NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/native/1767

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-21 | 3.1 KB

Xref: sparky alt.native:1767 news.groups:25959 soc.culture.misc:532
Newsgroups: alt.native,news.groups,soc.culture.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!mintaka.lcs.mit.edu!spdcc!gnosys!gst
From: [e-mail] (Gary S. Trujillo)
Subject: Re: Comments on the 2nd RFD: soc.culture.native
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: soc.culture.native
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:22:29 GMT
Lines: 53

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
    (Mike Wilson) writes:

> [e-mail] (Karleen S. Davis) writes:

>> Add a clause to the charter stating that soc.culture.native is for all
>> native peoples as described UNLESS there is another more specific
>> newsgroup for a certain people...

> Thank you once again for the voice of reason.  I think this is
> an excellent way to deal with Brian's important question of
> redundancy.

The following article, forwarded from Patrick Crowe speaks to this issue:

| From: [e-mail]
| Date: 21 Jan 1993 10:45:15 -0500 (EST)
| Subject: Re: Comments on the 2nd RFD: soc.culture.native
| Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
| Organization: University at Buffalo
|
| On the discussion of pulling traffic from other newsgroups, I'd have to say
| it's a nonissue.  I read a fair (~5) number of these groups regularly, and
| there's a common practice of cross-posting when the thread is of interest to
| two or more groups.  I often see items cross-posted to sci.anthropology,
| sci.archaeology, and sco.culture.* for what ever area is being discussed.
| That's my comment.
|
| -Pat Crowe

I agree, and feel that there should be nothing in the charter which in-
dicates that discussion or exchange of information about the indigenous
peoples of any part of the world should be excluded from soc.culture.native
based on the fact of there being a newsgroup already established to talk
about more general topics relating to that geographical region.  There
would be much, for example, in soc.culture.asia which would most decidedly
*not* be appropriate for soc.culture.native (most of the discussion that
takes place in that newsgroup, in fact), but some articles could quite
legitimately be cross-posted.  For example, I have recently cross-posted
an article on the Sami people between alt.native and soc.culture.nordic,
and would feel that such an article would also be proper to cross-post
between soc.culture.native and soc.culture.nordic.

So if there is any text which talks about existing "soc.culture.*" news-
groups, I feel it should be very carefully worded so as not to give an
impression that there is an attempt being made to exclude articles per-
taining to the parts of the world they cover based merely on the fact
of their existence.

Gary
--
    Gary S. Trujillo                            [e-mail]
Somerville, Massachusetts              {wjh12,bu.edu,spdcc,ima,cdp}!gnosys!gst