🚀 go-pugleaf

chadwick@leo.unm.edu (john craven chadwick) writes:

>>Many subscribers on [MUSEUM-L] have expressed an interest in 
>>having access to the group via a newsgroup. ...

Jonathan Grobe <grobe@ins.infonet.net> wrote:

>With nearly 1000 subscribers you would have no difficulty at all passing
>a Big 7 group proposal (to which you could gate this mailing list)....

True, if at least 100 of them vote, and enough vote YES rather than
NO.  Unlike bit.*, the "big 7" have a vote requirement.

"Big 7" newsgroups get far better propagation on average than bit.*
ones do (about twice as many sites carry them).  This means more
subscribers can switch to reading via Usenet.  It also means more
new readers, and thus possibly more traffic.  Moderating the 
newsgroup is a good way to control the negative aspects of wider
availability.  It requires some work, but usually not as much work
as handling bounced mail from subscribers.  This assumes that the
moderation is mostly automated.

I'd recommend a more useful name than bit.listserv.museum-l (the
conventional form);  bit.curation.museum perhaps, to make a 
hierarchy where other related newsgroups could be added later.

If the newsgroup were put in the "big 7", where should it go?

-- 
	Una Smith			smith-una@yale.edu

Department of Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT  06520-8104  USA