newsgroup for cacti?
cereoid at prodigy.net
Tue Nov 6 21:19:19 EST 2001
If all you're really doing is making an already existing newsgroup more
widely available, then go for it. In no way would it be competition or a
threat to Cacti_etc either in content or membership. Cacti_etc already
serves as the official source for information on cactus & succulents for the
various societies and that would not change. Those who use the newsgroup
exclusively will be the ones losing out.
If you are trying to create yet another newsgroup, I still feel it is
completely unnecessary. The Internet is already over flowing with forums and
groups on the topic.
Kay Easton <kay at scarboro.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:st3NvPEKkH67Ewyh at scarboro.demon.co.uk...
> In article <faYF7.450$X71.72706160 at newssvr15.news.prodigy.com>, Cereoid*
> <cereoid at prodigy.net> writes
> >It would thus I suggest I am much more familiar with the topic than Bruno
> >(Psycho Cactus). I still maintain that Cacti_etc already fulfills the
> >of cactophiles and creating another newsgroup would serve no useful
> >As has been said by Bruno (Psycho Cactus) himself, there is already a
> >rec.gardens.cacti anyway.
> What is being proposed is regularising the setting up of that group so
> that more ISPs will take it, not starting a completely new group.
> That doesn't seem to me to be at all unreasonable, and I cannot
> understand why you think it is such a bad idea. It gives people choice,
> and will not have an adverse effect on Cacti-etc.
> I am unlikely to subscribe to an email group, but I would possibly dip
> in and out of a news group.
> Kay Easton
> Edward's earthworm page:
More information about the Plantbio