Hello,
I'm a news.groups regular. Like most of the regulars here, I usually
don't vote on proposals. However, I've got some comments and questions
for you (the proponent) which you might want to consider incorporating
your responses to in the next draft of your RFD ("2nd RFD:...").
In news.groups Cara Altman wrote:
> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
> unmoderated group comp.databases.etl
>RATIONALE: comp.databases.etl
[snip]
>but
>these messages are scattered. When searching for ETL messages,
>postings were discovered scattered about numerous newsgroups:
This is a bit repetitious (messages being "scattered" is stated
twice in succession). Try changing "scattered about" to "in".
[snip list]
>This is not a complete list.
There is a possible implication that a large list means too
little commonality in discussions to be able to focus into
a single group. That is, so many groups may actually be
evidence against the viability of your proposal. You don't
explain how your proposed group will succeed where one of
the other (possibly more general) groups didn't.
>There are many complex issues surrounding the purchase or
>development of an ETL tool, cost, schedule, and effectiveness are
>probably the most common. This forum will aid those who are
>weighing their options about whether to build or buy. It will give
>users a place to express their opinions on what factors to consider
>when implementing an ETL solution, and what ETL tools best suit
>specific ETL needs. Additionally, the ETL knowledgebase can be
>expanded through the creation of its own forum.
Why can't other forums (e.g. other newsgroups, web forums) do the
job of centralizing discussion?
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)
|