Re: How to avoid dying from AAT overload

Andreas L. Opdahl (
8 Nov 1995 15:15:08 GMT

>In article <>, "C:DEMONSPOOLMAIL" <> writes:
>>I've got an Idea, with a capital I. Why doesn't everyone who's sick of
>>AAT start at least 1 thread which has nothing to do with AAT. That
>>way, we might be able to have some decent discussions.
>Actually, there have been several threads started (usually at a ratio of
>about 1:20 -- one unrelated thread to every 20 wet-apes). I try to
>reply to every one I have even a slight knowledge about, just to keep them
>going, but there is not much help forthcoming there. You're welcome to
>try again, if you like.

The long-term strategy would be to prepare a request for discussion
for the new newsgroup "sci.anthropology.paleo.aquatic". In this way,

* those following s.a.p primarily because of interest in AAT
could follow only s.a.p.a ;
* those not interested in AAT could follow only the pruned
s.a.p ;
* those satisfied with s.a.p as it is today could follow
both groups, and
* those who think there is a little too much AAT-talk in
s.a.p today could follow the pruned s.a.p, and regularly
browse s.a.p.a for new developments.

It is quite common on Usenet for mature newsgroups to split in this
manner when the number of daily postings reaches a threshold of 40-50,
and sci.anthropology.paleo is reaching that limit rapidly. There is
nothing dramatic about preparing the creation of a new group, and it
should certainly not be regarded as a disapproval of those concerned
with AAT.

As for naming, "sci.anthropology.paleo.aquatic.ape" is improper
because it places the new group *two* levels down in the newsgroup
hierarchy rather than one, "sci.anthropology.paleo.aquatic-ape"
or "...aquatic-ape-theory" is discarded due to the hyphen(s), while
"sci.anthropology.paleo.aat" is deemed inferior as it is an acronym
(although it is probably the best among the alternatives mentioned).

The appropriate procedure for creating a new newsgroup can be found
in "news.announce.newusers". Any takers?