Bionet hierarchy

Edward J. Huff huff at mcclb0.med.nyu.edu
Mon Apr 20 14:10:08 EST 1992


In article <01GISX58IQ8G0007CC at WFEB2.BITNET>, MACRIDES at WFEB2.BITNET (Foteos Macrides) writes:
> 
> In article <CMM.0.90.2.702871306.kristoff at genbank.bio.net> Dave Kristofferson
> <kristoff at genbank.bio.net> wrote:
> >I used bionet.biology.used-equipment to make it clear that this was
> >for biologists.  People browsing through USENET do not always put two
> >and two together and realize that bionet refers to biology.  Witness
> >the occasional postings of jobs on bionet.jobs which are way off in
> >left field.  [...]
> 
>         I agree with with sentiment.  I wonder if it would be appropriate, now
> or in the not-too-distant future, to start thinking about reorganizing the
> bionet hierarchy into one that is more intuitively obvious w.r.t. its
> organization (or is that too much trouble to be worth the effort)? 

Here is a suggestion which does not take very much effort and does not
reorganize the newsgroups.  I noticed that there are apparently NO
periodic information postings in bionet newsgroups, at least, none
listed on the list maintained at pitmanager and regularly posted to
news.answers, etc.  There should be a periodic posting to
say bionet.general which contains (at least) the charters of all
of the bionet newsgroups.  It ought to also mention the existence of
news.answers, news.announce.newusers, etc.

Maybe someone out there would volunteer to do this?  Not necessarily 
Dave Kristofferson.  There is a mailing list for maintainers of
such postings, see news.answers for more information.



More information about the Bioforum mailing list