"Tim Skirvin"  wrote 
  
 > Thad  writes: 
 > 
 >>                     REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) 
 >>           unmoderated group rec.photo.digital.slr-systems 
 >>               unmoderated group rec.photo.digital.zlr 
 >>           unmoderated group rec.photo.digital.point+shoot 
 >>           unmoderated group rec.photo.digital.rangefinder 
 > 
 > Ick. 
  
 Yep, *ew* 
  
 > If this is really what somebody out there wants, this should be 
 > rec.photo.digital.slr.*.  If this is just a compromise situation, it at 
 > least shouldn't compromise the whole idea of having such a hierarchy of 
 > groups later on.  RPD.slr, RPD.zlr, and RPD.point+shoot would at least 
 > be a reasonable hierarchy... 
  
 > .slr-systems means...what?  It would confuse me, and I have an 
 > idea what you're talking about. 
  
 I agree, it should have remained rec.photo.digital.slr and encompassed all 
 SLR type cameras, period.  But no, IMHO, they bowed to the exclusionary 
 faction. SLR sorts the distinction fine enough to put the right people in 
 the right groups.  Too possibly, a group for compact camera enthusiasts. 
  
 Then rewrite the 2 affected group's charters, call it a re-org,  and 
 *voila!* 
  
 that's my vote 
  
 > Baah.  Go back to RFD #3, possibly adding .point+shoot. 
  
 It certainly had more going for it 
  
 If more is needed, *we* will *build* them 
  
 Steve Young 
  
 -- 
 One thing you can guarantee, though: if you don't try, you'll never 
 have to find out it might have succeeded, and you can be very smug 
 about your species' extinction as it is happening: "I _told_ them 
 there was no way to bring peace to this planet!" 
 - xanthian 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)