[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Tale and the SRH-reorg (Was: Re: Charter changes?)
In article <4secb3$cmn@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
Rajwinder Singh <rajwi@bu.edu> wrote:
>Despite this excessive number of posts approved to SRH, the traffic is way
>below the accepted level which would warrant a reorganization: 200 or more
>posts per day. Even if it was 100 posts per day, *perhaps* the reorg
>proposal would make sense. In the current state of affairs, when the
>traffic is far, far below those numbers, it is _absurd_ to even
>talk about reorganization.
Such traffic requirements do not hold in case of moderated groups; in
case of unmoderated ones, perhaps. Tell me,
1> How many moderated groups do you know which carry 100+ postings
per day?
2> How many moderated groups *with one moderator* do you know which
carry 100+ postings a day?
Unless you can give a significant number of examples for the above,
especially for 2>, I will legitimately claim that the present setup
creates inherent limitations that do not allow the traffic to reach
such levels, and that therefore the argument is flawed.
The argument for the *.info group is quite simple -- there do happen
to be people who are not really interested in Hindu discussions, at
least of the sort commonly found on this newsgroup, but who will
participate in and follow an *.info group, should one exist. Also, I
find it unacceptable that there should be *.info groups for games, tv
shows, and even more obscure subjects, but not one for Hinduism, which
is much more significant. That the present setup has not allowed
traffic to reach an arbitrary level you define is not an argument
against one.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
>rajwinder singh
>rajwi@acs.bu.edu
