Thad  wrote: 
 >ru.igarashi@usask.ca wrote: 
  
 >> >Digital rangefinder camera systems are technically not SLR systems, but 
 >> >they are on-topic if they offer lens interchangeability. Inclusion of 
 >> >digital rangefinders with mounts for detachable lenses is provisional; 
 >> >should a separate Big-8 newsgroup for digital rangefinders ever come 
 >> 
 >> Change that to "should a separate Big-8 newsgroup more appropriate for 
 >> digital rangefinders".  This way it can't be argued that folks can 
 >> crosspost rangefinder topics between rpds and rpd because 
 >> rpds requires a separate (and unique) rangefinder group to exist to 
 >> exclude rangefinder discussions. 
  
 >It says that digital rangefinder discussion would become OFF-TOPIC in 
 >RPDSLR if a rangefinder group is created - it does not say they will 
 >become prohibited to discuss. There is a significant difference. 
  
 You totally missed my point.  You specify a group about rangefinders 
 must exist and it can be argued that to mean rpd.rangefinders only. 
 I suggested you broaden that to a group "more appropriate" for 
 rangefinders so that rpd. that includes 
 rangefinders better than rpds can start taking rangefinder discussions. 
  
 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)