In article <CMM.0.90.2.727472931.kristoff at net.bio.net>, kristoff at NET (Dave Kristofferson) writes:
>> David changed most instances of the word "Bionet" in my FAQ to "BIOSCI".
>> He and I have argued publicly over whether these are equivalent.
>This change was made simply because the name of the system *is* BIOSCI
Why is that? Is BIOSCI substantially more than network distribution of
biological research requests and information? Your(?) paper in the Los
Alamos COMPUTERS AND DNA collection mostly referred to bionet.
If it's mostly mailing lists now gatewayed via network news, it makes
sense to call it bionet, in analogy with usenet, decnet, happynet, etc.
"BIOSCI" could be anything, and sounds like something pretentious for
the sake of an unaware NSF committee.
I'm not trying to revise any old arguments, I just wonder if I hate the
name BIOSCI for a reason or not.
--
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba at sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
