RFD: remove rec.aviation.questions

It's been a while since I've seen a new group solicitation. But I
don't recall EVER seeing an old group removal solicitation.
Sounds like a no-brainer: no traffic speaks for itself.
Good for Jim!

Brian Whatcott Altus OK

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 11:29:29 -0700, Jim Riley
wrote:

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
remove rec.aviation.questions

This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) to remove the
newsgroup rec.aviation.questions.


RATIONALE: remove rec.aviation.questions

The last approved message was in June 1994. The group was created in
April 1994, and had less than 30 articles posted in its 3-month period
of activity.

The removal of rec.aviation.questions would have no effect on the other
moderated groups in the rec.aviation.* hierarchy including
rec.aviation.announce, rec.aviation.answers, or rec.aviation.stories. If
you are interested in reviving any of these groups, please contact the Big
8 Management Board.


HISTORY:

The newsgroup rec.aviation.questions was created in April 1994, and had
11 articles in April, 12 articles in May, and 5 articles in June.


PROCEDU

The full (draft) group removal procedure is documented he

http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.p...licies:rmgroup

Those who wish to comment on this request to remove this newsgroup should
subscribe to news.groups and participate in the relevant threads in that
newsgroup.

To this end, the followup header of this RFD has been set to news.groups.

All discussion of active proposals should be posted to news.groups.

If desired by the readership of closely affected groups, the discussion
may be crossposted to those groups, but care must be taken to ensure that
all discussion appears in news.groups as well.



DISTRIBUTION:

This document has been posted to the following newsgroups:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
rec.aviation.questions
rec.aviation.announce
rec.aviation.misc
rec.aviation.ifr
rec.aviation.piloting
rec.aviation.student


PROPONENT:

Jim Riley


CHANGE HISTORY:

2006-08-30 1st RFD

Brian Whatcott writes:

It's been a while since I've seen a new group solicitation. But I
don't recall EVER seeing an old group removal solicitation.

Over the last few months, we've rebuilt the newsgroup creation
system to be more flexible, easier for proponents to use, and more
open/ less directly adversarial. This new system is documented at
http://www.big-8.org/ . We hope to see *many* more proposals over the
next few months or years. If you have any ideas for new groups to
create, or old ones to remove, please don't hesitate to contact us and put
together a proposal.

- Tim Skirvin )
Chair, Big-8 Management Board
--
http://www.big-8.org/ Big-8 Management Board
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage FISH *

On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 13:19:08 -0500, (Tim
Skirvin) wrote:

Brian Whatcott writes:

It's been a while since I've seen a new group solicitation. But I
don't recall EVER seeing an old group removal solicitation.

Over the last few months, we've rebuilt the newsgroup creation
system to be more flexible, easier for proponents to use, and more
open/ less directly adversarial. This new system is documented at
http://www.big-8.org/ . We hope to see *many* more proposals over the
next few months or years. If you have any ideas for new groups to
create, or old ones to remove, please don't hesitate to contact us and put
together a proposal.

- Tim Skirvin )
Chair, Big-8 Management Board

Brian, tim is full of ****. it STILL takes 4 months to get a group
created, on average, as we have seen over the past 10 months. two
thirds of the board members are never seen or heard from. the rest
are cluebies. its sad. tim is actually the best of the bunch. he
may be a kook, but at least he participates some.

tim has made mistake after mistake in his tenure as chairman. 90% of
the folks around here think tim is a kook, and the other ten percent,
for the most part, wouldnt know good from bad if you gave them the
choice of white belgian chocolate versus an angry female black widow
spider.

--
Dave Hillstrom mhm15x4 zrbj
"Quotes can't be forced. They just come to you, like diarrhea."
-Dave Hillstrom mhm15x4

B A R R Y wrote:
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 17:35:23 GMT, Brian Whatcott
wrote:

It's been a while since I've seen a new group solicitation. But I
don't recall EVER seeing an old group removal solicitation.
Sounds like a no-brainer: no traffic speaks for itself.
Good for Jim!


Does a group with no traffic actually cost anything in resources? G

Nothing worth writing home about. The only harm those groups cause is great
emotional distress in some individuals. My philosophy has been that if
those emotionally torn individuals find satisfaction in their efforts to
rmgroup those groups, there is probably no harm in letting them do it.

In a previous article, said:
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 17:35:23 GMT, Brian Whatcott
wrote:
It's been a while since I've seen a new group solicitation. But I
don't recall EVER seeing an old group removal solicitation.
Sounds like a no-brainer: no traffic speaks for itself.
Good for Jim!


Does a group with no traffic actually cost anything in resources? G

A person new to the rec.aviation heirarchy with a question may attempt to
post to that group. Since the moderator is missing, their post will never
appear, and they may therefore give up on asking aviation questions on
usenet entirely. Removing the group reduces people's confusion about
where to post.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"Think?" I asked. "I don't think. I'm a witness. Someone asks me a
question, and I answer it as honestly as I can. How could I be on anyone's
*side*?" -- David P. Murphy, on his participation in a lawsuit