Readership Report

Tony Travis ajt at
Mon Feb 15 06:11:23 EST 1993

Dave Kristofferson (kristoff at NET.BIO.NET) wrote:
: [...]
: The bigger question is, "Is this a problem?"  Personally, I doubt it.
: It does create a barrier in as much as someone at a biology department
: must take some action to get started after they get their news set up
: instead of just watching "sci float by 8-)."

I have another question, Dave:

What proportion of us read bionet as the BIOSCI mailing lists?

Isn't this is relevant in comparing arbitron figures from groups that
_don't_ have a mailing list as a counterpart?

*anyone* can take action to subscribe to a mailing list, but only a
system administrator can elect to receive a news group.  This is both
good and bad (of course) because needless duplication of email
subscriptions to BIOSCI are the most obvious consequence.

However, as you know, I feel strongly that the email distribution of
bionet is what makes it readily accessible to your intended audience
(esp. in biology departments!).  The real disadvantage of the BIOSCI
email distribution is the burden it imposes on the recipient and I
AGREE that reading these groups as news is preferable.

In my opinion the problem is more one of widespread ignorance about
good mail/news readers than the method by which articles are
propagated.  I accept that it is less efficient to propagate bionet as
the BIOSCI lists, but I do think it would help many readers to know
that they don't _have_ to get a news feed to read bionet as news.

Dr. A.J.Travis,                       |  JANET: <ajt at>
Rowett Research Institute,            |  other: <ajt at>
Greenburn Road, Bucksburn,            |  phone: +44 (0)224 712751
Aberdeen, AB2 9SB. UK.                |    fax: +44 (0)224 715349

More information about the Bioforum mailing list