Re: Topicality (Was: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust?)

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:42:41 -0000 (UTC)
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote:

In article <vqn04q$6vsu$1@news.xmission.com>,
Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:

In article <vqmt6a$abj$2@reader1.panix.com>,
Dan Cross <cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net> wrote: 

In article <vqmofm$6r9q$1@news.xmission.com>,
[snip]
Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote: 

Keith will tell you that it is off-topic here. 

>
Topicality is part of the reason the Big-8 guidance for
introducing these discussions recommends cross-posting to groups
where the topic comes up semi-regularly, but setting follow ups
to news.groups.proposals, as I had done, and have done again
here.  ;-) 

>
Note that I did not say: Your post is off-topic. 

 
I did not say that said that you did?  ;-)
 

I said: Keith will tell you that it is off-topic here. 

 
Noted.  My post was meant to explain that I chose to implement
the guidance from the Big-8 process on new group creation, which
encourages posting to groups where interested parties may be
reading for discovery, but with follow-ups set to n.g.p to
discourage off-topic drift and fragmented discussion.
 
Given that the guidance is coming directly from Big-8,
complaints about topicality, from Keith or anyone else, seem
misplaced.
 

If you don't follow c.lang.c then you probably don't know that the
person you are answering is not even a troll. He best characterized as
stalker.

So far, as near as I can tell, the only person who's actually
engaged with the proposal was Tim Rentsch, who responded in
in comp.programming that he was in favor of comp.lang.rust.
 
- Dan C.
 

Personally, I have nothing against comp.lang.rust, but have my doubts
about perspectives of following. Rust is not so much a computer language
as a sort of subculture with very strong tendency for advocacy. It
(subculture) already has its own established discussion forums and
unlikely to be interested in Usenet group.