Don't split sci.electronics (was: Too many news and FAQ)
JOHA...@gemini.ldc.lu.se
>There is too much news and too much questions in this newsgroup.
>Is it possible to create different newsgroups ?
>
>Suggestion:
>sci.electronics.microprocessor
>sci.electronics.sensor
>sci.electronics.motor
>sci.electronics.tv
>sci.electronics.theory
>...
>and sci.electronics.book
>
Hi netters,
IMHO it's a bad idea to split this group, it just ends up with *LOTS* of
crosspointing between the sci.electronics.xxxxx groups and this because
of the nature of todays electronics...
If you think there are to many msg maybe you should change your "reading
style" and browse the subject lines for the good ones...
Just my $0.02
/Christer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Christer Johansson - HTH - * InterNet : joha...@gemini.ldc.lu.se *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE...@qucdn.queensu.ca
>Is it possible to create different newsgroups ?
>
>Suggestion:
>sci.electronics.microprocessor
>sci.electronics.sensor
>sci.electronics.motor
>sci.electronics.tv
>sci.electronics.theory
>...
>and sci.electronics.book
If I were to ask "are there any books that covers the theory for
controlling a motor through sensors feedback using a uP", then I
would have to cross post in all the news groups suggested ? :) :)
In article <01HCX977E...@gemini.ldc.lu.se>, JOHA...@gemini.ldc.lu.se
says:
$
$IMHO it's a bad idea to split this group, it just ends up with *LOTS* of
$crosspointing between the sci.electronics.xxxxx groups and this because
$of the nature of todays electronics...
AGREEDED !! The problem can be some what solved by having more
descriptive titles for the threads.
> * Christer Johansson - HTH - * InterNet : joha...@gemini.ldc.lu.se *
K. C. Lee
Jon Jenkins
: In a previous article, ber...@rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (Yves Bergeon) says:
: >There is too much news and too much questions in this newsgroup.
: >Is it possible to create different newsgroups ?
This will only mean that the "majority" of people will
now have to read these extra newsgroups. sci.electronics
is nowhere as big as several other newsgroups and they
survive quite happily (see for instance the linux
groups and comp.lan.c and c++ etc etc )
The comment about subject headings is correct: I
(and I suspect most others) browse the headings and only read when
I think I can help or I am interested: Usually by private
email unless I think it is of universal interest.
PS if you dont use it already use tin or one of the threaded
newsreaders. You can easily kill whole groups and threads
of articles under the same subject heading with a single key.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Dr Jon Jenkins
Location: Digital Equipment Corp, NaC,
Burnett Place, Research Park,
Bond University, Gold Coast
QLD, AUSTRALIA 4229
Phone: 61-75-75-0105
Fax: 61-75-75-0100
Internet: jen...@ozy.dec.com
The opinions expressed above are entirely personal and do not
reflect the corporate policy of DEC or the opinions of DEC management.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Stoney
>This will only mean that the "majority" of people will
>now have to read these extra newsgroups.
Could someone please help me understand what makes reading the same amount of
news when split into more than one newsgroup objectionable? Why do people who
want to read everything object to partitioning a group so that those of us who
do not want to be bombarded by the lot can be more selective?
--
Graham Stoney, Hardware/Software Engineer
Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Ph: + 61 2 805 2909 Fax: + 61 2 805 2929
Danny Bersch
#]Could someone please help me understand what makes reading the same amount of
#]news when split into more than one newsgroup objectionable? Why do people who
#]want to read everything object to partitioning a group so that those of us who
#]do not want to be bombarded by the lot can be more selective?
#]--
#]Graham Stoney, Hardware/Software Engineer
#]Canon Information Systems Research Australia
#]Ph: + 61 2 805 2909 Fax: + 61 2 805 2929
In a story book perfect world, where everything falls cleanly into one
category and everyone is interested only in information contained in
one category, splitting the groups may make sense. Clearly, there are
advantages in partitioning groups with unrelated or _WIDELY_ separated
interests (i.e. politics and rational.thought). However, in practice,
splitting a group like sci.electronics into two or more closely related
groups will not have the desired effect of significantly cutting down on
the traffic in any of the new sub groups. Those of us with a wide interest
in the topic end up subscribing to both groups so that we don't miss items
that don't clearly fit in one group or the other, a minor hassle. For
example, if the group is split into analog and digital, where does one
address A/D, D/A, controls (could be analog or digital control of analog
and/or digital), DSP, mixed-signal, etc.? It is not clear, and with closely
related groups, it never will be. More significant than the hassle factor
is the tendency of information on these "grey" or "cross-boundary" topics
to be cross-posted to all related groups. Those who were trying to limit
the amount of material through which to wade end up right back where they
started, while those with broader interest end up wading through the same
stuff twice (or more).
I don't think the objections that you see are necessarily to the idea of
partitioning the group, per se, so much as concern that poorly thought out
partitioning can be much worse than none at all. As I remember, the
original suggestion was that the group be split along analog/digital lines.
This is, IMO, unworkable. Electronic circuits seldom fit cleanly into
just one of those categories. New newsgroups should have characteristics
which uniquely differentiate them from existing groups, and sufficient
interest/volume to justify creating the new group.
The sci.electronics group exists as a generic discussion group for topics
related to electronics. As such, the vast majority of traffic seems to be
appropriate. If a given sub-topic, with a specific audience, is consistently
found to comprise a significant percentage of the postings, then I would
heartily support creating a sub-group for that topic. Such decisions should
be carefully thought out, with due consideration for the consequences. Knee
jerk reactions will just compound existing problems.
===================================================================
Danny Bersch | There is so much good in the worst of us,
Motorola | And so much bad in the best of us,
SPS, LATG, ATO, SST | That it little behooves any of us,
ber...@sst.sps.mot.com | To talk about the rest of us.
===================================================================
Richard Steven Walz
Graham Stoney <gre...@research.canon.oz.au> wrote:
>jenkins@oils (Jon Jenkins) writes:
>>This will only mean that the "majority" of people will
>>now have to read these extra newsgroups.
>
>Could someone please help me understand what makes reading the same amount of
>news when split into more than one newsgroup objectionable? Why do people who
>want to read everything object to partitioning a group so that those of us who
>do not want to be bombarded by the lot can be more selective?
------------------------------------
It wouldn't be, IF that were possible!!! But most electronics questions
digress into three or four of any group of division specs for this group
that I have seen suggested or thought of myself, and that means LOTS of
cross-posting, and THEN that means MORE time trying to find anything!!!
NOW do you fathom the problem?? Digital is analog, computer clocks are RF
and DO broadcast, IR needs digital and analog discussions as to how to make
them work, sensors digress into physics and analog back to digital,
displays are all the above, etc.!!!! It would be insane!!! Instead why
don't you tell us what your secret agenda for this group is, everybody's
got one, and then if enough people share one, then we could start another
group with just those things and leave this one with cross-postings to it.
That might be effective for some of the "snobs" (teasing) on the group who
only want to be bothered with one kind of thing, a narrower focus, or a
more high-faluttin' discussion up in the ASCII mathematics contest
range!!!:) Well, are you too shy to tell us what your "ideal" techie
newsgroup would have, or what???
-Steve rst...@armory.com
davi...@its.bldrdoc.gov
In article <Cr3rG...@armory.com>, <rst...@armory.com> writes:
> Newsgroups: sci.electronics
> Path:
massive!ncar!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gatech!swrinde!pipex!uknet!EU.net!uunet!hob
bes!earth.armory.com!rstevew
> From: rst...@armory.com (Richard Steven Walz)
> Subject: Re: Don't split sci.electronics (was: Too many news and FAQ)
> Organization: The Armory
> Date: Wed, 8 Jun 1994 23:48:16 GMT
> Message-ID: <Cr3rG...@armory.com>
> References: <01HCX977E...@gemini.ldc.lu.se>
<2sgvbk$8...@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <Cr27M...@research.canon.oz.au>
> Sender: ne...@armory.com (Usenet News)
> Nntp-Posting-Host: deeptht.armory.com
> Lines: 30
Just make the first word of the subject be the subject, i.e. RF, computer,
etc. Doesn't have to be perfect. Most internet interfaces have a subject
sort, so this will give everyone an unlimited number of sub groups without all
that ugly cross-posting. Even makes following threads easier. HAND
Steve
Christophe Vermeulen
>From: rst...@armory.com (Richard Steven Walz)
>Subject: Re: Don't split sci.electronics (was: Too many news and FAQ)
Own opinion : DO SPLIT : Digital isn't analog, microcontrollers aren't RF !
sci.electronics is not to be subscribed to in the current way !
Peter Nyffeler
- sci.electronics should be splited
- not into digital, analog, capacitors, resistors and so on
- but into applications as scientific_instrumentation, consumerelectronics,
construction, maintainance etc.
- and a sci.electronics.components group
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| __________
Peter Nyffeler | / ___ ___ \ member of
ETH-Zuerich, Physical-Chemistry-Lab. | / \/ \
Switzerland | | ___ ___ | Soaring
e-mail:pe...@ppc.lpc.ethz.ch | | \/ | Club
fax: ..41 1 632 10 21 | | ___ ___ | Zuerich
tel: ..41 1 632 43 60 | \ \/ /
| \__________/
| + Control-line modell enthusiast
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Steven Walz
If digital isn't analog, how come we build it out of analog devices and
have to know about load and input and output impedance and frequency max
then??? And how come we have to worry about it broadcasting and acting for
the world like an RF circuit when we make boards for uP's and uC's?? Don't
make me laugh! Did you just have a course in Boolean and a course in
transistors without realizing the connection, or something? Silly man.
Go away, my father got the bridge of his nose blown out and numerous shrapnel
wounds fighting to save your funny little country when he was with the
101st Airborne. Not that we begrudge it to you, but Belgium is too small to
be so smart that it knows what the whole net needs, especially if you don't
know that digital IS analog!!! Yes, I know Alcatel, and I did rather like
Belgium. I'm just trying to piss you off so you and other noodles like you
will quit with the assininity. Surely you have enough sense to realize that
the flagship of the electronics net has to accept all comers, just like
alt.sex. If you want to make a dozen other tiny groups that always
crosspost here for completeness then do it and quit pretending you can just
divide a flagship group in a given subject range. That's plain stupid, and
yes, I'm just an overbearing American who thinks he's always right!
But this time I also happen to BE right!
-Steve Walz rst...@armory.com
Lars Lindgren
> Go away, my father got the bridge of his nose blown out and numerous shrapnel
> wounds fighting to save your funny little country when he was with the
> 101st Airborne. Not that we begrudge it to you, but Belgium is too small to
Who cares?
> divide a flagship group in a given subject range. That's plain stupid, and
> yes, I'm just an overbearing American who thinks he's always right!
<sigh> Just too true I'm afraid..
Just a tip, Steve... Stop posting that kind of comments into this
group. It has nothing to do with electonics at all and I seriously
doubt that anyone else around here are more interested in them than I
am. Please.
--
Lars Lindgren, Stockholm, Sverige la...@argh.dude.pp.se PGP