I'm going to hijack the Rfd

[Mark Linimon]

> It looks like we won't get traffic until we have some groups. In an effort
> to get going, I'm going to create the newsgroups mentioned in Mark Linimon's
> RFD. Two exceptions are the admin groups which we already have, and the
> baseball groups which were contested.
>
> After these groups get some traffic, there should be enough interested
> people reading us.groups to create anything new that comes up. Then we can
> go to the RFD/CFV system before this turns into another alt.*.
>
> If there are no objections ...

Jamie:

I'll object :-). Please go back and read my initial posting. I am firmly
convinced that if us.* is not a voted hierarchy, from day one, it'll become
another alt in about a week: no longer.

I don't care to _create_ traffic. We can doubtlessly do that. I'd like to
see us.* used to _manage_ traffic. If all it does is _create_ traffic I'd
rather not be associated with it.

Please go back and read my initial posting. I hope it will help shed light
on why I feel so strongly about it.

Mark

[Jamie Gritton]

lin...@nominil.lonestar.org (Mark Linimon) writes:

>I'll object :-). Please go back and read my initial posting. I am firmly
>convinced that if us.* is not a voted hierarchy, from day one, it'll become
>another alt in about a week: no longer.

Hmm. This is an objection worth listening to, considering it's Mark's list.
I don't want to create "USA's alt", and I suppose I shouldn't make a precedent
for creating groups without votes. I still feel we need some "real" groups to
get going, but I can handle doing it with a CFV, Unless someone strongly
objects to Mark's objection.

I still don't hold that us.* should be a voted hierarchy, but the plan was
that it would have voted groups, and I'll stick by that plan.
--
James Gritton - gri...@byu.edu - I disclaim