IMPORTANT! - DISCUSSION ON THE FUTURE OF BIONEWS/bionet.general

Rob Harper harper at nic.funet.fi
Sun Dec 15 05:43:23 EST 1991


In <CMM.0.90.2.692658604.kristoff at genbank.bio.net> kristoff at GENBANK.BIO.NET (Dave Kristofferson) writes:

*>I will briefly describe these proposals under the headings of Plans A,
*>B, and C below and will then give my partisan reasons for preferring
*>Plan A.  Fote will post his reasons for plan B, and then we will open
*>this up for discussion in the event that anyone else has an even
*>better solution.

A cartoon in a Finnish newspaper shows Gorbachov riding a sleigh named
"Russia" The troika of horses that yank him out of his seat , are the
three new states that have declared themselves independant.

The splitting of big things into smaller entities seems to be in the air,
everybody is doing it. The three plans put before us represent the
Spirit of the times... and the nature of BIONET/BIOSCI will be radically
changed if these new plans are implimented. I surprize myself by daring
to suggest that rather than be carried along with the mood of the times,
we should stick with the model we have. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*>Plan A
*>The current BIONEWS/bionet.general newsgroups will be split into two
*>forums:
This will involve creation of one new newsgroup and 8 new mailing lists :-(
*>----------------------------------------------------------------------
*>Plan B
*>Four newsgroups have been proposed as follows:
	This will involve four new newsgroups and 24 new mailing lists :-(
*>----------------------------------------------------------------------
*>Plan C
*>Change nothing, i.e., BIONEWS/bionet.general 
             **** Only change the description for BIONEWS. ****
*>BIONEWS                      General announcements of widespread
*>                                interest to biologists
	This seems like a simple and elegant solution to me.
	No new newsgroups and no new mailing lists:-)
*>----------------------------------------------------------------------

One would imagine that if you could precisely define the name of a newsgroup
or lay down rules and regulation then everyone would know exactly where
to post, and how to do it. It does not work that way.

People post by example. If you give them good examples then they will follow
them if you give them bad examples then they follow those. People followup
on postings because they either like or dislike them, and no neat regulation
or rule will persuded them to do otherwise. So the restructuring of the 
newsgroups will mean a considerable amount of work, and in the end most
likely it will all be for nothing, cos people will post what they want to 
post anyway.

When it comes to the question of voting why not be really radical and don't
vote at all. Then none of the plans go through and the status quo is preserved.
Or if you must exercise your democratic rights then go for PLAN C

Rob "sometimes you say more by saying nothing" Harper

-- 
   Rob Harper                     /   E-mail:          harper at convex.csc.fi    
   Finnish State Computer Centre  /   Molbio/software: harper at nic.funet.fi
   P.O. Box 40, SF-02101 Espoo    /   Telephone:       +358 0 457 2076
   Finland                        /   Fax:             +358 0 457 2302



More information about the Bioforum mailing list