Is bionet.virology dead ?
nna at leicester.ac.uk
Fri Oct 3 12:27:12 EST 1997
In article <6133ml$hqp at net.bio.net>, "Dr. Joe S. Mymryk"
<jmymryk at julian.uwo.ca> wrote:
>I have to agree that the amount of activity on bionet.virology is
>What gives? Is it a general lack of interest in virology (hope not!),
>or a lack of
>time on the part of individuals doing virology (ie trying to keep some
>funding in the lab)?
>Regardless of the level of activity, I intend to keep looking for
The comparison to make is with similar newsgroups such as
bionet.microbiology they have not experienced a similar drop-off in
traffic. Don't tell me funding is any harder to get there :-(
>I can't see that moderation is responsible for any drop in activity.
Well, we haven't done a controlled experiment, but the coincidence is
>The stuff getting cut is junk that wastes everyone's time.
>I have observed a fair increase in the time it takes to make a posting
Several responses of mine to general requests for information have been
returned by the moderator (sorry, I don't remember which one). This group
has just lost it's vitality.
>Whats wrong with using bionet.virology to nuture interest in virology in
>high school students anyways? I know it takes time.
I agree completely.
Dr Alan J. Cann PhD, Department of Microbiology & Immunology,
University of Leicester, UK.
More information about the Virology