From Newsgroup: news.groups.proposals

Hi all,

Last activity in 2009
If there is need for discussion, more general groups can be used.

Generally, I am in favour of removing dead newsgroups from the canonical
list of the newsgroups carried by the Big-8.
We could for instance say that when the last activity in charter dates
back to more than 10 years, the newsgroup is a candidate for a removal.
A mass-deletion like the recent one for moderated newsgroups without moderators would be more efficient than hundreds of separate RFDs
lasting several years.

In case the need arises again for such newsgroups in the future, their re-creation could naturally be considered.


Just sharing my thoughts. I totally know that some other people have a different view about that.
--
Julien |eLIE

-2-aFarpaitement-a!-a-+ (Ob|-lix)

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.groups.proposals

In Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611261351080.30481@qbbshf.puvarg.pbz>
on 11/26/06 2:17 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

I have the example of the Haskell group and 10s of thousands of
useless alt groups on my side. Poorly used or unused groups
are harmful to discussion on Usenet, contrary to the rationale
that certain proponents give (that if the narrow topic isn't
in the group name, it cannot be discussed on Usenet)
because users may be discouraged from looking for
discussion elsewhere.

"Poorly used or unused groups are harmful to discussion
on Usenet"

What led you to change your opinion since 19 years?

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.groups.proposals

D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote:

"Poorly used or unused groups are harmful to discussion
on Usenet"

What led you to change your opinion since 19 years?

In general I disagree. But I sure wish we could finally get rid of alt.hairy-douchebag.meredith-tanner after all these years. And I
think Meredith will probably agree.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.groups.proposals

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote at 18:32 this Saturday (GMT):

D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote:

"Poorly used or unused groups are harmful to discussion
on Usenet"

What led you to change your opinion since 19 years?

In general I disagree. But I sure wish we could finally get rid of alt.hairy-douchebag.meredith-tanner after all these years. And I
think Meredith will probably agree.
--scott

I thought alt.* newsgroups weren't controlled by the Big 8 guys.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.groups.proposals

On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 12:05:35 -0500, candycanearter07 wrote:

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote at 18:32 this Saturday (GMT):

D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote:

"Poorly used or unused groups are harmful to discussion on Usenet"

What led you to change your opinion since 19 years?

In general I disagree. But I sure wish we could finally get rid of
alt.hairy-douchebag.meredith-tanner after all these years. And I think
Meredith will probably agree.
--scott

I thought alt.* newsgroups weren't controlled by the Big 8 guys.

They're not, that's another reason why marcos attempts is absolutely pointless.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.groups.proposals

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote: >Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote at 18:32 this Saturday (GMT):

D Finnigan <dog_cow@macgui.com> wrote:

"Poorly used or unused groups are harmful to discussion
on Usenet"

What led you to change your opinion since 19 years?

In general I disagree. But I sure wish we could finally get rid of
alt.hairy-douchebag.meredith-tanner after all these years. And I
think Meredith will probably agree.

I thought alt.* newsgroups weren't controlled by the Big 8 guys.

They are not, which is why the aforementioned newgroup is still sticking around.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2