Peter C > wrote:

>sorry Adam i just followed the guidelines set out in a ng "how to .." do a
>proposal.

What FAQ is that?

>Alt.config, as i understand it, are only supposed to comment on whether
>the proposal would be adequate as a control message to set up a newsgroup.

alt.config is an ordinary newsgroup. The main topic is discussion of proposals
for new alt groups and their potential impact on existing groups. What made
you think there would be no discussion?

>The posters in alt.config, who stuck to that brief, rather than the ones
>who took up the wider ethical issues such as yourself , agreed that with
>the deletion of one "s" and the addition of a full stop, my proposal would
>have passed muster as a control message should it have been needed.

You had your ass kissed by Eugene; he likes doing that. It's especially
sad when he plays his little games with proponents whose actions could
have serious consequences for the users of valuable newsgroups. There are
actually a few such groups on Usenet. The diabetes groups are among those. If
you care about decent discussion of diabetes at all, I'd urge you to make
improving the quality of discussion your first consideration. Sometimes,
the best way to do that is to participate in existing newsgroups.

>Thank you for your input Adam, i am sure that today there are half a dozen
>more proposals for you to sink your teeth into.

The point is that the proponent needs to take pride in his own work and make
an effort to understand the true needs of those discussing the topic.