Phoenix discussions

We need somewhere appropriate to for all this! Has anyone spoken to Henry
Spencer yet? We can't keep posting to ss.shuttle, ss.policy and
ss.history - it's too disjointed for one and completely off-topic as well.

What about setting up an alt. group (or series of groups)? Can additional
groups be added to the sci.space hierachy?

On May 26, 12:15 pm, "Alan Erskine" wrote:
We need somewhere appropriate to for all this! Has anyone spoken to Henry
Spencer yet? We can't keep posting to ss.shuttle, ss.policy and
ss.history - it's too disjointed for one and completely off-topic as well.

What about setting up an alt. group (or series of groups)? Can additional
groups be added to the sci.space hierachy?

sci.space.moderated went over like a ton of bricks.

Face it, there just aren't enough honest (read : rabid) space
activists in the known universe to support even a single group in the
hierarchy.

The hierarchy : you will be assimilated!

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message
...
We need somewhere appropriate to for all this! Has anyone spoken to Henry
Spencer yet? We can't keep posting to ss.shuttle, ss.policy and ss.history -
it's too disjointed for one and completely off-topic as well.

What about setting up an alt. group (or series of groups)? Can additional
groups be added to the sci.space hierachy?


Why don't you leave

"jonathan" wrote in message
.. .

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message
...
We need somewhere appropriate to for all this! Has anyone spoken to
Henry Spencer yet? We can't keep posting to ss.shuttle, ss.policy and
ss.history - it's too disjointed for one and completely off-topic as
well.

What about setting up an alt. group (or series of groups)? Can
additional groups be added to the sci.space hierachy?


Why don't you leave

Why would I do that? I post on-topic; you are the troll and continue to
disrupt this, and every other group you go to.

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message
...
"jonathan" wrote in message
.. .

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message
...
We need somewhere appropriate to for all this! Has anyone spoken to
Henry Spencer yet? We can't keep posting to ss.shuttle, ss.policy and
ss.history - it's too disjointed for one and completely off-topic as
well.

What about setting up an alt. group (or series of groups)? Can
additional groups be added to the sci.space hierachy?


Why don't you leave

Why would I do that? I post on-topic; you are the troll and continue to
disrupt this, and every other group you go to.

It's been a whole day and "jonathan" has yet to complain about how Phoenix
is interfering with NASA building solar power systems.

Replace "solar power systems" with "space shuttle" and you pretty much have
bbo hallre.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message
...
We need somewhere appropriate to for all this! Has anyone spoken to Henry
Spencer yet? We can't keep posting to ss.shuttle, ss.policy and
ss.history - it's too disjointed for one and completely off-topic as well.

What about setting up an alt. group (or series of groups)? Can additional
groups be added to the sci.space hierachy?


The answer is sci.space.policy. That's the catch-all.


--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html

In article ,
says...
Has anyone spoken to Henry Spencer yet?

His email address is quite well known. Have you tried to contact him?


Can additional groups be added to the sci.space hierachy?

Sure. It's a well defined process. But do you really think that will
solve the problem?
--
Kevin Willoughby lid

Kansas City, this was Air Force One. Will you change
our call sign to SAM 27000? -- Col. Ralph Albertazzie

"Kevin Willoughby" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...
Has anyone spoken to Henry Spencer yet?

His email address is quite well known. Have you tried to contact him?


Can additional groups be added to the sci.space hierachy?

Sure. It's a well defined process. But do you really think that will
solve the problem?

It may not solve it, but it will aleviate it. The sci.space hierachy is
very limited in content - it could use "s.s.craft" to discuss spacecraft
such as Phoenix and LRO and "s.s.human" to discuss human activities in space
to start with.

On Mon, 26 May 2008 21:36:00 GMT, "Alan Erskine"
wrote:

Why would I do that? I post on-topic; you are the troll and continue to
disrupt this, and every other group you go to.

....You have a point, which is why I decided to give Pat's advice a
chance and let you out of Killfile Hell on probation. So far you've
managed to keep your nose clean, but replying to "jonathan", one of
this group's most pathetic trolls, isn't helping you *or* us any good.


OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

On Mon, 26 May 2008 23:17:55 -0400, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:

The answer is sci.space.policy. That's the catch-all.

....It's been the garbage dump for sci.space since its creation some,
what? Two decades ago now? The mistake was, when converting
sci.columbia over to sci.space.shuttle, a second group dealing with
other missions should have also been created. .science and .tech sort
of caught this, but since those were created as moderated groups and
now have no moderator, they're essentially dead groups.

....So, what's the best course of action here? Can we get .science
changed to a non-moderated group, or should we look at an RFD/CFV for,
say, sci.space.current-missions, or sci.space.unmanned?


OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[