The rec.games.bolo newsgroup appears to be dead, with no recent on-topic
messages posted, as of 0001 UTC February 1, 2011. The Big8-Usenet
Management Board proposes to eliminate that newsgroup.
Any feedback on that proposal should be posted as a reply to the thread
"1st RFD: The Great Downsizing 2011/1" in the news.groups.proposals
newsgroup. In your feedback, please cite the name of that newsgroup --
rec.games.bolo -- in the subject line. If you object to eliminating
that newsgroup, please provide a brief justification of why it should be
Followup-To set to news.groups.proposals.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Paul W. Schleck <psch...@novia.net> wrote:
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Hash: SHA1
> >The rec.games.bolo newsgroup appears to be dead, with no recent on-topic
> >messages posted, as of 0001 UTC February 1, 2011. The Big8-Usenet
> >Management Board proposes to eliminate that newsgroup.
> Once again the junta is trying to kill r.g.b. for no good reason, and
> the posts from the last attempt (less than 18 months ago) apparently
> didn't count as "recent on-topic messages" in which multiple people
> posted their displeasure with the junta's third-world machete tactics.
There have been at most 2 on-topic posts to the group in the past 3
years. Discussion of whether or not the group should be removed is meta
discussion and not on-topic for a group about bolo.
If there were anyone who wanted to discuss bolo on Usenet, the previous
discussion about possibly removing it should have encouraged them to
actually use the group to prevent future consideration of removal.
> >In your feedback, please cite the name of that newsgroup --
> >rec.games.bolo -- in the subject line. If you object to eliminating
> >that newsgroup, please provide a brief justification of why it should be
> Not that anything I can write will have any influence, but I am 100%
> against this goofy and rash plan. It seems obvious from here that the
> decision to remove these groups from the junta's official lits has
> already been made, the RFD and other assorted alphabetic boiler-plated
> horseradish are just window dressing.
That paragraph sounds like you can't think of any justification for
keeping the group. No decision has yet been made. Persuasive arguments
were presented 18 months ago for giving the group a second chance, so it
was not removed at that time, although it was a very close call. Despite
the reprieve, it doesn't appear that people do actually want to use it.
If you have some justification for retaining the group, speak up.
Perhaps it is some other group(s) on the list that you feel shouldn't be
removed. If there is some reason that you feel one or more of those
groups shouldn't be removed, please post it in news.groups.proposals.
Kathy, speaking only for myself