Nan:2007-09-22-obvious-bulk-lcc
From Usenet Big-8 Management Board
From: The Big-8 Management Board <board@big-8.org>
Subject: 2nd RFD: bulk creation of "obvious" groups (LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS)
Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups, news.groups.proposals
Followup-To: news.groups.proposals
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:13:36 -0500
Organization: http://www.big-8.org/
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
bulk creation of "obvious" groups
This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the bulk creation of several
Usenet newsgroups, as listed below.
PROCEDURE:
The B8MB plans to begin voting on this proposal after five days. Please
offer any final discussion or comments before the end of this waiting
period. Voting may take up to one week (7 days); a result will be posted
following the end of the voting period.
All discussion of this proposal should be posted to news.groups.proposals.
NEWSGROUPS:
comp.phone.cellular Cellular telephones
comp.phone.cellular.motorola Motorola Cell Phones
comp.phone.cellular.nokia Nokia Cell Phones
comp.phone.cellular.iphone Apple's iPhone
comp.phone.voice-over-ip.asterisk Open-source VOIP package
comp.internet.services.blog.advocacy Which blog is best?
comp.internet.services.blog.livejournal LJ blogging service and software
comp.internet.services.blog.wordpress Blogging service and software
comp.internet.services.google Search, Gmail, Groups, Maps, Picasa, etc
comp.internet.services.social.facebook Student social networking
comp.internet.services.social.myspace Teenage social networking
comp.internet.services.video.youtube Internet video for the masses
comp.internet.services.wiki Wikis, such as Wikipedia
comp.sys.antique Unsupported computer platforms
rec.autos.sport.autocross Cone course racing, solo, gymkhana
rec.arts.tv.comedy Television comedies
rec.arts.tv.comedy.sitcom Television situational comedies
rec.arts.tv.comedy.the-office The Office, both US and UK Version
rec.arts.tv.drama.damages Lawyer drama on FX with Glenn Close
rec.arts.tv.drama.pushing-daisies Resurrection to solve murders
rec.arts.tv.news.colbert-report The Colbert Nation
rec.arts.tv.news.oreilly-factor Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor
rec.media.players.portable Portable media players
rec.media.players.portable.ipod Apple's iPod media players
rec.media.digital.streaming Streaming video and audio
rec.games.computer.civilization Sid Meier's world-building series
rec.games.online.mmorpg Massive Multi-Player Online Role-Playing Games
rec.games.online.mmorpg.world-of-warcraft World of Warcraft
rec.games.video.microsoft.xbox360 Microsoft XBox360 console
rec.games.video.sony.playstation3 Sony PS3 comsole
rec.games.video.nintendo.wii Nintendo Wii gaming console
rec.games.video.nintendo.ds Nintendo DS portable system
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION:
The response to this proposed experiment has been fairly negative. There
have been three main complaints:
1. Will these groups be propagated adequately without a specific
proponent?
This is in large part what this experiment is trying to uncover. If
adequate propagation can't be built without significant effort beyond
the efforts of a fairly casual proponent, then it may well be
effectively impossible to achieve adequate propagation at all. That
would be useful knowledge.
Also, it may well be that "adequate" propagation may be lower than
current theories hold; what really matters is that the group is well-
used. If only a small number of servers carry the group, but it
is still well-used, then does it matter if the other servers do not
carry it?
2. Can't this be done in a different hierarchy?
Discussion is currently proceeding on a '9th.*' hierarchy for this
purpose. This proponent currently has no comment on this idea, but
does not wish to tie the two proposals together.
3. Isn't this a major departure from existing policies, and shouldn't
there therefore be more discussion?
This is an experiment; if this turns out to be worth pursuing again
in the future, it will be necessary to codify policies to handle it.
4. What about the groups that don't work?
The proponent has pledged to both push major news servers to carry the
groups, and to later help remove those groups that fail.
RATIONALE: bulk creation of "obvious" groups
The last few weeks/months have seen very little discussion of proposals of
any kind. Rather than worry about the "why" of this, I would like to
experiment with a new, "bulk" creation of newsgroups that are clearly
"obvious", but do not have formal proponents or specific charters, and are
uniformly unmoderated. The above-listed groups were taken from several
discussions of this topic, and are not exhaustive (nor, necessarily,
"obvious"); further suggestions are encouraged.
This is not yet a formal process! Please participate in the discussion
in news.groups.proposals both to discuss the groups listed above, and the
policy decisions that stem from even discussing this kind of bulk creation.
Also, updates to the charters/newsgroup descriptions can be offered until
the end of the LCC process.
CHARTER:
(The following is a template charter, which will be set for all groups.)
This newsgroup was created as part of a trial "bulk creation" newsgroup
creation process, in which "obvious" newsgroups are created without specific
proponents or charters. Users of this group are urged to formulate a more
specific charter and/or newsgroup description for this group, and to propose
them in news.groups.proposals.
If this group is not used within the next 18 months, it will be removed.
For more information, please refer to the FAQs posted in
news.announce.newgroups.
Advertising, spam, and excessive crossposting are prohibited. Messages must
be plain text only (no HTML, pictures or other binaries) with the exception
of X-Face headers or PGP-type signatures. Posts should be on-topic for the
name of the group, subject to future interpretation by the overall group
culture.
DISTRIBUTION:
This document has been posted to the following newsgroups:
news.announce.newgroups (moderated)
news.groups.proposals (moderated)
PROPONENT:
Tim Skirvin <skirv@big-8.org>
CHANGE HISTORY:
2007-09-14 1st RFD
2007-09-24 2nd RFD/LCC
