In article ,
says...
I find that interesting and I just guess you had to be there, why were there
flame wars? was it an issue as to splitting in the first place or was it an
issue as to how to split? soft

I can't remember why, but I had stopped posting to the original RPC
around the time of the split, so I wasn't around when the split actually
happened. I left RPC for reasons I can't recall (I may have had an
illness, actually, due to the nature of my disability. I was posting to
RPC around the time I was in school, too, so school may have had
something to do with why I wasn't posting at around the time the split
happened. The more I think of it, the time I stopped posting was around
the time I moved from Milwaukee back to my hometown area, so that may
have had a lot to do with why I stopped posting to RPC for a while, as
well. I KNOW for a fact that my leaving didn't have ANYTHING to do
with being angry or hurt about how the group was treating Onyx or I or
how the group was functioning before the split), and when I came back to
post again, RPC had split into the groups that are here today. In fact,
I remember at the time thinking to myself, "why didn't they just call
'our' newsgroup 'rec.pets.cats.meowchat' (RPCM)?? It's simple enough,
and it's accurate."

I'm SO glad that they didn't call this newsgroup that, in retrospect.
The meowchatters back in the day got a LOT of crap. They got a lot of
crap from regular RPC'ers not wild about meowchat (who actively dissed
us and called meowchat baby talk), but also from trolls, as well. If
the group HAD been named RPCM, we'd be an easier mark, I believe, for
trolls to seek us out and plague us left and right.

What I recall (and what I recall may not be 100% accurate or complete)
is that a big reason why people who wanted the split was because they
were tired/sick of the meowchat. They wanted it gone from their
newsgroup. The meowchatters wanted to continue to let their kitties
have their own voices. AIUI, the arguing and the flamewars all
escalated from there, and the split became an issue that was about more
than just meowchat, for reasons I can't recall. I think some of it was
a combination of both splitting the groups in the first place, and also
how to split the groups. If you'll notice, there's a group in the RPC
hierarchy called rec.pets.cats.health+behav. Like I said earlier, I
wasn't around when the split actually happened, but I wouldn't be
surprised at all to learn that there were people who wanted there to be
two separate groups: rec.pets.cats.health, and rec.pets.cats.behavior...
so yeah, I would imagine that there was a fair amount of talk about how
to split the groups. Since this is Usenet, there had to be a consensus.

Usenet's funny... there are these things called RFDs, or request for
discussion. I see now that they happen in the news.* hierarchy. I
think they used to take place in the alt.config newsgroup many years
ago. There are also, IIRC, RFVs, or request for votes. RFDs and RFVs
both center entirely around creating new newsgroups. I can't remember
if RFDs just happen and people discuss creating a new newsgroup simply
because there was a call for an RFD, or if an RFD has to be voted upon
in order for there to actually even BE a discussion about creating a new
newsgroup. Anyway, when an RFD happens, people discuss creating the new
newsgroup, whatever its name may be (e.g. alt.fan.billy-bob).

If there seems to be a consensus that the new newsgroup should be
created, then I *believe* an RFV is called for. There's a magic number
of votes or a percentage that has to approve the creation of a new
newsgroup in order for it to even be created. I believe the rationale
for that is so that Usenet is not just flooded with newsgroups. Having
said that, yes, if you look at your list of newsgroups, there ARE
newsgroups that exist that are pretty stupid and never, ever seem to get
traffic. However, that is actually one of the reasons that there are
RFDs and RFVs and that the rules for creating a new newsgroup are as
stringent as they are. You just have to trust me when I say that the
glut of newsgroups that don't get any traffic would be about 20 times
higher than it is today if the process that IS in place today didn't
exist at all.

OK... I think that that just about covers it. I hope I've answered all
of your questions this time around. If not, just post other questions
you may have, and I or someone here who's been here long enough to know
will answer them as soon as I/we can. :-)

--- Unca Cory ;-)