Re: Does anyone think this group needs splitting into subgroups?

May I summarise the discussions so far...

There appear to be two groups of people, those who wish to read about all related topics and those who wish to read only some. While those who wish to read only some topics are keen on the split, those who wish to read sevaral or all topics are concerned about cross-posting and all the related additional work that will result.

Thinking about educating readers not to cross post or to include key words on the subject etc will not work. People just don't bother.

There was a suggestion that follow-ups are e-mailed to the original poster who compiles and posts a summary. If he does not, the thread dies. This requires an autobot. If someone volunteers to organise this, it can be considered as a viable alternative.

There were some suggestions for a human moderated group. No one has volunteered to moderate. Moderation policies have not been defined yet. If anyone comes forward to do all that, this too can be considered.

One more suggestion is that a catch-all group remain into which everything from every sub-group gets cross-posted. This way, those who want to read everything only have to subscribe to one group.

This leaves the sub-groups proposed...

JOBS, SQL and FORMS
forms,reports,dba,sql
Tools, database & jobs.
oracle.rdbms,oracle.tools
forms,reports, dba, sql, jobs

If there has been enough pre-discussion, I can volunteer to draft a formal RFD.

Kim Hughes (Kim_Hughes_at_notes.drthou.com) has offered his time. I hope he can volunteer to be the Independant Vote Taker when the CFV is announced.

If Kim or someone else volunteers to be the Vote Taker and there is clear indication that there is little more to discuss and no one objects to my proposing a RFD, I shall go ahead.

SV Singam
Hitachi Semiconductor
Malaysia Received on Tue Mar 05 1996 - 00:00:00 CET