New Newsgroup
Dana B. Norman
Can we get ruling from a newsadmin on austin.gardens?
Dana
--
Dana B Norman
Cyber: http://www.ar.utexas.edu/staff/norman
vaq...@mail.utexas.edu
jher
So, shall we call it
austin.gardens
or
austin.gardening
Frankly, the former sounds like places to visit (i.e. parks) and the latter
sounds like me knee deep in the mud.
Having been shot down on austin.rec.gardening I would vote for austin.gardening
In article <vaquero-1103...@norman.ar.utexas.edu>,
--
jh...@matrix.eden.com jh...@fnord.org 23
SysAdmin eden.com Moron fnord.org
http://www.eden.com/~jher
5 BOFH Shoggoths don't let shoggoths grimp flumbh
Dana B. Norman
>
> austin.gardens
> or
> austin.gardening
>
> Frankly, the former sounds like places to visit (i.e. parks) and the latter
> sounds like me knee deep in the mud.
I agree, but am willing to go with the majority.
Dana
--
Cyber: http://www.ar.utexas.edu/staff/norman
vaq...@mail.utexas.edu
Randall Raemon
>>Having been shot down on austin.rec.gardening I would vote for austin.gardening
>
I also agree... Do we have a consensus yet??
--
Randall Raemon
del...@netcom.com
00056...@mcimail.com
Richard P. Bainter
>Having been shot down on austin.rec.gardening I would vote for austin.gardening
I agree with that as well.
Once we have a majority, someone can send it out.
Ciao,
--
Richard Bainter Mundanely | OS Specialist - OMG/CSD
Pug Generally | Applied Research Labs - U.Texas
p...@arlut.utexas.edu | p...@eden.com | {any user}@pug.net
Note: The views may not reflect my employers, or even my own for that matter.
Thomas A. Gunter
Raemon) wrote:
/ Do we have a consensus yet??
No, we don't.
Let me reiterate what I said last week in article
<tag-080396...@foggy.cc.utexas.edu>:
I don't have anything against a gardening group, but I don't see the
traffic to warrant it. Historically, creating a group doesn't make people
want to post on that subject. I haven't seen many recent posts on
gardening.
Please convince me there's enough gardening discussion to warrant a newsgroup.
(And where are the people who usually bring this issue up?)
Tom
--
Thomas A. Gunter | "That's the worst call I've ever seen,
t...@mail.utexas.edu | and I'm from the Southwest Conference!"
Microcomputer Technologies | -- me, 1994 NCAA basketball tournament
jher
is just a newsgroup. I started austin.jobs last year sometime and there really
wasn't a "discussion" that warrented it. Granted, we did talk about it here
in austin.usenet.config but there was not a hell of a lot of jobs traffic at
the time. After I created the group, it literally EXPLODED with postings and
several of my friends have gotten jobs because of it.
I will agree that I do not see a lot of "gardening" discussion in
austin.talk and austin.general but I personally would like to see the group
created and will talk in the group. Its not much, but I think it will have
quite a lot of traffic if it is created.
In article <tag-130396...@foggy.cc.utexas.edu>,
Thomas A. Gunter <t...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>In article <delta1Do...@netcom.com>, del...@netcom.com (Randall
>Raemon) wrote:
>/ Do we have a consensus yet??
>No, we don't.
>Let me reiterate what I said last week in article
><tag-080396...@foggy.cc.utexas.edu>:
>I don't have anything against a gardening group, but I don't see the
>traffic to warrant it. Historically, creating a group doesn't make people
>want to post on that subject. I haven't seen many recent posts on
>gardening.
>Please convince me there's enough gardening discussion to warrant a newsgroup.
>(And where are the people who usually bring this issue up?)
>Tom
--
Dana B. Norman
> <tag-080396...@foggy.cc.utexas.edu>:
>
> I don't have anything against a gardening group, but I don't see the
> traffic to warrant it. Historically, creating a group doesn't make people
> want to post on that subject. I haven't seen many recent posts on
> gardening.
>
> Please convince me there's enough gardening discussion to warrant a newsgroup.
First of all, be a little more specific about what you expect from us.
In a nutshell, we want a group to call our own. I don't think that is too
much to ask. So far you are the ONLY person voting against this group.
Gardening in Austin is very popular and this popularity is on the rise. A
newsgroup dedicated to Austin and Central Texas gardening will be (IMHO) a
welcomed and much used group.
Dana B. Norman
(Thomas A. Gunter) wrote:
All I asked was to see the "we" you mention post articles in a.general or
> a.talk. I don't see a "we" out there, other than those who've posted
> regarding the creation of a new group.
I can see your point, sort of. But my feeling is that alot of folks
interested in gardening may not know to go to austin.talk or
austin.general. In my case, I more or less stumbled into it one day.
> I agree with the idea, but I'd replace "newsgroup" and "group" with
> "discussion in austin.general" first.
See above
> think people will be in a new group, the "if you build it, they will come"
> plan doesn't always work.
But sometimes it will work, and I think it will in this case.
> Here's where the vote count stands in austin.usenet.config posts in the
> nine days since austin.gardening was proposed in article
> <vaquero-0403...@norman.ar.utexas.edu> (I didn't check other
> groups, and some people may have voted by e-mail to Dana):
Don't have exact numbers in front of me. Maybe four or five additional
"yes" votes, zero "no" votes, and one "abstain" (that would be you,
Thomas)
Amy Rupp
>
>Please convince me there's enough gardening discussion to warrant a newsgroup.
>
>(And where are the people who usually bring this issue up?)
Right here!
Seriously, gardening is the number one pastime in America these days, enjoyed
equally across age groups and gender lines. I'd love to talk more about Austin
gardening. Gardening here is a big challenge, but there are many, many
folks interested in gardening in our area -- the fact that there are six weekend
morning talk-show hours devoted just to this topic is one indicator.
I post fairly often regarding gardening in austin.talk, but have to wonder --
only a few of us *know* to use austin.talk for this purpose, and many don't
want to wade through all of the other noise in austin.talk to find the
gardening posts.
Obviously, though, you can vote no for the proposal. I believe that the
consensus referred to earlier is on the proposed name.
--
Amy Moseley Rupp
am...@mpd.tandem.com
(512) 432-7144
Thomas A. Gunter
vaq...@mail.utexas.edu (Dana B. Norman) wrote:
/ First of all, be a little more specific about what you expect from us.
/ In a nutshell, we want a group to call our own. I don't think that is too
/ much to ask.
All I asked was to see the "we" you mention post articles in a.general or
a.talk. I don't see a "we" out there, other than those who've posted
regarding the creation of a new group.
/ So far you are the ONLY person voting against this group.
I've never said I was voting against the group. I'm just the only person
asking "why?" If you have to classify me, put me down as an "abstain."
I have no to reason to vote against it, but none to vote for it, either.
/ Gardening in Austin is very popular and this popularity is on the rise.
I agree this is a good thing.
/ A newsgroup dedicated to Austin and Central Texas gardening will be (IMHO)
/ a welcomed and much used group.
I agree with the idea, but I'd replace "newsgroup" and "group" with
"discussion in austin.general" first.
I don't mean to be the bad guy or play net.cop, but I'm afraid it might
look that way. I'm just pointing out that no matter how interested you
think people will be in a new group, the "if you build it, they will come"
plan doesn't always work.
A few months ago, someone suggested a texas.* group to discuss South Texas
and/or the Coastal Bend. I was all for that. We started some threads in
texas.general that had very few followups, so we had our discussions in
e-mail. Despite the large number of people in and from those regions,
there just wasn't enough traffic for the discussion to need its own
newsgroup.
A gardening group may get a lot a traffic, but we don't know that it
will. That's all I'm getting at. If there was already a lot of gardening
traffic, I'd vote for the group in an instant. I just don't personally
see the need.
That being said...
Here's where the vote count stands in austin.usenet.config posts in the
nine days since austin.gardening was proposed in article
<vaquero-0403...@norman.ar.utexas.edu> (I didn't check other
groups, and some people may have voted by e-mail to Dana):
FOR
Dana B. Norman <vaq...@mail.utexas.edu>
jh...@news.eden.com (jher)
John Rembetski <jre...@ix.netcom.com>
mby...@tpoint.net (Mike Byrnes)
de...@jump.net (Dewey Coffman)
am...@devnull.mpd.tandem.com (Amy Rupp)
wayne clark <wayne...@sematech.org>
del...@netcom.com (Randall Raemon)
p...@arlut.utexas.edu (Pug)
c...@NetXpress.com (cliff bingham)
AGAINST
<none>
ABSTAIN
t...@mail.utexas.edu (Thomas A. Gunter)
Since ABSTAINs don't count in the tally, that's 10 of 10 FOR and 0
AGAINST. With the fairly loose standards of a.u.c voting, I'd say it's a
go.
Now all we have to do is get a newsadmin to send the newgroup message.
Any volunteers?
cliff bingham
on with it. Sounds to me like someone has a typical Austin disease
i.e. too much politics. Maybe I don't understand the great scheme of
things but who cares what it is called? I think it will get a lot of
traffic and will be useful what else is there?
vaq...@mail.utexas.edu (Dana B. Norman) wrote:
>In article <4i2gvc$h...@matrix.eden.com>, jh...@news.eden.com (jher) wrote:
>>
>> austin.gardens
>> or
>> austin.gardening
>>
>> Frankly, the former sounds like places to visit (i.e. parks) and the latter
>> sounds like me knee deep in the mud.
>I agree, but am willing to go with the majority.
Pug
>Any volunteers?
Yep. Done, assuming I did it right. The message body, as copied from the
RFD, of it was:
As discussed in austin.usenet.config, austin.general and austin.talk.
The "vote" passed 15:0:1 approximately. I choose the original name over
austin.gardens because I *thought* that was the consensus.
*New group name: austin.gardening*
Discussion of things related to Gardening in Austin.
The group is for discussing Gardening (Vegetable, Flower, Water),
Landscaping (Services, Contractors, Ideas), Nurseries (Prices, Plant
availability), Garden Resources (TV shows, Radio programs, Magazines,
Newspaper articles, Clubs and the listing of their meetings) and just
about anything else related to plants and growing things in *Austin*.
Please do not cross-post articles from rec.gardens to austin.gardening.
It would be suitable to post in both locations or to repost something
from rec.gardens to austin.gardening if is austin specific (or USDA
Zone 8).
For your newsgroups file:
austin.gardening Austin and USDA Zone 8 gardening related discussions.
Richard P. Bainter
>Yep. Done, assuming I did it right.
Btw, sorry for sending it out twice. The first time I did it, it told me
it didn't send it out. *sigh*
Ciao,