|
Another fine message from the rec.arts.movies.erotica reading room...
[Prev][Next][Subject][Thread] Re: RFD: rec.arts.movies.erotica moderated
Evan Leibovitch ([email protected]) wrote: : In article <[email protected]>, Orc <[email protected]> wrote: : >In article <[email protected]>, : > Evan Leibovitch <[email protected]> wrote: : >>Also: It is bad Usenet practise to have a name that is both a newsgroup : >>and a base for a hierarchy -- this is indeed a royal pain for : >>administrators. You cannot have *both* rec.arts.erotica and : >>rec.arts.erotica.movies; : >Don't be silly; of _course_ you can have both rec.arts.erotica : >and rec.arts.erotica.movies. : Sigh. Technically you can, prectically you can't. See below. : >Some people like .misc'ing the main : >group when subgroups are formed, and some people don't, but the : >transport software doesn't give a fuck whether a group has subgroups : >or not. And the royal pain for _this_ administrator is renaming : >groups whenever someone inplements one of these 'required' renamings : >to satisfy the clique that must have .misc on every name. : Well, there it is. This 'clique' happens to include the moderators of : news.announce.newgroups, without whose approval RFDs and CFVs don't get : anywhere. I ran into this problem, very specifically, on a proposal I : made about a year ago; it wasn't accepted as an RFD until I misc'd the : existing group when turning a group name into a hierarchy. A proposal : to create rec.arts.erotica.movies without changing the base group would : *never* have made it as far as RFD stage... Make sure the proponents advise a NO vote on the misc group in regular discussion on the base group. : Wanna take on tale and company? Go ahead. To me, the principles involved : in fighting them on this issue just ain't worth it. To some of us they are.Vote against every misc renaming in sight!! References:
|