In article <4guam9$72f at mserv1.dl.ac.uk>, <Jonas.Blomberg at alinks.se> wrote:
> Fellow virologists(?),
>> The Bionet.Virology newsgroup has degenerated.
> It is sad byproduct of affluence that necessity
> is forgotten. Too many are preoccupied with the
> Although it is contrary to basic Internet values,
> I advocate moderation of this newsgroup.
This proposal has been raised several times before. As far as I
understood, it is not practically feasable, unless we start a new group
under another hierarchy. In my experience (I already survived to the
harmless HIV, Ebola outbreak and adverse vaccination effects), these
postings will fade out with time. Now we are in the middle of a milk storm
with some broccolized water in it, tomorrow we'll probably read about
something else. I am afraid that this level of noise is physiological,
given the exponentially growing number of people connected to Internet. In
particular, since viruses attract people's attention even outside
professionals, this newsgroup suffers of higher level of noise. It doesn't
happen for bionet.molbio.proteins or methds-reagnts, since, outside
molbiologists, nobody does care a rat about agarose gels or
chromatography. What should be done, IMO, is to AVOID cross-postings. When
one reads a message he likes to answer to, check the header. If it has
been posted to more than two or three newsgroups, it would be polite to
delete as many groups as possible and to reply only to the one he thinks
is the most appropriate. Too bad this basic Netiquette seems far too much
difficult for many people.
Disclaimer. I do not consider basic questions about the main topic of this
(or others) newsgroup a noise. I DO consider as such, questions about
unrelated topics (does milk or water pollution have ANYTHING to do with
virology?) as well as proclamation of personal opinions without ANY
intention to debate them on a scientific basis (pro- and anti-vaccine
propaganda on this newsgroup has lost any scientific interest a long time
Just my worthless opinion. Giovanni.