Re: RFD: rec.games.pbem.*

From: ru.igarashi@usask.ca

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 06:22:50 +0000

In news.groups Steven Thorderson <steven@thorderson.com> wrote:
>                     REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
>                   unmoderated group rec.games.pbem
>                unmoderated group rec.games.pbem.clans

>Newsgroup lines:
>rec.games.pbem		Discussion group for PBeM-RPG players.
>rec.games.pbem.clans	Discussion group for PBeM-RPG clans.

>This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
>world-wide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup rec.games.pbem.clans and
>rec.games.pbem.  This is not a Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote
>at this time.  Procedural details are below.

[snip]

>Proponent: Steven Thorderson <steven@thorderson.com>
>Proponent: Robert Hawk <admiral_sealofdoom@yahoo.com>

Are these proponents aware that discussion on technical problems
with this proposal are taking place in news.groups?  They should
be addressing those concerns there.  As far as I can tell, some
of these problems are probably show stoppers, so these proponents
should really deal with them.  It's also bad form for proponents
to not make an appearance in news.groups if there is discussion
of their proposal (news.groups regulars typically are looking for
answers from proponents).

ru (a news.groups regular)

--
My standard proposals rant:
Quality, usefulness, merit, or non-newsgroups popularity of a topic
is more or less irrelevant in creating a new Big-8 newsgroup.
Usenet popularity is the primary consideration.

References

RFD: rec.games.pbem.*
Steven Thorderson <steven@thorderson.com>
Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:58:19 +0000