🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BxIM4v.26L@well.sf.ca.us> sarfatti@well.sf.ca.us (Jack Sarfatti) writes:
>I suggest that sci.physics be split into three sub-conferences:

First of all, they're newsgroups, not conferences, no
matter what your vendor-copyrighted software wants to
believe;

second, except for those times we disagree on issues of
no import, the volume isn't large enough to mandate a
split;

third, if your suggested groups were any more silly they'd
be in the new Disney movie or an Erich von Danneken book.

>I volunteer to edit 2.

BWAAAAAAAA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAAAAAAAAAA.

>I notice lots of multiple postings between sci. math and sci.physics - yet
>when I put some optics related stuff in sci.optics I was immediately jumped
>upon for wasting bit space with multiple listings - what gives?
>I was told that the objection had nothing to do with
>content or value of the posting.

What gives is that they're even more clueless than you are.
Crosspostings don't take up significantly more space than
unitary postings, except on pathological news-storage systems,
wherein the implementor has brought his inefficiencies wholly
upon himself.

>PS the review of Gleick's book etc. would be in 3 - I
>volunteer to edit 3 as well.

Create them as alt.* groups and see how they run before you
try to alter the fabric of the net.universe.

				--Blair
				  "IMHO"