Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Vote NO: Comp.databases.oracle.server.java
In article <Eq6BuE.4ny_at_presby.edu>, Jon Bell <jtbell_at_presby.edu> wrote:
>In article <3514582D.FA5DB912_at_pacific.net.sg>,
>Phil Bradley <pbradley_at_pacific.net.sg> wrote:
>>
>>stevec_at_zimmer.csufresno.edu wrote:
>>>
>>> Giving figures on how fast Java is growing and stating how important you think
>>> Java will be in the future is NOT a good reason to start a new newsgroup.
>>
>>So what is a good reason? I would have thought that a subject of widespread
>>interest where there is limited knowledge would be a good candidate.
>>>
>>> A newsgroup should be created if there is a need for the group based on the
>>> numbers of articles that would naturally fall within its scope.
>>
>>So the justification is push. If enough articles get posted on any news group
>>that would fall into the scope of the designated news group, then that is the
>>justification.
>
>Yes, that's a good way to put it. Most people would also accept e-mail
>discussion groups as evidence of interest in the subject, provided that a
>significant number of people using them actually want to switch to a
>newsgroup. Web-based bulletin boards might also be a possibility,
>although there hasn't been much experience with them yet (in connection
>with justifying newsgroups) as far as I know.
>
>Please keep in mind that this "rule" about pre-existing traffic isn't a
>rule in the sense that it's been imposed from above by the Great Usenet
>Gods. It's simply a summary of actual experience in creating newsgroups
>over the years, as observed by people who hang out in news.groups
>regularly. We serve as the "collective memory" of Usenet. Individual
>RFD's and proponents come and go, and most of them have no experience
>with or interest in newsgroup creation except for their own particular
>proposal. Some of us are "into" newsgroup politics, for whatever reason,
>and stick around for a long enough time that we see many RFD's go by.
>We've seen what works and what doesn't.
>
>Over the long haul, our experience has been that the "pull" model (a.k.a.
>the "if you newgroup it, they will come" model) of newsgroup creation
>does not usually work. By and large, new newsgroups are successful when
>they have a base of pre-existing interest to draw upon, from people who
>are *already* expressing that interest somewhere on the Net: in related
>newsgroups, mailing lists, or wherever.
>
>One can argue, "that's what the vote is for, isn't it?" Yes, but why go
>through the trouble of running a vote unless you have some genuine
>confidence that it has a reasonable chance of succeeding? Over the last
May someone wants it to fail, so it can't be voted on for another 6 months. Hmmmm, who would be anti-java?
>several months many votes have failed because of simple lack of
>interest. Considering that any proposal will draw at least 20-30 NO
>votes, do you think you have a fighting chance of getting at least
>120-130 YES votes from people who are genuinely interested in using the
>group?
>
>--
>Jon Bell <jtbell_at_presby.edu>
-- These opinions are my own and not necessarily those of Information Quest jgarry@eiq.com http://www.informationquest.com http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/joel_garry "See your DBA?" I AM the @#%*& DBA!Received on Mon Mar 23 1998 - 00:00:00 CST