Preliminary Idea: Tesla NG?
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
fascinating, multi-faceted individual. I went to Google Groups to look up
information and discussions about him.
I discovered that there are 370,000 usenet posts about Tesla archived
there. I reviewed a bunch of on-topic posts in groups as diverse as:
sci.physics.electromag
alt.engineering.electrical
sci.energy
alt.energy.high-voltage
alt.astronomy
sci.electronics.design
rec.pyrotechnics
sci.engr.mechsci.energy.hydrogen
rec.antiques.radio+phono
soc.history.what-if
soc.culture.malaysia
soc.culture.europe
alt.sci.physics
alt.alien.research
alt.slack
alt.clearing.technology rec.crafts.metalworking
alt.energy.high-voltage
rec.radio.shortwave
alt.sci.physics.new-theories
alt.paranet.ufo
alt.energy.homepower
sci.electronics.basics
Needless to say, Tesla was into lots of different stuff.
I am thinking that maybe, there are a bunch of different folks in
different fields who all share a common denominator: A desire to talk
about aspects of Tesla's work, his life, and his inventions.
Does it seem reasonable that this may be a topic for a Big 8 group? If
so, what 1st and 2d level hierarchy might be appropriate?
--
A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
--Edward R. Murrow
Dave Sill
> Does it seem reasonable that this may be a topic for a Big 8 group?
Yes, definitely.
> If so, what 1st and 2d level hierarchy might be appropriate?
Hmm... {soc|sci|talk}.{fan|history|biography}.nikola-tesla?
-Dave
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> > Does it seem reasonable that this may be a topic for a Big 8 group?
> Yes, definitely.
Good. Thanks. I'd be interested in more opinions.
> > If so, what 1st and 2d level hierarchy might be appropriate?
> Hmm... {soc|sci|talk}.{fan|history|biography}.nikola-tesla?
That covers a lot of ground! And many of the combos make sense. Is there
such a thing as talk.fan.*? I imagine that sci.talk.* doesn't exist, but
that might make sense too. What else?
Adam H. Kerman
>So lately I'm reading a biogrphy of Nicola Tesla, who turns out to be a
>fascinating, multi-faceted individual. I went to Google Groups to look up
>information and discussions about him.
>I discovered that there are 370,000 usenet posts about Tesla archived
>there. I reviewed a bunch of on-topic posts in groups as diverse as:
How did you miss:
alt.fan.nikola-tesla Discussion of the greatest hacker of all time.
alt.tesla Famous Inventor / Radio, Xray, Teslacoil.
alt.tesla-coils ATC is a group devoted to tesla coils and troll wars.
Pick one. Post there.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> How did you miss:
> alt.fan.nikola-tesla Discussion of the greatest hacker of all time.
> alt.tesla Famous Inventor / Radio, Xray, Teslacoil.
> alt.tesla-coils ATC is a group devoted to tesla coils and troll wars.
The first thing I did was yank in all the groups carried by Panix. Then I
searched the namespace for Tesla. Nothing came up, so I assume that Panix
carries non of those. They weren't in the first few pages of posts I
picked up when I checked Google Groups, so I didn't see them there
either.
Brian Mailman
> In news.groups, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> How did you miss:
>> alt.fan.nikola-tesla Discussion of the greatest hacker of all time.
>> alt.tesla Famous Inventor / Radio, Xray, Teslacoil.
>> alt.tesla-coils ATC is a group devoted to tesla coils and troll wars.
>
> The first thing I did was yank in all the groups carried by Panix. Then I
> searched the namespace for Tesla. Nothing came up, so I assume that Panix
> carries non of those.
Due to past and present abuse, most news servers don't honor control
messages in alt.*. Ask your systems adminstrator to add them (knowing
Adam, I'm fairly certain he checked to see if they have valid control
messages). I don't see those groups at Supernews, so you may have do
some promotion.
B/
Adam H. Kerman
>>How did you miss:
>>alt.fan.nikola-tesla Discussion of the greatest hacker of all time.
>>alt.tesla Famous Inventor / Radio, Xray, Teslacoil.
>>alt.tesla-coils ATC is a group devoted to tesla coils and troll wars.
>The first thing I did was yank in all the groups carried by Panix. Then I
>searched the namespace for Tesla. Nothing came up, so I assume that Panix
>carries non of those. They weren't in the first few pages of posts I
>picked up when I checked Google Groups, so I didn't see them there
>either.
Ask for them by name; no reason Panix wouldn't create them.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> Ask for them by name; no reason Panix wouldn't create them.
Yep - already done. If they are adequete, then there would be no reason
to create a Big 8 group.
Adam H. Kerman
>>Ask for them by name; no reason Panix wouldn't create them.
>Yep - already done. If they are adequete, then there would be no reason
>to create a Big 8 group.
If they are inadequate, chose one and promote it to success, which is the
same as you'd have to do to get traffic into a brand new Big 8 group.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
But you are ignoring an important difference - propogation.
Promotion of an alt.group which is on few servers is very different from
promotion of a Big 8 group which will be added to many servers as a matter
of course.
But if these existing groups are active and well-propogated, then there is
little reason to create a Big 8 group.
Adam H. Kerman
>Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>EskW...@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>>>Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>Ask for them by name; no reason Panix wouldn't create them.
>>>Yep - already done. If they are adequete, then there would be no reason
>>>to create a Big 8 group.
>>If they are inadequate, chose one and promote it to success, which is the
>>same as you'd have to do to get traffic into a brand new Big 8 group.
>But you are ignoring an important difference - propogation.
Seriously, no I'm not.
Be warned: i'm a heretic in news.groups. I believe that newsgroups aren't
successful until there's lots of on-topic discussion in them, which requires
consistent work and effort on the part of a proponent. That applies
regardless of which top-level hierarchy a group is created in.
You CANNOT assume that the vast majority of news servers around the world
that take Big 8 groups are processing checkgroups on a regular basis.
Anecdotally, there have been reports of numerous news servers that don't
create new or established Big 8 groups, and even some that won't cooperate
immediately with user requests to create those groups!
It is unfortunate indeed that it's not always important to users that the
servers they use process checkgroups for the managed hierarchies that they
take. Commercial servers that won't run checkgroups, but claim to be
uncensored 'cuz they've created 50,000 spam traps in alt and free and
numerous unrecognized groups in managed hierarchies, stay in business.
>Promotion of an alt.group which is on few servers is very different from
>promotion of a Big 8 group which will be added to many servers as a matter
>of course.
These days, promotion is needed for both. I'm going to be one of the few
people around these parts who will tell you that even if you propose a
redundant Big 8 group, it'll take as much work to get discussion going in it
as starting with a new alt group.
At least with an alt group newgrouped a while back, there are some servers
that had already created it. That's an advantage right now. Also, there's a
certain nobility in breathing new life into a moribund group.
>But if these existing groups are active and well-propogated, then there is
>little reason to create a Big 8 group.
You may find a small but active community in one of those groups, true. That
will be to your advantage. It's always worth it to do a bit of promotion.
Best of luck on getting good discussion going.
Brian Mailman
> In news.groups, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>> EskW...@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>> >Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> >>Ask for them by name; no reason Panix wouldn't create them.
>
>> >Yep - already done. If they are adequete, then there would be no reason
>> >to create a Big 8 group.
>
>> If they are inadequate, chose one and promote it to success, which is the
>> same as you'd have to do to get traffic into a brand new Big 8 group.
>
> But you are ignoring an important difference - propogation.
No, he's not, and (notice the connecting "and" instead of the negating
"but") he's pointing out propagation isn't everything.
You would still need to promote the group to obtain active users; it's
the same story with any hierarchy. Just having a line in the active
file doesn't automatically garner usage.
> But if these existing groups are active and well-propogated,
alt.* is a DIY hierarchy. Propagation is something you do for yourself.
Find someone on Supernews, for example, who is insterested in this
topic and will request the Tesla group (I'd think the *.fan.* one would
be most likely to succeed) and you not only get Supernews itself, but
the dozens/hundreds of servers that outsource their news to them.
B/
Tim Skirvin
> These days, promotion is needed for both. I'm going to be one of the few
> people around these parts who will tell you that even if you propose a
> redundant Big 8 group, it'll take as much work to get discussion going in it
> as starting with a new alt group.
I wouldn't say that it's *as much*, but it's certainly a large
fraction of the amount of work. But there are other benefits:
- New servers will likely carry the group right off the bat.
- There are extra people looking to improve that group's
propagation, with no input from you.
- If you can get your server to carry that one group, and do
it right, you may never have to ask your admins for another
Big-8 group again (they'll just appear!).
- Tim Skirvin (sk...@big-8.org)
Chair, Big-8 Management Board
--
http://www.big-8.org/ Big-8 Management Board
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage <FISH>< <*>
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> >But you are ignoring an important difference - propogation.
> Seriously, no I'm not.
> Be warned: i'm a heretic in news.groups. I believe that newsgroups aren't
> successful until there's lots of on-topic discussion in them, which requires
> consistent work and effort on the part of a proponent. That applies
> regardless of which top-level hierarchy a group is created in.
I created alt.food.barbecue a bunch of years ago, and I know exactly what
you are saying.
> You CANNOT assume that the vast majority of news servers around the world
> that take Big 8 groups are processing checkgroups on a regular basis.
So you are saying that there is no advantage, propogation-wise, to being
in the Big 8? Or only that the advantage is smaller than "complete"?
> Anecdotally, there have been reports of numerous news servers that don't
> create new or established Big 8 groups, and even some that won't cooperate
> immediately with user requests to create those groups!
Anecdotal evidence is not something I generally rely upon. Do you have
any stats?
> >Promotion of an alt.group which is on few servers is very different from
> >promotion of a Big 8 group which will be added to many servers as a matter
> >of course.
> These days, promotion is needed for both.
Well, yeah, probably. The difference may be in the amount of effort
required for a successful result. If propogation of the Big 8 is similar
to alt.*, then there is no important distinction there. But if it is
vastly better, or even significantly better, then a different course of
action might yield good results with significantly less chance of failure.
I'm going to be one of the few
> people around these parts who will tell you that even if you propose a
> redundant Big 8 group, it'll take as much work to get discussion going in it
> as starting with a new alt group.
An interesing viewpoint. And if true, then the Big 8 is dead.
> At least with an alt group newgrouped a while back, there are some servers
> that had already created it. That's an advantage right now.
"Some" servers, with new servers only after bucketloads of work isn't a
huge advantage, but I see your point.
Also, there's a
> certain nobility in breathing new life into a moribund group.
Yeah, but there's something to be said for creating a new Big 8 group as
well.
> >But if these existing groups are active and well-propogated, then there is
> >little reason to create a Big 8 group.
> You may find a small but active community in one of those groups, true.
That would be fine. I'll let you know when Panix adds the three you
suggested.
> Best of luck on getting good discussion going.
Thanks. You've given me a lot to consider.
Adam H. Kerman
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:
>>These days, promotion is needed for both. I'm going to be one of the few
>>people around these parts who will tell you that even if you propose a
>>redundant Big 8 group, it'll take as much work to get discussion going in it
>>as starting with a new alt group.
>I wouldn't say that it's *as much*, but it's certainly a large fraction of
>the amount of work. But there are other benefits:
> - New servers will likely carry the group right off the bat.
You mean, if they happen to be INN, that they'll start with the default
control.ctl, rather than grabbing the control.ctl and active and newsgroups
file from their upstream?
> - There are extra people looking to improve that group's
> propagation, with no input from you.
Told you I was a heretic. Publicizing a new group requires lots of input
from a proponent. Remember Brian's point: The key measure of success is
getting people to post on topic. Regardless of the group's top-level
hierarchy, this still requires follow through.
> - If you can get your server to carry that one group, and do
> it right, you may never have to ask your admins for another
> Big-8 group again (they'll just appear!).
Please ask your News administrator to run checkgroups, or take your marbles
elsewhere. If one were a user on a well-run server, this is a question one
need never ask.
Tim Skirvin
>> I wouldn't say that it's *as much*, but it's certainly a large fraction of
>> the amount of work. But there are other benefits:
>> - There are extra people looking to improve that group's
>> propagation, with no input from you.
> Told you I was a heretic. Publicizing a new group requires lots of input
> from a proponent. Remember Brian's point: The key measure of success is
> getting people to post on topic. Regardless of the group's top-level
> hierarchy, this still requires follow through.
As I said above, it will definitely require non-trivial work from
the proponent to get a working, active group. But having the support of
other parties is a nice help in the process.
Adam H. Kerman
>>You CANNOT assume that the vast majority of news servers around the world
>>that take Big 8 groups are processing checkgroups on a regular basis.
>So you are saying that there is no advantage, propogation-wise, to being
>in the Big 8? Or only that the advantage is smaller than "complete"?
Managed hierarchies have an advantage over unmanaged hierarchies with
respect to propogation: checkgroups. A well-run server processes a recent
checkgroups from time to time. Too many of the other kind of servers are out
there badly supporting their users.
It's my opinion that starting out with SOMETHING, such as an alt group
newgrouped a while back with a name that doesn't suck, is always better than
starting out with a new group in alt or Big 8. It's already created on
servers and can be found by those interested in the topic, if they are
promoted to.
>Anecdotal evidence is not something I generally rely upon. Do you have
>any stats?
Nope. Just reports of the experiences of other proponents.
>>I'm going to be one of the few people around these parts who will tell you
>>that even if you propose a redundant Big 8 group, it'll take as much work
>>to get discussion going in it as starting with a new alt group.
>An interesing viewpoint. And if true, then the Big 8 is dead.
I don't agree that the Big 8 is dead or that I'm describing a problem.
>>Also, there's a certain nobility in breathing new life into a moribund
>>group.
>Yeah, but there's something to be said for creating a new Big 8 group as
>well.
It's important to avoid redundant newsgroups and the pointless splitting of
the conversation. That's the main advantage of building an audience in an
existing group.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> >>I'm going to be one of the few people around these parts who will tell you
> >>that even if you propose a redundant Big 8 group, it'll take as much work
> >>to get discussion going in it as starting with a new alt group.
> >An interesing viewpoint. And if true, then the Big 8 is dead.
> I don't agree that the Big 8 is dead or that I'm describing a problem.
I said what I said because the before-cmsg phase in the Big 8 is a
PITA, while it is trivial in alt. So if the after-cmsg phase is the same
for both, then why would anyone in their right minds attempt a Big 8
group?
Adam H. Kerman
>I said what I said because the before-cmsg phase in the Big 8 is a PITA,
Well, Tim's gotten rid of voting. It's not like it was.
Henrietta K Thomas
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>In news.groups, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> >>I'm going to be one of the few people around these parts who will tell you
>> >>that even if you propose a redundant Big 8 group, it'll take as much work
>> >>to get discussion going in it as starting with a new alt group.
>
>> >An interesing viewpoint. And if true, then the Big 8 is dead.
>
>> I don't agree that the Big 8 is dead or that I'm describing a problem.
>
>I said what I said because the before-cmsg phase in the Big 8 is a
>PITA, while it is trivial in alt. So if the after-cmsg phase is the same
>for both, then why would anyone in their right minds attempt a Big 8
>group?
Prestige. Status. Automatic propagation to a point. And probably a
bunch of other reasons as well. Big 8 is the creme de la creme, the top
banana of Usenet, the legitimate successor to the original Unix Users
Network. Everybody wants to have a Big 8 group.
Back to the subject at hand......
I'm not fond of "fan" groups outside the alt.* hierarchy, so if you want
to talk about Tesla in a Big 8 group, I'd suggest proposing a group to
discuss "inventions" or "inventors". The best name for such a group
would be:
sci.technology.inventions
or
sci.technology.inventors
Then if the group gets lots of traffic about particular inventors (e.g.
Tesla), another level could be added:
sci.technology.inventions-tesla
sci.technology.inventors.tesla
Trouble is, there is no sci.technology.* sub-hierarchy. :(
So you might want to consider doing sci.inventions or sci.inventors,
both of which could be expanded to focus on particular individuals.
It might actually be a little better this way, because Tesla is only one
of many scientists whose inventions had a large impact on the world.
What do you think?
--
Henrietta K. Thomas
Proponent, soc.support.vision-impaired
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
<e7ugp5$cve$1...@reader2.panix.com>:
>In news.groups, Dave Sill <d...@big-8.org> wrote:
>> EskW...@spamblock.panix.com writes:
>
>> > Does it seem reasonable that this may be a topic for a Big 8 group?
>
>> Yes, definitely.
>
>Good. Thanks. I'd be interested in more opinions.
>
>
>> > If so, what 1st and 2d level hierarchy might be appropriate?
>
>> Hmm... {soc|sci|talk}.{fan|history|biography}.nikola-tesla?
>
>That covers a lot of ground! And many of the combos make sense. Is there
>such a thing as talk.fan.*? I imagine that sci.talk.* doesn't exist, but
>that might make sense too. What else?
sci.scientists.tesla?
Marty
--
Member of the Big-8 Management Board (B8MB), such as it is.
The B8MB is a work in progress.
See http://www.big-8.org for more information.
Dave Sill
> sci.technology.inventions
> or
> sci.technology.inventors
The .inventors group would be better because it more clearly allows
general discussion about any Tesla-related topic, not just his
inventions. The .inventions group sounds like a place where inventors
would go for support in developing their own inventions. Not a bad
idea, but completely orthogonal to talking about famous inventors.
> sci.technology.inventions-tesla
> sci.technology.inventors.tesla
.tesla is preferable to -tesla.
> Trouble is, there is no sci.technology.* sub-hierarchy. :(
Not a problem at all. What makes you think it is? Not sure what
.technology adds, though.
-Dave
Dave Sill
>>> Hmm... {soc|sci|talk}.{fan|history|biography}.nikola-tesla?
>>
>>That covers a lot of ground! And many of the combos make sense. Is there
>>such a thing as talk.fan.*? I imagine that sci.talk.* doesn't exist, but
>>that might make sense too. What else?
>
> sci.scientists.tesla?
That's what I was getting at with "biography", but maybe "people"
or "personalities" would be better.
-Dave
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
I'm starting to think that a more technical group name would be
appropriate, in an attempt to weed out discussions of pseudo-science and
other kook topics. I note that there is no sci.physics.high-energy, and I
wonder why that is the case. While Tesla was the inventor of the AC
polyphase system which is still in use today (and made possible the shift,
during the industrial revolution, to the use of electric motors) his work
in high-energy physics was perhaps his most well-remembered.
He was more physicist than an inventor (at least, he considered himself
as such). He discovered basic physical relationships of matter and energy
in the field of electromagnetism. His inventions, while still in use
today, were not his primary contribution to the world.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> Back to the subject at hand......
> I'm not fond of "fan" groups outside the alt.* hierarchy, so if you want
> to talk about Tesla in a Big 8 group, I'd suggest proposing a group to
> discuss "inventions" or "inventors". The best name for such a group
> would be:
But his main contributions were in the field of high energy physics, and
he himself wold be insulted if you were to describe him as a mere
"inventor".
Perhaps sci.scientists.* is viable?
> Trouble is, there is no sci.technology.* sub-hierarchy. :(
> So you might want to consider doing sci.inventions or sci.inventors,
> both of which could be expanded to focus on particular individuals.
I have no real opinion on that. It may be a good idea. But not in this
context.
Adam H. Kerman
>I'm starting to think that a more technical group name would be
>appropriate, in an attempt to weed out discussions of pseudo-science and
>other kook topics.
You'd better take a hard look at the numbers. How much SERIOUS discussion is
there taking place on Usenet WRT Tesla? If it's overwhelmed trolling and
troll feeding on nonsense topics, is much of that taking place in properly
named groups?
Yet another unmoderated group would probably enjoy a similar experience.
>He was more physicist than an inventor (at least, he considered himself
>as such). He discovered basic physical relationships of matter and energy
>in the field of electromagnetism. His inventions, while still in use
>today, were not his primary contribution to the world.
As he made contributions to several fields of science and technology, it may
not be reasonable to assume that the useful discussion would consolidate in
one new group. It's more likely that discussion of his work in a particular
field will continue to take place in newsgroups that discuss that field.
After all, it's not off topic.
Discussion may even be better if you don't try to push consolidation. How
many Usenet users have expertise in as many fields as Tesla contributed to?
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> >I'm starting to think that a more technical group name would be
> >appropriate, in an attempt to weed out discussions of pseudo-science and
> >other kook topics.
> You'd better take a hard look at the numbers. How much SERIOUS discussion is
> there taking place on Usenet WRT Tesla? If it's overwhelmed trolling and
> troll feeding on nonsense topics, is much of that taking place in properly
> named groups?
Excellecnt points. All I did was a cursory Google Groups search for
"Tesla", and then I scanned a bunch of posts. I saw no trolls, but I did
see a fair amount of pseudo-science. Of course, stuff like wireless
tranmission of Morse Code was pseudo-science prior to Tesla's work, as was
the thought of a practical AC electric motor.
> Yet another unmoderated group would probably enjoy a similar experience.
> >He was more physicist than an inventor (at least, he considered himself
> >as such). He discovered basic physical relationships of matter and energy
> >in the field of electromagnetism. His inventions, while still in use
> >today, were not his primary contribution to the world.
> As he made contributions to several fields of science and technology, it may
> not be reasonable to assume that the useful discussion would consolidate in
> one new group. It's more likely that discussion of his work in a particular
> field will continue to take place in newsgroups that discuss that field.
Another good point.
> After all, it's not off topic.
> Discussion may even be better if you don't try to push consolidation. How
> many Usenet users have expertise in as many fields as Tesla contributed to?
Given that the man was a wide-ranging genius, it is likely that not many
folks anywhere have expertise in say, both bladeless turbine engines and
wireless transmission of power. But I wonder if the cross-pollenization
might make for lively discussions?
And I wonder how many folks hang out in tangentially related groups just
because of the specialized knowege available there, while their real
interest is Tesla.
How could I research this sort of question? Any pointers to info?
Adam H. Kerman
>Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>EskW...@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>>>I'm starting to think that a more technical group name would be
>>>appropriate, in an attempt to weed out discussions of pseudo-science and
>>>other kook topics.
>>You'd better take a hard look at the numbers. How much SERIOUS discussion
>>is there taking place on Usenet WRT Tesla? If it's overwhelmed trolling
>>and troll feeding on nonsense topics, is much of that taking place in
>>properly named groups?
>Excellecnt points. All I did was a cursory Google Groups search for
>"Tesla", and then I scanned a bunch of posts. I saw no trolls, but I did
>see a fair amount of pseudo-science. Of course, stuff like wireless
>tranmission of Morse Code was pseudo-science prior to Tesla's work, as was
>the thought of a practical AC electric motor.
btw, the "hard numbers" I'm talking about are for your benefit so you can
judge what the Usenet audience is talking about and who they are. You can
define "serious discussion" any way you wish, but look for the discussion
that you would be interested in. Look at the articles' main topics; don't
count merely incidental mentions of Tesla.
Look for discussion over a recent 90 day period.
>>Discussion may even be better if you don't try to push consolidation. How
>>many Usenet users have expertise in as many fields as Tesla contributed to?
>Given that the man was a wide-ranging genius, it is likely that not many
>folks anywhere have expertise in say, both bladeless turbine engines and
>wireless transmission of power. But I wonder if the cross-pollenization
>might make for lively discussions?
>And I wonder how many folks hang out in tangentially related groups just
>because of the specialized knowege available there, while their real
>interest is Tesla.
>How could I research this sort of question? Any pointers to info?
It's a judgment call on your part. Participate in recent threads in which
Tesla is mentioned and get to know the interests of the posters. You'll
learn the answer from your own experience.
If there is purely biographical discussion, maybe you can get some posters
to repeat their comments in alt.fan.nikola-tesla as topics like that are
tangential to the science and technology groups. Of course, if you do build
the audience in a.f.n-t, discussion will drift into pure science and
applications as well!
You'd be going through exactly the same thing if you propose a Big 8 group,
of course, except it might be four to eight weeks before it gets newgrouped
after you write a charter (a whole lot faster than when there was voting).
As you are enthusiastic to get discussion going right now, I'm trying to
encourage you to choose to support one of the existing groups.
Henrietta K Thomas
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>In news.groups, Henrietta K Thomas <h...@xnet.com> wrote:
>
>> Back to the subject at hand......
>
>> I'm not fond of "fan" groups outside the alt.* hierarchy, so if you want
>> to talk about Tesla in a Big 8 group, I'd suggest proposing a group to
>> discuss "inventions" or "inventors". The best name for such a group
>> would be:
>
>But his main contributions were in the field of high energy physics, and
>he himself wold be insulted if you were to describe him as a mere
>"inventor".
>
>Perhaps sci.scientists.* is viable?
Maybe, but I think you should explore your high-energy idea first.
Visit the sci.physics.* groups where you saw discussion of Tesla and ask
if anyone would be interested in a high-energy group. If you get enough
affirmative response, you may have something going, and maybe they'll
help you write a good RFD.
Of course, a high-energy group would be about high energy, not
necessarily about Tesla, but it that's what he is most remembered for,
it might be the best way to get a group to talk about his work.
Otherwise, you may want to consider sci.scientists.* or sci.inventors.*,
whichever seems most appropriate. Marty has already suggested
sci.scientists.tesla, and I'm sure there are other scientists people
might want to talk about. And ditto for sci.inventors.*.
Henrietta K Thomas
<d...@big-8.org> wrote:
>Henrietta K Thomas <h...@xnet.com> writes:
>
>> sci.technology.inventions
>> or
>> sci.technology.inventors
>
>The .inventors group would be better because it more clearly allows
>general discussion about any Tesla-related topic, not just his
>inventions.
Agreed.
>The .inventions group sounds like a place where inventors
>would go for support in developing their own inventions. Not a bad
>idea, but completely orthogonal to talking about famous inventors.
Agreed here as well. That type of interpretation of a newsgroup name
didn't occur to me.
>>sci.technology.inventions-tesla
>> sci.technology.inventors.tesla
>
>.tesla is preferable to -tesla.
Yep. Sorry.
>> Trouble is, there is no sci.technology.* sub-hierarchy. :(
>
>Not a problem at all. What makes you think it is?
The basic naming scheme is to start with two level groups, then go to
third level, then to fourth, and I tend to want to stick to tradition as
much as possible.
>Not sure what
>.technology adds, though.
Only to indicate that the inventions and inventors are concerned with
technological advancement.
May not be necessary, though.
I read EW's article on high energy, and I'm encouraging him to explore
that option first. Otherwise, I think it might be best to just go with
sci.scientists.* or sci.inventors.*.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> btw, the "hard numbers" I'm talking about are for your benefit so you can
> judge what the Usenet audience is talking about and who they are. You can
> define "serious discussion" any way you wish, but look for the discussion
> that you would be interested in. Look at the articles' main topics; don't
> count merely incidental mentions of Tesla.
> Look for discussion over a recent 90 day period.
This seems to be a reasonable methodology. BTW, in the 48 hours since
Panix added the three existing alt.* groups, there has been a grand total
of 0 posts to them. I'm not sure what that means.
Adam H. Kerman
>BTW, in the 48 hours since Panix added the three existing alt.* groups,
>there has been a grand total of 0 posts to them. I'm not sure what that
>means.
That the proponent was a BAAAAAD boy...
Brian Mailman
...by not promoting the group.
It means that if you're really interested in this topic, you need to
either start promoting the existing groups or you need to start
promoting interest in a new group.
B/
Aratzio
<bobof...@127.0.0.7> transparently proposed:
>On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:24:12 -0400, in news.groups, "Martin X.
>Moleski, SJ" <mol...@canisius.edu> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 18:11:49 +0000 (UTC), EskW...@spamblock.panix.com wrote in
>><e7ugp5$cve$1...@reader2.panix.com>:
>>
>>>In news.groups, Dave Sill <d...@big-8.org> wrote:
>>>> EskW...@spamblock.panix.com writes:
>>>
>>>> > Does it seem reasonable that this may be a topic for a Big 8 group?
>>>
>>>> Yes, definitely.
>>>
>>>Good. Thanks. I'd be interested in more opinions.
>>>
>>>
>>>> > If so, what 1st and 2d level hierarchy might be appropriate?
>>>
>>>> Hmm... {soc|sci|talk}.{fan|history|biography}.nikola-tesla?
>>>
>>>That covers a lot of ground! And many of the combos make sense. Is there
>>>such a thing as talk.fan.*? I imagine that sci.talk.* doesn't exist, but
>>>that might make sense too. What else?
>>
>>sci.scientists.tesla?
>
>Any such group would have to be moderated. Telsa is nothing more than
>a kook magnet.
Yes, he is. I for one appreciate his advances in kook science so that
some of the great kooks have a patron scientist to worship.
--
VjikQueen defining irony:
Message-ID: <g9dp62d4kc5rff362...@4ax.com>
"But, of course, you are a dense thinkheaded fucking moron."
AHM Wanker Stomping Award - 2005
Pierre Salinger Hook, Line & Sinker - May, 2005
Pierre Salinger Hook, Line & Sinker - Jan, 2006
Hammer of Thor - July, 2005
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) on 10-22-2005
Message-Id: <slrndlk3ae....@dformosa.zeta.org.au>
"But it is not isolated AUK has a massive impact the rest of usenet."
Please ask your admin to be adding alt.aratzio to your news server
alt.aratzio Usenet asshole Aratzio
viking of soc.men in a killer demonstration of irony:
Message-ID: <v56d329aier0cgr2l...@4ax.com>
"We all know you are fucking stuipd, though."
Hollydan Works Canada
> So lately I'm reading a biogrphy of Nicola Tesla, who turns out to be a
> fascinating, multi-faceted individual. I went to Google Groups to look up
> information and discussions about him.
>
> I discovered that there are 370,000 usenet posts about Tesla archived
> there. I reviewed a bunch of on-topic posts in groups as diverse as:
>
> sci.physics.electromag
> alt.engineering.electrical
> sci.energy
> alt.energy.high-voltage
> alt.astronomy
> sci.electronics.design
> rec.pyrotechnics
> sci.engr.mechsci.energy.hydrogen
> rec.antiques.radio+phono
> soc.history.what-if
> soc.culture.malaysia
> soc.culture.europe
> alt.sci.physics
> alt.alien.research
> alt.slack
> alt.clearing.technology rec.crafts.metalworking
> alt.energy.high-voltage
> rec.radio.shortwave
> alt.sci.physics.new-theories
> alt.paranet.ufo
> alt.energy.homepower
> sci.electronics.basics
>
> Needless to say, Tesla was into lots of different stuff.
>
> I am thinking that maybe, there are a bunch of different folks in
> different fields who all share a common denominator: A desire to talk
> about aspects of Tesla's work, his life, and his inventions.
>
> Does it seem reasonable that this may be a topic for a Big 8 group? If
>
> A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
> --Edward R. Murrow
Here are just a few that most people are familiar with and use every day:
● Radio
● Cellular Communication
● Wireless Data Transfer (Internet, Wi-Fi and Email)
● Wireless Remote Control Devices
● Star Wars Defense System (US Military Air Defense)
● RADAR (the detection of moving objects on land, air and sea)
● Electro-Magnetic Motors in today’s toys, appliances and power tools
● X-Ray Crystallography (Medical equipment)
● Florescent Light Tubes for commercial and domestic use
● AC Generator (everyday basic power generator)
And of course, his most famous invention the Alternating Current better known as “AC” it’s what gives the entire world LIGHT & ELECTRICITY. Google has long been a great admirer of Nikola Tesla. For a world of information on Tesla search for him on GOOGLE.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/6daysdark/tesla-feature-film-final-campaign
Flávio Francisco
LEIA ESTE TEXTO, SERÃO OS MINUTOS MAIS BEM USADOS DA SUA VIDA!
INTRODUÇÃO
Olá! Eu tenho ótimas notícias que devem demorar uns três minutos
para ler. Você alguma vez pensou "como eu posso faturar alto em
pouco tempo????", ou esteve devendo muita grana, pronto a realizar
qualquer coisa para pagar suas contas?? Então, pegue uma cerva, uns
salgadinhos, se arrume em sua cadeira e leia este texto realmente
interessante, um verdadeiro achado (E foi achado por acaso na
Internet). Vou começar dizendo que EU FINALMENTE ACHEI A SOLUÇÃO!!
É isso mesmo, eu descobri! E EU ODEIO ESTES ESQUEMAS DE FICAR RICO EM
POUCO TEMPO!! NÃO ACREDITO MESMO QUE ALGUÉM POSSA GANHAR DINHEIRO
ASSIM, eu tentei de tudo nestes últimos 12 meses. E de alguma forma
acabei aparecendo em uma lista de pessoas procurando fazer dinheiro
(mais certo dizer pessoas desesperadas e burras que tentam qualquer
coisa por dinheiro). Bem, quando, eu era adolescente, estes apelos de
"me fará rico rapidamente" pareciam irresistíveis! Eu pagava
R$500,00 aqui, R$ 200,00 ali que iam acumulando. Eu estava no limite
dos meus cartões de crédito... e desesperado por dinheiro!!!!!!!!
Então eu dei uma chance para todos os sistemas, mas todos falharam!
Talvez eles tenham funcionado para alguns, mas não para mim. Por
acaso, eu estava dando uma vasculhada no meu lixo quando eu li uma
mensagem. Reconheci logo. Podia farejar um esquema de grana fácil
furado a um quilômetro devido a minha situação financeira. Então eu
pensei... "Eu posso evitar de entrar num destes esquemas facilmente.
Mas eu estava errado!! EU ADORO A INTERNET!!!!!
Eu estava lendo umas mensagens na rede quando eu vi um artigo que
começava dizendo CONSIGA GRANA FÁCIL!! Eu pensei... "aqui na
interne???? Que tipo de esquema de grana fácil poderia haver na
internet? Eu tenho que ver". O artigo descrevia um modo que dizia
MANDE UM REAL PARA APENAS SEIS PESSOAS E FAÇA r$ 50.000,00 EM DINHEIRO
VIVO EM APENAS 4 SEMANAS! Bem, quanto mais eu pensava nisso, mais eu
ficava curioso. Porquê?
Por causa do modo de funcionamento desse sistema e porque SÓ IRIA ME
CUSTAR doze REAIS (E SEIS SELOS), E ISSO SERIA TUDO A PAGAR.. PARA
SEMPRE!!! Tudo bem, os R$ 50.000,00 em grana poderiam ser uma grana
dificílima de alcançar, mas eram possíveis. Eu sabia que poderia ter
um retorno mínimo de R$ 1.000,00 ou mais. Então eu o fiz!! Como
diziam as instruções do artigo, eu mandei um real para cada um dos
seis da lista contida no artigo. Eu inclui uma pequena nota, junto do
dinheiro que dizia: por favor, coloque-me na sua lista (please add me
to your list). Então eu removi o primeiro nome dos seis da lista e
movi todos os outros uma posição acima, e coloquei o meu nome na
última posição da lista. É deste jeito que a grana começa a rolar!
Então eu peguei este texto revisado, agora com o meu nome na lista e O
MANDEI PARA QUANTAS REDES DE MENSAGENS E ÁREAS DE MENSAGENS LOCAL DE
BBS QUE EU CONHECIA, FÓRUNS, NEWGROUPS. Então eu esperei para ver a
grana entrar... preparado para receber entre R$ 1.000,00 e R$1.500,00
em dinheiro vivo ou um pouco mais... mas que incrível surpresa quando
aqueles envelopes continuaram a aparecer!!! Eu sabia o conteúdo deles
no momento em que eu vi o endereço de pessoas do mundo todo. A maioria
dos EUA, mas alguns do Canadá, da América do Sul e até mesmo da
Austrália!!! Te digo, foi muito massa!! E quanto eu recebi de retorno?
$1.000,00? $5.000,00? Que nada!! Eu recebi um total de R$ 23.343,00 !!
eu não podia acreditar! Agora eu tenho um micro novinho, gravador de
cd, impressora, aparelho de som, discman. Guitarra e um carro , tudo
isso comprado somente com a grana que ganhei!! Agora, após quase oito
meses, estou pronto para fazer tudo de novo!!! Então talvez seja
realmente possível faturar $50.000,00 em dinheiro, SÓ DEPENDE DE
VOCÊ!!!!!!!!
Você deve seguir as instruções e mandar este artigo para todos os
lugares que você puder e imaginar! O quanto você mandar vai
determinar a quantidade de dinheiro que irá chegar em sua caixa de
correspondência!!! É simplesmente muito fácil de se realizar!!!
Vamos revisar agora os motivos que você tem para fazer isso: o custo
é somente 6 selos e 6 notinhas de 2 reais que você manda para os nomes
da lista pelo correio (o serviço postal de país). Então simplesmente
mande este arquivo (COM SEU NOME ADICIONADO A ELE) para tudo quanto
for
rede de mensagens e BBS que conheça e possa. Depois se sente,
ironicamente, dê um passeio até a sua caixa de correspondência e
pegue a sua recompensa!!!
Todos nós temos R$ 12,00 para colocar em tal investimento com RETORNO
REALISTICO DE $ 15.000,00 A $ 25.000,00 entre 3 a 5 semanas! Então
deixe a loteria um pouco de lado, coma em casa ao invés de gastar 12,00
(no Brasil) comendo fora e utilize esta fortuna) neste espantoso
sistema de fazer dinheiro!!! Não tem como perder!!!
Você então pergunta: como fazer isso exatamente ,sem dar problemas?
" e eu te respondo: eu cuidadosamente escrevi da forma mais
detalhada, as instruções mais fáceis possíveis de entender de como
encaminhar a grana até você. ENTÃO, VOCÊ ESTÁ PRONTO PARA GANHAR
DINHEIRO? ENTÃO AÍ VAMOS NÓS!!!!
*****A LISTA DE NOMES ESTÁ NO FINAL DESTE ARTIGO.******
Ok, leia tudo isso cuidadosamente. Imprima estas informações, se
quiser, para que você possa facilmente utilizar como referencia quando
precisar.
INSTRUÇÔES:
1º PASSO: pegue um pedaço de papel e escreva nele o seguinte: "Por
favor me coloque na sua lista". Isto cria o serviço a partir do
sistema de ganhar dinheiro e o torna TOTALMENTE LEGAL. Se você não
gosta da idéia de mandar R$ 2,00 para alguém, tenha em mente que
você esta pagando esta quantia para um serviço legal. Tenha certeza
que você incluiu o seu nome e endereço. Eu asseguro a você,
novamente, que isso é completamente legal! Apenas por diversão,
escreva também em qual número a pessoa estava: " você estava no
número 3" isso é o chama ganhar dinheiro enquanto se diverte, ou
unir o útil ao agradável.
2ºPASSO: agora dobre este pedaço de papel em volta da nota que você
vai mandar (nada de cheques ou vales), os coloque em um envelope e
mande para as seis pessoas da lista. Dobrar o papel em volta da nota
assegura que o dinheiro vai chegar.
3ºPASSO:agora leia cuidadosamente, que ESTA É A PARTE QUE FALA COMO O
DINHEIRO VAI CHEGAR ATÉ VOCÊ. Elimine o primeiro nome da lista e em
seguida reordene a lista de 1 a 5, ou seja (2 torna-se 1, 3 torna-se 2
e assim sucessivamente). Agora coloque seu nome e endereço na 6º
posição da lista.
4ºPASSO: agora faça u Upload (mande) do arquivo para quantas áreas
de Redes de Mensagens e áreas de arquivos( fóruns ou newgroups) forem
possíveis. Coloque como descrição algo como: Precisa de grana
urgente? Aqui está a solução ou Precisa de dinheiro para pagar o que
deve???, etc. e quanto mais uploads você fizer, mais grana você vai
ganhar, e é claro, mais grana os outros da lista vão ganhar também.
O SEGREDO DESTE SISTEMA É A HONESTIDADE DOS PARTICIPANTES E CONSEGUIR
5.000% DE LUCRO NESTE SISTEMA!!! Você vai se maravilhar com os
benefícios, pode acreditar!! Determine um número concreto de Uploads
que vai fazer, um mínimo de 500 uploads. E tenha sempre em mente que
quanto mais Uploads você fizer, mais grana você vai fazer.
Se você tiver problemas em fazer Uploads, peça ajuda ao SysOp da BBS
que você estiver, que ele terá prazer em te ajudar. E jamais coloque
descrições milagrosas como "consiga uma enchente de um milhão
saindo da sua caixa de correspondência em apenas dois dias!". -
você nunca terá respostas de ninguém.
5ºPASSO: este é o passo que eu mais gosto. APENAS SENTE-SE E
APROVEITE A VIDA PORQUE A GRANA ESTÁ A CAMINHO!! Tenha em mente que
geralmente apenas uns trocados aparecem em 2 semanas, mas na 3 e 4
semanas, uma tempestade de GRANA VAI DESTRUIR A SUA CAIXA DE
CORRESPONDENCIA de tão cheia!!!! E tudo o que você precisará fazer
é pegar a grana e tentar não gritar muito alto, quando perceber, que
FINALMENTE CONSEGUIU ALCANÇAR OS SEUS SONHOS, e ficou cheio de
grana!!!!!
*****COMO POSTAR NOS NEWGROUPS*********
Etapa 1: copie e salve este artigo em seu editor detexto. (selecione o
texto, clique em Editar e Copiar, abra deu editor de texto e clique em
Editar e colar,depois clique em Arquivo e Salvar como.txt)
Etapa 2: faça as devidas alterações neste artigo, incluindo seu nome
na sexta posição da lista.
Etapa 3: salve novamente o arquivo. Clique em Editar e Selecionar
tudo.
Cllique novamente em Editar e copiar.
Etapa 4: abra seu navegador e procure vários newgroups (fóruns
on-line, cadernos de mensagens, locais de conversa, discussões) e
poste uma mensagem nova em cada MURAL ou ÁREA, ou algo similar.
Etapa 5: para postar nesses newgrooups. No campo destinado para
digitar
o texto ou mensagem a ser enviada para o newgroups, clique com o botão
direito do mouse. Em seguida clique em colar. Como Assunto ou titulo,
digite um nome que chame a atenção, como o meu, ou invente algo
parecido. Clique em enviar e pronto, você acabou de enviar sua
primeira mensagem! Parabéns...
Etapa 6: selecione outro newgroups e repita o passo 5. faça isso para
no mínimo 500 newgroups. Pronto você logo começará a receber
dinheiro pelo correio.
Agora PAGUE AQUELAS CONTAS ATRASADAS E SUA DIVIDAS, compre algo que
você sempre sonhou, ou algo para aquela pessoa especial. APROVEITE A
VIDA!!!!
Sempre que você acabar de gastar a grana que conseguiu, simplesmente
reative o sistema. Para isso, tenha sempre duas cópias de segurança
deste arquivo com você. Uma em disquete, outra no seu HD. O mais
incrível é que você pode usar este sistema quantas vezes você
necessitar!!!!
Se você mandar a carta para o exterior, lembre-se de mandar com
cédulas de dólar, no Brasil o equivalente a 1 dólar (2 reais
aproximadamente)
LISTA DOS NOMES
" A HONESTIDADE É O QUE FAZ ESTE PROGRAMA FUNCIONAR!!
LEMBRE-SE DOBRE UMA FOLHA EM VOLTA DA NOTA E COLOQUE NO ENVELOPE!
SEJA HONESTO, VOCÊ GASTA 6 REAIS E RECEBE MUITO MAIS, FOI ASSIM
COMIGO!"
1- Elly Isney Medeiros Garcia
Rua Antonio Ponpilio de Albuquerque, 18
Bairo Dom Jaime Câmara
Mossoró - Rio Grande do Norte - Brasil
CEP: 59628-210
2- Diego Schneider Silveira
Rua Ignes Fagundes, 3309 - Restinga Nova
Porto Alegre - Rio Grande do Sul - Brasil
CEP: 91790-010
3- Katja Rosa Klein Lustosa
Rua Major Sebastião Saraiva, 1828
Bairro Morada do Sol
Teresina - Piauí - Brasil
CEP: 64056-530
4- Tabata Cristina Espírita
Rua Sargento Noel de Camargo, 200
Bairro Jardim Imperador
São Paulo - São Paulo - Brasil
CEP: 03937-000
5- Rodrigo da Silva Batista
Avenida Meriti, 361
Bairro Vila Kosmos
Rio de Janeiro - RJ -Brasil
CEP: 21220-202
6- Flávio Francisco de Lima
Rua Nossa Senhora da Penha, 300
Bairro Caitetus
Alagoas - AL - Brasil
CEP: 57311-210
*COPIE ESTE ARTIGO PARA QUANTOS LUGARES VOCÊ PUDER... E BOA SORTE!