FInal? Thoughts on alt.book.pynchon

[tribe at primenet.com]

On Mon, 18 Nov 1996, Andrew Dinn wrote:

> Well, I don't think it is so simple as all that. How exactly do you
> expect traffic to split between the two forums? Do you not think that
> there will be postings in both which you will want to see? Do you not
> also think that the same old subjects will be reiterated in both
> forums by those who don't read both lists? It's bad enough watching
> newer list members rehash stuff which was done to death 1 2 or 3 years
> ago without paying any attention to what is in the archives.
> Duplicating that reduplication sounds like a waste of time to me.

I apologize for butting in, but I think that the e-list will always have
the better discussion.  Yeah, there is bound to be some redundancy between
the two forums, but maybe we are over-estimating our guy's attraction to
the rest of the world.  I mean WE are diehards, I just don't think that
other than the evil kiting schemes and the like, that we are going to get
that much traffic in the first place on usenet.

> The list is not moderated and it is far from orderly most of the time.
> If not enough people know about it then rather than splitting posts
> between two different forums wouldn't it be better to post regularly
> to existing news groups such as rec.arts.books to advertise the list?
> I actually do this every few months when someone mentions Pynchon. I
> was more than happy to find the list and I am more than happy for
> others to join it.

Actually, until Siegel's unwelcome excursion into the confines of this
list, I never found this list to be "far from orderly"...at least in the
personal, flame war sense.

Rec.arts. books is perhaps not a good example since it is so broad that it
attracts everything from porn chat lines to advertisements.  Again, we are
talking about a really limited topic here.

> None of my notes were flames either. But the existence of a news group
> is likely to affect the list because it will arbitrarily split
> discussion into two different places. I think it would be easier and
> better all round if everything was in one place. You may think
> different. Ok, let's vote on the matter. But please allow me to point
> out what I see as problems with your suggestion without labelling me
> emotional or narrow-minded.

I don't see any of the regulars on this list sitching allegainces to
usenet.  However, this list would become a real pain if folks start to
cross-post, with the good intentions of bringing something relevant from
usenet, to this list...and several well-intentioned souls post the same
article several times.  Maybe appoint someone to post what is relevnat
from there to here?

> I might just force myself to do that. Although I would prefer it if
> someone else would monitor the group and forward anything of value.
> But then again that sure is going to piss off those people who read
> both.

Ooops, and speaking of redundancy.:)  Sorry.

Tribe