Is bionet.virology dead ?

A.J.Cann 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
>depressingly low.
>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
>postings.  

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
pretty big.

>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
>though.

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.

>SNIP

>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 mailing list