....
>
> however, scit.extracts cannot be as selective as rsci.
> infact, the ultimate goal is to see that the duplication
> between scit and scit.ex reaches 100% i.e every article
> in scit is found fit to appear in scit.ex
>
> baparao gari point that usenet administrators would have an
> objection to this is valid. i cannot find an answer to that
> except to say, i am sure the dupliaction ratio would be much
> less than 50% mostly.
If I were a news admin, I would have a serious concern about a proposal,
which, if it succeeds in its goals, will result in a 100% duplication.
Depending on the extra pressure which I anticipate on my resources, I
might decide to campaign against the idea (hypothetically speaking).
Given the huge number of news admins on usenet, I can
imagine a scenario in which the proposal will generate vehement objections
on news.groups.
I think the proposal should be crafted so as to avoid such a debate which
would be detrimental to our goals.
If we ignore the news admin concern for a moment, it seems to me that the
reason to have scit.ex is to achieve a more rigorous moderation than
possible with automoderation alone, while not tampering with the existing
scit. Is this correct, Prasad garu? If you agree, then it makes sense to
first agree on the quality and extent of the proposed moderation. In a
separate post you indicated that you looked into the automoderation
software and that you thought that it was powerful enough for our purpose.
Does this mean that the scit.ex discussion is moot as far as you are
concerned?
>
> a related discussion is found in the soc.religion.hindu
> FAQ which can be found at
> http://www-ece.rice.edu/~vijaypai/srh-faq.html
>
> [here is a short extract from that FAQ]
> : I.2 Will this destroy soc.religion.hindu?
> :
> : In short, no. It will replace soc.religion.hindu with three groups:
> : unmoderated group talk.religion.hindu
> : moderated group soc.religion.hindu.moderated (renames soc.religion.hindu)
> : moderated group soc.religion.hindu.info
>
> anyone who favours this 3-group arrangement?
To me personally, it would be satisfactory if the "new" scit were to be
a place all telugu-related matters were posted, and obviously non-telugu-
related matters were excluded. Things like matrimonials may be considered
borderline by some (they have the potential to degenerate into all-sci*
wars on casteism, for example), but I would favor leaving them in the
new scit. So, I am in favor of focussing on crosspost and "troll" elimination
for now.
> infact, we do see that scit has a lot of announcements
> by local associations and a lot of matrimonials too.
The local associations issue can be handled by poster education:
they should properly select the distribution (organization, locality,
state, region, country, etc. etc.) level.
Bapa Rao