🚀 go-pugleaf

[Note: the original Newsgroups: line included "bionet.followup" which, as
far as I know, is not a valid group; I've changed it to bionet.general]

In article <1951@cps3xx.UUCP> cook@frith.UUCP (Greg Cook) writes:
> I posted an article in sci.misc and news.groups about starting a new group
> for chemistry.  I have only seen one reply to that article.

	I would assume, therefore, that nobody is interested.

> I envision four new news.groups for this subject [...] Chem.org, Chem.inorg,
> Chem.phys, Chem.analyt.

	Egad, he can only find one person who is interested in chemistry at
all, and he wants to form 4 new groups all at once!  My suggestion is to just
use the existing sci.misc group for now.  Bionet is "officially" for talk
about biology, but I don't think people would be too worked up if you posted
your chemisty discussions to bionet.general; biologists have been known, on
occassion, to talk about chemistry.

	Maybe the thing to do is to form a mailing list.  If you are trying to
find people who are interested in being on the list, I don't think it would be
a breach of net ettiquette to post a single "mailing list forming, sign up
now" type article to many newsgroups.
-- 
Roy Smith, System Administrator
Public Health Research Institute
{allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri!roy@uunet.uu.net
"The connector is the network"