X-Message-Number: 826
Date: 14 May 92 01:56:52 EDT
From: Bob Smart <>
Subject: CRYONET: sci.* proposal

One of the more useful products of the recent activity on sci.med was the
proposal that the new cryonics group be called sci.cryonics, as opposed to
sci.med.cryonics.  That sounded pretty reasonable to me.
 
That might pacify the rabid cryonics-ain't-medicine crowd, while still
leaving us as part of the sci.* hierarchy (which is apparently carried at
more sites than is the alt.* hierarchy).  I don't see any real advantage to
forcing the issue by insisting on a sci.med.cryonics...and it might actually
be better to start our own subtree anyway.  Some of the issues that are
likely to come up in a cryonics newsgroup are not directly medical; we could
start out with sci.cryonics, then if sufficient volume develops to warrant
more specific grouping, we could have a sci.cryonics.med,
sci.cryonics.legal, sci.cryonics.ethics-and-philosophy, ... .  Meanwhile,
the more general sci.cryonics group would be an appropriate place for a
wider range of topics, and could perhaps be complementary with
sci.nanotechnology.
 
Comments, gentlebeings?

[ Allowing for convenient expansion to sub-newsgroups is an interesting
  idea.  Meanwhile, the latest sci.med cryonics debate has generated well
  over 165K bytes of commentary so far.  The message 0011 has the entire
  set and the daily incrementals are in files 0011.1 (May 12), 0011.2
  (May 13), etc., all accessible via the usual CRYOMSG Subject line
  mechanism.  These files currently are formatted to unbundle into their
  separate files (after you remove the email headers) when you type a
  command of the form "sh filename".  Of course, for those of you on
  non-UNIX machines, this unbundling capability is not much help.
  (You can still read the files without unbundling them; it's just
  harder to see where one message ends and another begins if you do not.)
  I may eventually reformat these to be more like the digest files. - KQB ]

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=826