Re: [photo-3d] rec.photo.stereo-3d

[Brian Reynolds <reynolds@xxxxxxxxx>]

Sergio Baldissara wrote:
> one of my holostereoitalia@xxxxxxxxxxx mates proposed to build up a
> group about stereoscopy on the Usenet.
>
> I agreed it would be a good additional tool for recruiting newbies
> to 3d (I often read weird questions about 3d techniques in
> photographic NGs) so I started the procedure to create one.
>
> At the moment you will find my RFD (request for discussion) in the
> "news.groups" NG, and you can post a feedback in there. At the end
> of all procedures, a CFV (call for votes) will be issued, so
> everybody can say if he agrees (of doesn't) agree with the creation
> of the new NG.  Sergio
> 

I'd like to comment on the RFD and newsgroup creation in general.  I
do it from the perspective of a systems administrator and a USENET
reader for over 15 years.  I'm commenting on it here because this is a
less contentious place than news.groups.  I'll also point out that I
think a USENET newsgroup would be a nice idea, but I believe that this
RFD will fail.  Here's why.

First, you have to understand that news.groups and the newsgroup
creation process has a rather unfortunate history.  There have been a
lot of fights in the past and that shapes the current situation.
There are people today who believe that there should be no new
newsgroups.  That's why one person replied that you will need an
additional 20 votes, to get past those who automatically vote NO.

Second, you should understand that a RFD does not automatically lead
to a CFV.  If, in the opinion of the moderator of
news.announce.newgroups, the RFD did not lead to a consensus on the
Charter for the new newsgroup there will be no announcement of a CFV.
This leads to another point.

The CFV is a vote in name only.  It is really a poll of users used by
systems administrators to determine if there is enough interest in a
newsgroup for them to bother creating and carrying it locally.  (And
it is a real bother to properly run a USENET site.)  USENET exists as
a cooperative between systems administrators at various sites.  The
CFV (and its results) is not binding on the systems administrators.
Generally the systems administrators abide by the decisions of the
moderator of news.announce.newgroups (who will issue the newgroup
message if the CFV passes).  In the past there have been abuses of the
system (by people trying to force through their favorite newsgroup and
by the SPAMers) that have lead many to no longer automatically follow
newgroup messages.

Third, rec.photo has previously undergone reorganizations that have
left a sour taste with many people.  The recent (a year or so ago)
reorg of rec.photo.markteplace (which was to fix an oversight of the
previous reorg) was particularly contentious, and still hasn't reach
some places.

Fourth, there is a major error in the proposed Charter (partially
quoted below).

> CHARTER: rec.photo.stereo-3d
>
> This newsgroup will ideally be used for free postings in any
> languages from stereo photograpers, holographers, collectioners, and
> simple curious people looking for advice, contacts, clubs or other
> communities or ressources.  It will be a provisional meeting point
> for such users until they find/create their ideal community. It also
> will be a place for people whishing to swap/sell/buy stereo
> equipment or collection items.

The Charter of rec.photo.* specifically forbids buying or selling
equipment in rec.photo.* discussion groups.  Any buying or selling
between private individuals must take place in
rec.photo.marketplace.*, and the Charter also prohibits dealers from
using the rec.photo.marketplace.* newsgroups.  There is a history
behind this and it is not going to be changed.  If the last sentence
of the paragraph quoted above isn't removed from the proposed Charter
not only will those who are generally against new newsgroups be
against this but so will the rec.photo.* regulars (at least those who
pay attention to newsgroup creation and are likely to vote).

The couple of replies to the RFD I've seen are pretty reasonable and I
would also suggest that you also incorporate those suggestions into
the revised Charter.

Good luck and don't let this get you down.

-- 
Brian Reynolds                  | "Dee Dee!  Don't touch that button!"
reynolds@xxxxxxxxx              | "Oooh!"
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds  |    -- Dexter and Dee Dee
NAR# 54438                      |       "Dexter's Laboratory"