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

On 10/03/2025 16:42, 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.

 

(If Keith wants to tell you that your post is off-topic, he will tell you.  He is a far better judge of what he wants to post about than Kenny is.)

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.
 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.
 

For what it is worth, I think it makes sense to ask here (and in the other groups I have seen your post - c.l.c++ and c.programming) to ask about interest in comp.lang.rust.  Many people who are interested in Rust and who use Usenet, will be found in one of those groups.  It might not be strictly topical for c.l.c., but it is certainly of potential interest to a number of people here.
I also think that if you do create the group, announcing it here in c.l.c. is appropriate.
Like Tim, I am not overly keen on posting in one group with a follow-up to another group, if you are expecting replies from people here (rather than just making an announcement).  When I read something in c.l.c. and want to discuss it, I think it is natural to do so in c.l.c. (c.programming may be more natural for this discussion, but the audience is pretty minimal there.)
I don't think there will be much life in a comp.lang.rust group - groups like c.l.c. are held together by people who have been programming in C and haunting Usenet for decades.  Rust is too young, so I think it will be hard to establish a community in a Rust newsgroup.  However, I may be wrong, and I wish you the best of luck with it.
(I know there are Rust programmers in comp.arch, and perhaps some follow comp.lang.misc, if you are looking for other appropriate newsgroups.)