Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl01370)

Alexis:

>Well, my gurus got home and I accessed the alt.theosophy.

I just got the alt.theosophy group on deltanet.com, and saw the
first two messages. I posted a congratulations message, and
mentioned theos-l.

>Chuck, why don't you enter a message giving the general philosophical
>parameters which we started the Alt. to provide? I'm going to post
>something tonight.

I haven't looked at the rules for alt groups for several years,
and am not sure how they work. If a group is defined, is it
given a charter by the people that initiate it? Is its contents
restricted to that charter? I remember reading something a few
days back about the list, but am not sure at the moment what
you and/or Chuck wrote...

The nature of a newsgroup is unmoderated, and I'm not sure
how its content can be controlled or kept on topic or in accord
with a specific charter.

It would seem like a top-level news group like "alt.theosophy"
would be generic in nature, with "anything goes", and then under
it would be specialized subtopics like "alt.theosophy.hpbonly"
or "alt.theosophy.whatever" ...

My thinking is that the alt group could subdivide over time along
the lines of the "factions" or different lines of thought we've
found in our thinking on theos-l.

-----

Now I have a suggestion to theos-l readers in general:

Why don't we shift the bulk of our general interest discussions
to alt.theosophy, and just leave behind the lower-volume
specialized discussions on Theosophy on the mailing list?

The writings to people in general would go on the news group,
and the writings for non-public discussion, for study among
other students of Theosophy, could stay behind??????

The public exposure of Theosophy would be enhanced, and the
remaining traffic on theos-l would be of interest to those
with a more specialized interest.

-- Eldon