kat  wrote: 
 >irene... please email me at least a week in advance when the vote will 
 >take place and i will return with other investors to vote "yes"... the 
 >simple reason being that "bonds" are not adequately discussed in detail 
 >in any of the available public  groups... 
  
 I recommend you point those folks to news.announce.newgroups 
 (note: that's "newgroups" not "newsgroups").  It is a moderated 
 low noise group specifically intended for posting RFD, CFVs 
 and announcement regarding the creation of Big-8 newsgroups. 
 Having folks check that weekly should be adequate. 
  
 I also recommend that you try to only direct folks that have 
 expressed interest in reading the proposed group once created. 
 Otherwise, you only succeed in passing a group that dies or 
 suffers the same fate as the other scattered newsgroups in 
 short order.  Also, be sure that these folks are prepared to 
 learn how to use usenet newsgroups (etiquette, etc) if they 
 haven't already.  We have seen proposals die when the prospective 
 readers discovered they were uncomfortable with usenet.  The 
 consequences of these folks voting blindly is again a good 
 possibility of creating a dead group.  The problem with dead 
 groups?  We can't get rid of them (no mechanism for it), and 
 their presence can block later related efforts (the list goes 
 on). 
  
 ru 
  
 -- 
 My standard proposals rant: 
 Quality, usefulness, merit, or non-newsgroups popularity of a topic 
 is more or less irrelevant in creating a new Big-8 newsgroup. 
 Usenet popularity is the primary consideration. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)