ You got a plan? / Try not to get killed. \\ Support the new hierarchy // // Ivanova/Sheridan, "The Long Dark" // for the arts & humanities! \\ \\ Official Member, National B5 Emmy Lobby \\ Read news.groups. //
> This, I beleive fits the 'agenda" of those who regard themselves as some >sosrt of superior, specialised " transportation professional" and who have >reacted with dismay over suggestions that the newsgroup stay in the "rec" >hierarchy. Ballyhooing their credentials marks such epople as a kind of >dilletente IMHO, but to each his own.
Please state who has called themselves a transportation professional, or "ballyhooed" their credentials.
Personally, I have not seen one, so I would be very curious to take these individuals to task.
-- Daniel A. Hartung * dhart...@mcs.com * http://www.mcs.net/~dhartung/home.html \\ You got a plan? / Try not to get killed. \\ Support the new hierarchy // // Ivanova/Sheridan, "The Long Dark" // for the arts & humanities! \\ \\ Official Member, National B5 Emmy Lobby \\ Read news.groups. //
> <much that I agree with deleted for the sake of bandwidth>
>>I would happily support rec.railway.* or rec.rail.* but I think that changing >>to misc.transport is complete STUPIDITY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>Dick,
> You are going to be lectured that you'll lose NONE of what you enjoy >here; but I and a number of others share your concern. The remarks amde by >some about "increasing the professionalism" concern me. I have been a railraod >professional and I don't come here to ballyhoo it. I come here for the >recreational railfan aspect. The sad trugth is that there are those who revel >in identifying themselves as "transportation profressionals" who aren't ahppy >with the recreational focus and have contrived any number of flimsy excuses to >change the hierarchy and, perhaps, the focus. I hope this consern is wrong. >My doubts, howevver, have prompted me to vote "no" and I've urged others who >share these concerns to do the same. Making such remarks, you will see, will >earn reprimands. To each their own.
So why not let the "professionals" have their own
misc.transport.rail.professional&wannabees.only
and leave the rest of us with a rec.rail hierarchy
The politics of destroying rec.railxxx really STINKS !
-- ***____ __I_|HH|_ Dick Lord, Current Technology (603)868-2270 Y___|[]| ,~~~__ | x x | 99 Madbury Rd. Durham, NH 03824 >{|___|__|_|_____|_|_______| r...@curtech.mv.com DCC group NMRA #092225 /oo--@-@ oo oo oo oo HO B&M/MEC Mountain div. under construction.
In article <3m9cvq$egk_...@pr.mcs.net>, Dan Hartung <dhart...@mcs.com> wrote:
[On my comment that m.t.r would die of unuse]
>It will only die from unuse if you choose not to post to it.
Unless you believe that each and every current poster to rec.railroad will continue to post forever to the new group, they will have to be replaced by new users. New users, at least the railroad enthusiasts, will not expect to find the discussion in misc, and, barring keeping rec.railroad around to post periodic "TRAIN DISCUSSIONS ARE IN..." or personal invitations (like the invitation I received about misc.transport.urban-transit, which I would have otherwise completely missed), they won't find it. And _this_ is what will kill this silly group proposal off.
I'm not talking about misc being a 'lesser' group than rec, and I don't know why you keep harping on that issue. Misc is a perfectly fine heirarchy, it's just not appropriate for a newsgroup for railroad enthusiasts.
If I'm looking for automobile enthusiasts, why, look, there's rec.auto, and a million and one subgroups. Say I'm interested in airplanes? Why, what a surprise -- here's the rec.aviation heirarchy. High-end audio? Amazing -- rec.audio.high-end is sitting right there for my viewing enjoyment. But for trains, particularly a newsgroup "For fans of real trains, ferroequinologists.", I'll look in the OBVIOUS place. *snort* It's great if you want to keep out hoi polloi, but if a clique is needed, there are always mailing lists.
I'm not disagreeing that there may need to be a group for professional/techical discussions about railroads -- after all, misc.transport.urban-transit is a great place to discuss transportation policies and/or heap abuse on deserving transit authorities -- but I'd not even bother looking in a technical newsgroup for details on when the garratts start running in Wales again, and I will not participate in an attempt to breathe life-blood into such a group by slitting the throat of a healthy and appropriately placed group.
The name of the group matters. When people are looking for newsgroups, it's been my experience that they don't look at the charter for those groups, they make guesses from the name, and, boy-o-boy, is misc.transport.rail the WRONG name for that.
____ david parsons \bi/ No on misc.transport.rail \/
Dick Lord (r...@francis.curtech.mv.com) shaped the electrons to say:
: So why not let the "professionals" have their own : misc.transport.rail.professional&wannabees.only : and leave the rest of us with a rec.rail hierarchy
(1) One of the original intents of this effort was to keep all the railway/road in one place. A separate hierarchy will not do that. (2) How the heck does one define what is a "professional" interest and what is a "railfan" interest? This is why a subject-based split was rejected long ago.
-- Andrew Toppan --- el...@wpi.edu --- http://www.wpi.edu/~elmer/ Railroads, Ships and Aircraft Homepage, Tom Clancy FAQ Archive
: Despite what you say, the name of the group matters. When people : are looking for newsgroups, they don't look at the charter for : those groups, they make guesses from the name.
No they don't... they just do a find on "rail" and find the group(s), no matter under which hierarchy they are located.
> Unless you believe that each and every current poster to >rec.railroad will continue to post forever to the new group, they >will have to be replaced by new users. New users, at least the >railroad enthusiasts, will not expect to find the discussion in >misc, and, barring keeping rec.railroad around to post periodic >"TRAIN DISCUSSIONS ARE IN..." or personal invitations (like the >invitation I received about misc.transport.urban-transit, which I >would have otherwise completely missed), they won't find it. And >_this_ is what will kill this silly group proposal off.
Lots of other good stuff deleted to save bandwidth
> The name of the group matters. When people are looking for >newsgroups, it's been my experience that they don't look at the >charter for those groups, they make guesses from the name, and, >boy-o-boy, is misc.transport.rail the WRONG name for that.
> ____ > david parsons \bi/ No on misc.transport.rail > \/
Thank you David ! You did a much better job than I did of making this point.
Perhaps the "powers that be" would have all the rec. groups move to their "appropriate" misc. categories !
-- ***____ __I_|HH|_ Dick Lord, Current Technology (603)868-2270 Y___|[]| ,~~~__ | x x | 99 Madbury Rd. Durham, NH 03824 >{|___|__|_|_____|_|_______| r...@curtech.mv.com DCC group NMRA #092225 /oo--@-@ oo oo oo oo HO B&M/MEC Mountain div. under construction.
Orc (o...@pell.com) wrote: > In article <3m9cvq$egk_...@pr.mcs.net>, Dan Hartung <dhart...@mcs.com> wrote: > [On my comment that m.t.r would die of unuse] > >It will only die from unuse if you choose not to post to it. > The name of the group matters. When people are looking for > newsgroups, it's been my experience that they don't look at the > charter for those groups, they make guesses from the name, and, > boy-o-boy, is misc.transport.rail the WRONG name for that.
\begin{newuser} Let's see, i am a new user in July95. Got his internet account just two days ago, and first tried Netscape on the Web. Nice system, this usenet news. Lets try it using this toy 'trumpet'. Oh, well, 6000 newsgroups. Does the bloody program have some kind of search mechanism ? Let's see.... searching for 'rail' -> uk.railway (bogus group which spoils the picture) -> misc.transport.rail.europe (BINGO) -> misc.transport.rail.americas -> misc.transport.rail.australasia -> misc.transport.rail.misc -> rec.railroad Actually, i am more interested in metros.... searching for 'metro' -> nothing found Metro, those Americans call it transit.... searching for 'transit' -> misc.transport.urban-transit (BINGO)
Now, according to the lessons in those internet books, i first have to 'lurk' what is going on and read the FAQ of these groups
And after sme weeks, i understand where to go inside these groups. One of them is bogus, one of them keeps on carrying the message it is being faded out, the others have a lively discussion on the subjects i am interested in. (and still have not seen a FAQ, but that is another subject), Now i try my very first posting.... \end{newuser}
So mr. Ben Lee User does not find the rail groups in the misc hiearchy? Get Real! He does not even know what misc, rec or Big7 stands for!
> ____ > david parsons \bi/ No on misc.transport.rail > \/
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Phons Bloemen http://ei0.ei.ele.tue.nl/~phons Information & Communication Theory group Eindhoven University of Technology Word(t) Klein Zacht Raampje Perfect voor '95? Stap over! TeX & LaTeX & Linux
Orc <o...@pell.com> wrote: >In article <3m9cvq$egk_...@pr.mcs.net>, Dan Hartung <dhart...@mcs.com> wrote: >[On my comment that m.t.r would die of unuse]
>>It will only die from unuse if you choose not to post to it.
> Unless you believe that each and every current poster to >rec.railroad will continue to post forever to the new group, they >will have to be replaced by new users. New users, at least the >railroad enthusiasts, will not expect to find the discussion in >misc, and, barring keeping rec.railroad around to post periodic >"TRAIN DISCUSSIONS ARE IN..." or personal invitations (like the >invitation I received about misc.transport.urban-transit, which I >would have otherwise completely missed), they won't find it. And >_this_ is what will kill this silly group proposal off.
I don't know of any compelling reason to expect it to be in rec, either. "Let's see, railroads, yeah, that's recreational, just like camping and board games."
> I'm not talking about misc being a 'lesser' group than rec, and >I don't know why you keep harping on that issue. Misc is a >perfectly fine heirarchy, it's just not appropriate for a newsgroup >for railroad enthusiasts.
People keep using words like "denigrated" or "downgraded" or "hidden" etc. I don't harp on the issue, they do. I simply try to reply.
>sitting right there for my viewing enjoyment. But for trains, >particularly a newsgroup "For fans of real trains, >ferroequinologists.", I'll look in the OBVIOUS place. *snort*
Again, most people will do some search on the word 'rail'. Every newsreader I've used except AOL's does this. You assume that people will look in rec first. In fact, most people these days seem to look through alt first. And if they're going alphabetically, m comes before r....
>It's great if you want to keep out hoi polloi, but if a clique >is needed, there are always mailing lists.
I do not want to keep anyone onut. I want all the regulars of rec.railroad to come to the new groups, as well as new readers who might not have before.
[unnecessarily viciuos metaphors deleted]
> The name of the group matters. When people are looking for >newsgroups, it's been my experience that they don't look at the >charter for those groups, they make guesses from the name, and, >boy-o-boy, is misc.transport.rail the WRONG name for that.
Opinion, which I happen to disagree with.
-- Daniel A. Hartung | Support the new Arts/Humanities hierarchy! dhart...@mcs.com | dhart...@chinet.chinet.com | Look for the "humanities.misc" CFV http://www.mcs.net/~dhartung/ | in news.announce.newgroups
In a previous posting, Dan Morisseau (d...@dpm3.seanet.com) writes:
> The remarks amde by > some about "increasing the professionalism" concern me.
What remarks? The comment was made earlier that misc.* would simply be a place for political flamewars. The response was that control over this resides with the people in the newsgroups, regardless of name. Nobody has made the type off comment that you are referring to, in a derogatory way.
> The sad trugth is that there are those who revel > in identifying themselves as "transportation profressionals" who aren't ahppy > with the recreational focus and have contrived any number of flimsy excuses to > change the hierarchy and, perhaps, the focus.
All I can say is: you are wrong. Everybody with an interest in rail will be welcome in the new groups. -- Colin R. Leech |-> Civil Engineer by training, ag...@freenet.carleton.ca |-> Transportation Planner by choice, h:613-224-2301 w:613-741-6440 |-> Trombonist by hobby. My opinions are my own, not my employer's. You may consider them shareware.
>Orc wrote: >> Unless you believe that each and every current poster to >>rec.railroad will continue to post forever to the new group
And why wouldn't we???
>> New users, at least the >>railroad enthusiasts, will not expect to find the discussion in misc
Why is rec.* such an obvious place to go looking for a group? People use keyword searches to find things. Recently there have been a dozen or so railroad posts in misc.transport.urban-transit that really should have been here. Obviously these poeple found m.t.u-t, and didn't look any further because they thought that they had found all of the transport newsgroups, and that m.t.u-t was the closest thing to a rail group that they would find.
>> The name of the group matters. When people are looking for >>newsgroups, it's been my experience that they don't look at the >>charter for those groups, they make guesses from the name, and, >>boy-o-boy, is misc.transport.rail the WRONG name for that.
And that is why most of us (according to your own poll, even) feel that misc.transport is the RIGHT place to be. rec.* by definition implies that non-recreational posts are not welcome; yet current practice indicates otherwise.
-- Colin R. Leech |-> Civil Engineer by training, ag...@freenet.carleton.ca |-> Transportation Planner by choice, h:613-224-2301 w:613-741-6440 |-> Trombonist by hobby. My opinions are my own, not my employer's. You may consider them shareware.
In article <3mh2ul$...@venus.mcs.com>, Daniel Hartung <dhart...@MCS.COM> wrote:
>I don't know of any compelling reason to expect it [rec.railroad] to be in rec, >either. "Let's see, railroads, yeah, that's recreational, >just like camping and board games."
Well, the unfortunate truth is that railfanning is recreational, no matter how much you might want to avoid the taint of doing it for fun. I note that the aviation folks have managed to get a newsgroup created that puts the esoterica about aviation in misc.transport, so people can go out of the way and argue about routing, fare policies, and the like, while still keeping rec.aviation around for the enthusiasts. Why not railroads (aside from the small detail that there has been, to my knowledge, no discussions about routing, fare policies, and the like in rec.railroad, and thus no real need to a professional/technical group)?
____ david parsons \bi/ No on misc.transport.rail \/
: I note that the aviation folks : have managed to get a newsgroup created that puts the : esoterica about aviation in misc.transport, so people can go out of : the way and argue about routing, fare policies, and the like, while : still keeping rec.aviation around for the enthusiasts.
Two things you are missing here: -misc.transport.air-industry was an effort folks from rec.travel.air to create a group for the discussion of the airline industry (a discussion by those interested in it, not just 'professionals' -the first few days of m.t.a-r have been a discussion of the infrastructure, policies, financial condition and future of the industry. Not very much different from (shock!) rec.railroad.
-- Andrew Toppan --- el...@wpi.edu --- http://www.wpi.edu/~elmer/ Railroads, Ships and Aircraft Homepage, Tom Clancy FAQ Archive
In the referenced article, o...@pell.com (Orc) writes:
>Why not railroads (aside from the small detail that there has been, to >my knowledge, no discussions about routing, fare policies, and the like >in rec.railroad, and thus no real need to a professional/technical group)?
You are ignoring the discussions of rail _passengers_. In the UK, the rail system is used for a variety of purposes, and "recreation" is just one of them.
Subjects which do not fall easily into specific classifications (rec, or soc) are better in a non-specific one. misc.transport.* is not just for "professional" or "technical" posts. It is for practical, recreational, professional, technical or even miscellaneous posts about transport.
In article <D74sGv....@bath.ac.uk>, Andrew Henry <bsp...@bath.ac.uk> wrote: >In the referenced article, o...@pell.com (Orc) writes:
>>Why not railroads (aside from the small detail that there has been, to >>my knowledge, no discussions about routing, fare policies, and the like >>in rec.railroad, and thus no real need to a professional/technical group)?
>You are ignoring the discussions of rail _passengers_.
Well, no, I'm not. If there's a need for a non-recreational railway group, I would support it 100% *in addition to* the current group for railway enthusiasts. But the vote in question didn't provide for this, unless one wanted to argue in favor of every proposal except m.t.r.m.
>Subjects which do not fall easily into specific classifications >(rec, or soc) are better in a non-specific one. misc.transport.* >is not just for "professional" or "technical" posts. It is for >practical, recreational, professional, technical or even miscellaneous >posts about transport.
This doesn't wash. If there is a large body of non-recreational postings about railways, that's supporting evidence for creating additional groups to cover discussions about them (similar to the million and one subgroups under rec.aviation, and the new misc.transport group that is intended to cover the non-recreational parts of aviation), and not to uproot the existing group to breathe life into the new ones. If the intent is to move all the vehicle-fan newsgroups into misc.transport, an ad-hoc approach to it is the worst possible approach, since it will disarrange the heirarchy as the smaller and easier to destroy groups are moved around while the larger ones remain exactly where they are (if, for example, tale & group-advice tried to force rec.autos into misc.transport.autos by hijacking a new subgroup, the readership of rec.autos.* would probably vote NO en masse.)
I've chatted with some of the people who voted for the misc.transport.air-industry proposal, and they are mystified at this attempt to destroy rec.railroad in favor of misc.transport.rail. Since this renaming seems stupid to nonrailfans, I don't think that the argument that misc.transport is the "proper" place holds much water.
If this (obstupid: stupid) proposal is defeated, I'll sponsor a misc.transport.rail-industry newsgroup for non-railfan discussions as soon as it's proper to do so. If this proposal isn't defeated, then I'll be one of the many sites that won't pay attention to the rmgroup and will continue to keep rec.railroad around for the railfans.
In article <D75Lt1....@pell.com> o...@pell.com (Orc) writes: > If the >final votes in this CFV reflect the straw poll I did, the proposal >will fail.
Either way, we may want to consider waiting for the official announcment in news.announce or wherever and then filing an appeal. I think there is sufficient dissent from the "official line" that there may be some misgivings over going through with it. What do you think, Orc?
=========================================================================== Dan Morisseau, N7ZXL - Tacoma, WA GEnie:D.Morisseau Internet:d...@dpm3.seanet.com (pref) OR d...@prostar.com ===========================================================================
In article <D75AsK....@pell.com> o...@pell.com (Orc) writes:
> If this (obstupid: stupid) proposal is defeated, I'll sponsor a > misc.transport.rail-industry newsgroup for non-railfan discussions > as soon as it's proper to do so.
That would be a very stupid newsgroup. It would be for manufacturers of railroad vehicles and such; at least that would be my interpretation. So all things concerning passengers I would post to rec.railroad (yes I think being a passengers can be a recreationi rather than an industry related subject). And, yes, I voted YES. -- dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924098 home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; e-mail: d...@cwi.nl
In article <D70Hps....@freenet.carleton.ca>, Colin R. Leech <ag...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>>Orc wrote: >>> Unless you believe that each and every current poster to >>>rec.railroad will continue to post forever to the new group
>And why wouldn't we???
People move on. They graduate from college, they find other interests, they grow old and die, they lose net access, there are any of a thousand reasons why they might leave. Even in the 16 years the net has existed, you'd be hard pressed to find people who were there at the start and are still posting (I am one, I can think of one or two others, but many many others have left.)
>>> New users, at least the >>>railroad enthusiasts, will not expect to find the discussion in misc
>Why is rec.* such an obvious place to go looking for a group?
Because it's where recreational groups are traditionally located.
>And that is why most of us (according to your own poll, even) feel that >misc.transport is the RIGHT place to be.
That wasn't a stunning majority, though, and that was after a month or so of "you can't fight city hall -- if we don't do m.t.r The System Administrators won't let us split the group." If the final votes in this CFV reflect the straw poll I did, the proposal will fail.
>rec.* by definition implies that >non-recreational posts are not welcome;
No it does not. Look at rec.audio.high-end, please, if you want to see a place where non-rec postings are accepted in a recreational group. The only people I've seen complain about the recreational emphasis of the existing group are a few outspoken folks from australia and europe, and I think that there should be a misc.transport.rail-industry group, similar to misc.transport.air-industry, for such professional and technical posts. The only misc.transport group that even vaguely touches on railways now is misc.transport.urban-transit, which is a perfectly fine group, but not if you're a trolley fanatic and don't care about such things as busses versus light rail and/or the economic/social rationale of mass transit versus privately-owned automobiles.
Anyway, pell.com won't be carrying any non-technical railway groups in misc.transport. I don't think that scattering the rec. groups throughout the big seven makes the namespace anything other than a officially sanctioned version of the roiling chaos that is alt., so I'll keep the group in the right place, where people can find it.
Dan Morisseau (d...@dpm3.seanet.com) shaped the electrons to say:
: Either way, we may want to consider waiting for the official : announcment : in news.announce or wherever and then filing an appeal. I think there is : sufficient dissent from the "official line" that there may be some : misgivings over going through with it. What do you think, Orc?
You can't challenge the vote except in case of fraud or forged votes on either side. "I don't like the results" is not a valid reason to challenge.
-- Andrew Toppan --- el...@wpi.edu --- http://www.wpi.edu/~elmer/ Railroads, Ships and Aircraft Homepage, Tom Clancy FAQ Archive
Dan Morisseau <d...@dpm3.seanet.com> wrote: >In article <D75Lt1....@pell.com> o...@pell.com (Orc) writes: >> If the >>final votes in this CFV reflect the straw poll I did, the proposal >>will fail.
> Either way, we may want to consider waiting for the official announcment >in news.announce or wherever and then filing an appeal. I think there is >sufficient dissent from the "official line" that there may be some misgivings >over going through with it. What do you think, Orc?
Well, as I've said before, my site will not honor any newgroups coming from this CFV. If the vote passes, all it will do is reduce the number of postings to rec.railroad (but not eliminate them -- many sites don't pay attention to rmgroups from anyone and won't kill off groups that have traffic.) I think I've made my objections to the renaming known sufficiently by now, but I'll be pleased to be a sore loser or vengeful winner, no matter how the vote turns out. ____ david parsons \bi/ A system administrator. \/
>: I note that the aviation folks >: have managed to get a newsgroup created that puts the >: esoterica about aviation in misc.transport, so people can go out of >: the way and argue about routing, fare policies, and the like, while >: still keeping rec.aviation around for the enthusiasts.
>Two things you are missing here: >-misc.transport.air-industry was an effort folks from rec.travel.air > to create a group for the discussion of the airline industry (a > discussion by those interested in it, not just 'professionals' >-the first few days of m.t.a-r have been a discussion of the > infrastructure, policies, financial condition and future of the > industry. Not very much different from (shock!) rec.railroad.
>-- >Andrew Toppan --- el...@wpi.edu --- http://www.wpi.edu/~elmer/ >Railroads, Ships and Aircraft Homepage, Tom Clancy FAQ Archive
THANK YOU, Andrew ! You could not have stated my viewpoint better !
Despite your long attempts to refute the point, you have concisely stated the crux of the matter and lent your support to preserving a rec.rail !
Indeed, a significant part of rec.rail content of late has been discussion of "infrastructure, policies, financial condition and future of the industry." This is an entirely different kind of topic from the discussions on steam locomotive preservation and how block signals work.
Nothing would please me more than to see discussions of "infrastructure, policies, financial condition and future of the industry" be moved to <misc.transport.rail> while still keeping <rec.rail> for recreational interest. Those interested in both aspects can participate in both groups.
I think the parallels to <rec.aviation> / <misc.transport.airplane> are remarkable.
> Not very much different from (shock!) rec.railroad.
Thank you, Andrew, for finally coming to your senses and not only acknowledging the two different forums, but in doing so, also lending support to the argument to preserve <rec.rail> ;-)
-- ***____ __I_|HH|_ Dick Lord, Current Technology (603)868-2270 Y___|[]| ,~~~__ | x x | 99 Madbury Rd. Durham, NH 03824 >{|___|__|_|_____|_|_______| r...@curtech.mv.com DCC group NMRA #092225 /oo--@-@ oo oo oo oo HO B&M/MEC Mountain div. under construction.
In article <3msqnt$...@bigboote.WPI.EDU> el...@wpi.edu (Andrew Toppan) writes: >You can't challenge the vote except in case of fraud or forged votes >on either side. "I don't like the results" is not a valid reason to >challenge.
Andrew,
I never said that dissatisfaction with the outcome was the reason for a challenge (if any). I will go so far as to say that I know of no forged votes, either. Does "fraud in the inducement" count or must it be fraud in the tallying? I'm only pointing out to Orc some of the options that any user is entitled to consider where they feel suitably aggreived. It is a topic for consideration, nothing more. Don't get so worked up.
=========================================================================== Dan Morisseau, N7ZXL - Tacoma, WA GEnie:D.Morisseau Internet:d...@dpm3.seanet.com (pref) OR d...@prostar.com ===========================================================================
misc.transport.rail.americas passed on Tue Mar 28 04:24:27 1995 misc.transport.rail.europe passed on Tue Mar 28 02:43:28 1995 misc.transport.rail.australia-nz passed on Tue Mar 28 04:24:27 1995 misc.transport.rail.misc (replaces rec.railroad) passed on Tue Mar 28 05:56:49 1995
For group passage, YES votes must be at least 2/3 of all valid (YES and NO) votes. There also must be at least 100 more YES votes than NO votes.
There is a five day discussion period after these results are posted. If no serious allegations of voting irregularities are raised, the moderator of news.announce.newgroups will create the passed group(s) shortly thereafter.
Newsgroups Lines: misc.transport.rail.americas Railroads & railways in North & South America. misc.transport.rail.europe Railroads & railways in all of Europe. misc.transport.rail.australia-nz Railways in Australia & New Zealand. misc.transport.rail.misc Miscellaneous rail issues & discusions.
CHARTER misc.transport.rail.*: ---------------------
The misc.transport.rail.* newsgroups are for discussion of all aspects of railways, railroads and rail transportation in general.
Topics that will be discussed include, but are in no way limited to, train watching, railfanning, operations, history, preservation, technology, locomotives, freight and passenger cars, political, economic and social issues regarding rail transport, the future of rail transport and the infrastructure of rail transport. This list is not meant to be all-inclusive, it is simply intended to give an idea of the topics appropriate to the newsgroup(s).
These groups are meant to include all discussions and issues regarding rail transport. Therefore, everyone, including railfans of all types, those in the rail transport industry, rail passengers and anyone interested in trains is welcome (and encouraged) to participate in the discussions.
Commercial posts and advertising are not appropriate for these groups, but individuals may post for sale messages for railroad related books, magazines, etc. and legally obtained collectors items and railroadiana. Binary postings of any sort are not appropriate.
Announcements of railfan trips, excursions, exhibitions and other such events are encouraged.
misc.transport.rail.americas: ---------------------------- For discussions relating to North, South and Central America.
misc.transport.rail.europe: -------------------------- For discussions relating to Europe.
misc.transport.rail.australia-nz: -------------------------------- For discussions relating to Australia and New Zealand.
misc.transport.rail.misc: ------------------------- For discussions relating to geographic areas not included in the other misc.transport.rail.* groups. Also for discussions that relate to two or more of the misc.transport.rail.* groups, several geographic areas, or the entire world. This will include discussions of technical issues that are not specific to any one continent.
rec.railroad reorg Final Vote Ack
[This collection of addresses is (C)1995 by Consultix Computer Services. Permission is strictly NOT given to use this list or any part thereof to make a mailing list, or for mass-mailings. Any other use is fine.]
misc.transport.rail.misc (replaces rec.railroad) ------+ misc.transport.rail.australia-nz -----+| misc.transport.rail.europe ----+|| misc.transport.rail.americas ---+||| |||| 73053.2...@compuserve.com Erich S. Houchens YYYY 76256....@compuserve.com Mark Hufstetler NNNN A.H.He...@bath.ac.uk Andrew Henry YYYY A.Sm...@kingston.ac.uk Andrew N. Smith YYYY A.Wa...@mel.dit.csiro.au Andrew Waugh YYYY aa...@freenet.toronto.on.ca Gordon Webster YYYY aa...@freenet.carleton.ca Duncan MacGregor YYNY a...@netcom.com Aahz NNNN a...@WI.LeidenUniv.NL Alexander Al YYYY aaro...@best.com Aaron Priven YYYY ab...@freenet.carleton.ca Michael Paul Doyle NNNN a...@IC.Mankato.MN.US Tim Olson NNNN ae...@lafn.org Pierre A Plauzoles YYYY af...@freenet.carleton.ca Harry Dodsworth NNNN ag...@freenet.carleton.ca Colin Leech YYYY ahlst...@fy.chalmers.se Peter Ahlstrom YYYY a...@cs.monash.edu.au John Hurst YYYY ajr...@wariat.org Douglas A. Rohn NNNN ak...@freenet.buffalo.edu Chris Webster NNNN ala...@harlech.demon.co.uk Iain Bowen YYYY albe...@ctsd2.jsc.nasa.gov Seth Alberts YYYN a...@aber.ac.uk Anthony Coulls YYYY ande...@clinet.fi Jan-Erik Andelin -Y-- ande...@cadvision.com Erik Langeland YYYY ande...@stud.unit.no Anders Reggestad YYYY Andrew.Co...@nrpa.no Andrew Cooke YYYN Andrew.McMa...@ncds.anu.edu.au Andrew McMahon YYYY a...@pythagoras.org The Tie-Dyed Side of the Force NNNN ANDYPEER...@delphi.com Andy peerand NNNN ap...@cam.ac.uk Alan Collier NNNN A...@brraero.demon.co.uk Adrian Philip Gaylard YYYY arc...@frmug.fr.net Vincent Archer NNNN ARE...@email.mot.com Bill Hoffman YYYY arrom...@blaze.cs.jhu.edu Ken Arromdee NNNN ASEIT...@delphi.com Allen Seitner NNNN a...@cs.albany.edu Jim Ault YYYY av...@freenet.carleton.ca Colin J. Churcher YYYY a...@dce.vic.gov.au Allister Coots YYYY awo...@halcyon.com Alan Woolf YYYY a...@interaccess.com Alex Schneider NNNN baird_da...@tandem.com David G. Baird YYYY bal...@nexus.yorku.ca Balaji YYYY barry.copel...@bbs.synapse.net Barry Copeland YYYY bb...@freenet.carleton.ca Eduardo Cordeiro NNNN b...@gate.net Bob Curtis YYYY benc...@win.tue.nl Manfred Dalmeijer YYYY BE...@hacon.de Bernd Luettge YYYY bhar...@vt.edu Bruce B. Harper NNNN bi...@mousa.demon.co.uk Bill Beford YYYY bi...@rehab.state.tx.us Bill Nash N--N bj...@freenet.carleton.ca Cliff Downey NNNN b...@herbison.com B.J. Herbison ---Y b...@1776.COM Robert K. Coe YYYY bobwal...@cix.compulink.co.uk Robert Waller YYYY BO...@nwfs1.rz.fh-hannover.de Andreas Boose YYYY bren...@macadam.mpce.mq.edu.au Brendan Jones YYYY brom...@mdw078.cc.monash.edu.au David Bromage YYNY bsut...@sam.neosoft.com Barry Suttin YYYY bu...@emerald.DIALix.oz.au John Waldeck YYYY b_n...@dante.lbl.gov Bruce Nordman YYYY C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de Alexander Eichener NNNN cad...@ccsun.strath.ac.uk cad475 YYYY cassa...@clipper.ens.fr Julien Cassaigne YYYY cbst...@phoenix.Princeton.EDU Chris Stone YYYY ch...@rivers.dra.hmg.gb Christopher Samuel YYYY Christophe.Bon...@irisa.fr Christophe BONNET YYYY chris...@panix.com Christos Pathiakis YYYY colem...@er4.eng.ohio-state.edu Christopher D. Coleman YYYY c...@lsi-j.co.jp Yoshiyuki Kondo YYYY cr...@msgate.columbiasc.ATTGIS.COM Craig Williamson NNNN cr...@zeta.org.au Craig Dewick YYYY cr...@cus.cam.ac.uk Colin Bell YYYY CrO...@aol.com Craig O'Connell YYYY crouc...@flidh103.delcoelect.com K. CROUCH ----
...
In a previous posting, Orc (o...@pell.com) writes:
> is misc.transport.urban-transit, which is a perfectly fine group, but > not if you're a trolley fanatic
Trolley fans are welcome in m.t.u-t, and there are several there already. Discussions of technical issues (like the traction motors used, for example), or what types of trolleys were used in various cities, were a bit slow off the mark compared to other topics, but are now present both for electric fans and for bus fans. -- Colin R. Leech |-> Civil Engineer by training, ag...@freenet.carleton.ca |-> Transportation Planner by choice, h:613-224-2301 w:613-741-6440 |-> Trombonist by hobby. My opinions are my own, not my employer's. You may consider them shareware.
