bionet.bionette or bionet.women ?

[Michiaki Masuda]

In article <1992Sep8.095717.1637 at gnv.ifas.ufl.edu> afc at gnv.ifas.ufl.edu writes:
>In article <3832 at fcs280s.ncifcrf.gov>, masuda at fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov (Michiaki Masuda) writes:
>> In article <zxmkr08.715537023 at mailserv> zxmkr08 at mailserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de (Cornelius Krasel) writes:
>>>
>>>Well, when I read the name "Bionette" the first time, I thought of something
>>>connected with Netiquette... I guess I would have had a look though (just
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>because of curiosity) but I NEVER would have guessed the purpose of this
>>>newsgroup from its name.

>I agree totally.

   No, you don't.

>I would have put it in my kill file immediately.

   This is what makes you different from Mr. Krasel. 

>Names should mean something.

   I agree.

>Flame on:

   Please, note the crossposting and look at the Followup-To.

>Why not just use random names for all newsgroups?

   Because there are groups not intended for "curious" scientists 8-).
If you are talking about BIOSCI, the answer is, "DK may not be happy to
see that happen." 8-)

  Serious mode on: We have rules in naming in the USENET. <Serious mode off>

>  We could name this
>one alpha.centuri- I'm sure that no one would guess that it had something
>to do with biology.  

  No, no. You can't. We are in the bionet now.

>The purpose of newsgroup names is not to be poetic, cute, or entertaining
>(though these are not necessarily bad); it is to convey information about
>the newsgroup topic.

  The purpose is probably both.
  
>  "Bionette" is a *bad* name because it does not convey
>that information, although it is cute and entertaining.

 This is the very point that I cannot agree to, and probably we have 
receptors of different kinds. Analytically saying, I could guess that
bionet.bionette with the suffix "-ette" might be related to something
feminine not to mention that it is a group for biology. 

>Flame off.

  Oh, you don't have to...

>I have subscribed to several newsgroups with similarly misleading names.
>They tend to have high noise/signal because people that would be interested
>never subscribed, and people that are not interested post extraneous
>messages.  This is a good prescription for a dead group.

  As I understand it, you can propose renaming whenever you think the name does
more harm than good. If the group is finally opened under the *bad* name 
"bionet.bionette" after a long winding road, I'll be looking forward to seeing 
your proposition.
Or would you not subscribe being misled by the name? 8-)

  Anyway, let's wait for the result of the vote.

Michiaki Masuda