From rifkin@cco.caltech.edu Sun Feb 13 04:35:57 1994 To: robert@vlsi.cs.caltech.edu, adam@vlsi.cs.caltech.edu Subject: Let's make an alt topic!!! >Path: nntp-server.caltech.edu!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.pop.psu.edu!news.pop.psu.edu!not-for-mail >From: barr@pop.psu.edu (David Barr) >Newsgroups: alt.config,alt.answers,news.answers >Subject: So You Want to Create an Alt Newsgroup >Supersedes: >Followup-To: alt.config >Date: 1 Feb 1994 10:03:06 -0500 >Organization: Penn State Population Research Institute >Lines: 308 >Approved: news-answers-request@MIT.Edu >Expires: 19 Feb 1994 15:03:01 GMT >Message-ID: >NNTP-Posting-Host: bosnia.pop.psu.edu >Summary: This is a guide for anyone interested in creating a newsgroup > within the alt.* hierarchy. It is posted every 14 days. >Xref: nntp-server.caltech.edu alt.config:25702 news.answers:17475 Version: $Id: alt-creation-guide,v 1.12 1994/01/29 23:24:23 barr Exp barr $ Archive-Name: alt-creation-guide There are no Guidelines or Rules for creating alt groups. There is no one "in charge" of the alt hierarchy. The key to creating a successful alt newsgroup depends only on convincing the thousands of news administrators across the globe to carry your newsgroup. Here are some tips that will help you achieve this. This article is based on common-sense and real-life experience. This is not an attempt to codify rules or guidelines for alt, but merely a guide to help people get the most out of alt, as well as a reflection of some established procedures. This guide is split onto three parts. The first part covers some technical background as to why alt is the way it is, and how it fits into the larger Usenet. The second section lists many common reasons proposed alt groups are rejected. Some are technical, and some are philosophical. The third section includes some miscellaneous suggestions on making your alt group achieve the widest audience possible. This guide is also available on the World Wide Web at: http://www.pop.psu.edu/0h/users/barr/usenet/alt-creation-guide 1. Technical background * _What is alt?_ Contrary to popular belief, "alt" is not named necessarily because it carries "alternative" topics. Back during the dawn of the modern Usenet, it was decided that newsgroups should be created by following a clearly defined set of "Guidelines", involving formal discussions and a voting procedure. There was a significant number of people who felt that there should be a provision for a place where people could create groups without having to go through any discussion or votes. Thus alt was born. It is a hierarchy that is "alternative" to the "mainstream" (comp,misc,news, rec,soc,sci,talk) hierarchy. "ALT stands for 'Anarchists, Lunatics, and Terrorists'." - ziegast@uunet.uu.net (Eric Ziegast) _Votes? Did someone say vote?_ Let me repeat. There are _no votes_ in alt. Period. If you want to gather an "opinion poll" for your own purposes to see how popular the group will be, great. Do _not post_ votes to alt.config. Every few months someone says "hey I've got a great idea for a newsgroup alt.widget, what do you think?". Someone responds "I vote yes!", causing a chain-reaction of posts to alt.config, lasting for days or weeks. These serve no purpose but to annoy readers of alt.config, and to distribute dozens of messages across the globe that should have ended up in someone's mailbox instead. Please, use a Followup-To: poster in your header and gather votes by e-mail. Then post a summary after a week or two. _News Administrators:_ Alt newsgroups are not created everywhere all at once. Each site has a news administrator, who ultimately decides whether to carry a new newsgroup on that site. Nevertheless, for simplicity, many sites automatically honor all requests to create a new group and (by default) ignore all requests to remove groups. Newsadmins can be very busy people who don't need the hassle of hand-approving every group. Thus, alt newsgroups are not necessarily created in a way that is fair, or just, or logical. That's life. _Newsgroup Name Components:_ A newsgroup name, e.g. alt.foo.bar-bar.baz, is made up of a series of dot-separated components, in this case alt, foo, bar-bar, and baz. The articles in newsgroups are usually stored in your machine's directory hierarchy. Basically, every component of the newsgroup name corresponds to a directory or subdirectory of the same name, and that subdirectory typically takes up 512 or more bytes on the machine all by itself. Also, since accessing any group requires eventually reading the contents of the directory, if there are lots of subdirectories off of alt access for any single article in alt can theoretically suffer a performance hit. Also, some newsreaders are hierarchically organized. To read alt.folklore.computers, you select alt, then select folklore, then computers. If there are lots of needless top-level components, then this is more work for the person reading news. (e.g. More than four levels deep) _Newsgroup Longevity:_ There are some people who insist that once an alt newsgroup is created, it can never be destroyed, no matter what. These people make sure that whenever someone tries to remove a group, it gets re-created. Even if these people were not on the net, occasional mistakes (in such situations as people setting up new sites) can cause almost-dead newsgroups to get revived everywhere. Thus, alt groups are effectively immortal, at least for the foreseeable future; they can't be removed or even re-named. Alt groups never die, they just fade away. 2. Common Reasons Proposed Groups are Rejected * _"Harmful" newsgroup names:_ Newsgroup names which have components that are composed of the characters other than the letters 'a' through 'z', plus the characters '-' and '+' are considered non-standard and not encouraged. Some odd characters can tickle bugs in some software, or require news admins to make special modifications in order to carry the group. Newsgroup components must be non-empty. (like "alt..foo") One joke group, ".cabal", was created and lots of software mysteriously stopped working in bizarre fashion. * _Component Too Long:_ Some systems cannot handle a newsgroup name component that is longer than 14 characters. Thus alt.fan.bgcrisis (length of "bgcrisis" = 8) instead of alt.fan.bubblegum-crisis (length of "bubblegum-crisis" = 16). This restriction is becoming less and less critical, as softare like INN handles this better. C news unfortunately enforces this limit, and makes it hard to accommodate exceptions. The author has no immediate plans to change this limitation. * _Useless Components:_ If you take away components at the end of the name, you should not be left with a directory name that is unlikely to have any other newsgroups in it. Thus alt.fan.bg-crisis instead of alt.fan.bubble.gum.crisis (other "alt.fan.bubble" newsgroups?). In other words, don't use a dot as a word separator, use a dash. * _Joke/Revenge/Shock Group:_ Because of newsgroup longevity (see below), newsgroups which are started just to get people to laugh at the name, and/or to get revenge on some specific person, and/or to shock people, are discouraged. They tend to generate a flurry of articles (sometimes) for a maybe even a month or two, but quickly die. * _".word.word.word" Ending:_ The first group was "alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork". Since then, dozens of lookalike groups have been created. This was kind of funny at first (5 years ago) but the joke is old. * _Top-Level Mess:_ There are dozens of newsgroups named alt.something, wherei something is a very specialized subject. Wouldn't it be nice if there were some classification scheme for them? Well, there is; you can name your group alt.food.something, or alt.sport.something, or whatever. * _Big Seven Move Threat:_ Because of newsgroup longevity, many newsadmins will actually _oppose_ creation of a group if you suggest you may want to move it to the "big seven" hierarchy (rec, soc, talk etc.) sometime in the future. Try to create it there first. On the other hand, some newsadmins will then suggest you try out an alt group before trying to create a "big seven" group. * _Extremely Limited Interest:_ Yes, alt groups can be created for subjects that the "big seven" hierarchy wouldn't touch, but if the discussion you propose is extremely faddish, or silly, or of extremely limited or regional interest, some newsadmins may oppose it. More on "local" or "regional" groups in alt. Usually they are a bad idea. Remember that your articles will be travelling across the globe, on the disks of hundereds of thousands of machines. People in Saudi Arabia generally don't care much about great places to eat in Houston, Texas, USA. * _Not Proposed in alt.config:_ Some newsadmins will not create any groups that haven't been discussed in alt.config. Posting your idea for a new group to alt.config is a very good idea anyway. Someone may have already created the group you proposed, or something similar. They may also point you to a mailing list that you might not have known about. They also will probably tell you if your group is poorly named. Eric Ziegast has this to say about alt.config: "You don't have to take their advice, but then again, who wants to start a fight? At least when people discuss a group first in alt.config, news admins throughout the world can decide whether or not to accept/feed your group if/when it's created. If people like your group suggestion, you will be considered a net.hero, and your group will likely exist until the end of time (which is currently January 2038 for Unix)." _"If Other Silly Newsgroup Deserves To Exist, Then So Does Mine"_ Since anyone can create a newsgroup in alt without fanfare, frequently anyone _does_. It's not a question of whether either newsgroup "deserves" existence. Think carefully about this point: you're willfully likening your proposal to all the silly and ridiculous newsgroups that already exist in the alt hierarchy. If you really want people to take you seriously, don't you think you can find a better argument? _"But No One's Forced To Accept It" Considered Irrelevant:_ Sure, no newsadmin has to accept your group if they don't want to; but the newsadmins are going to curse you for the hassle of having to decide on it -- when it gets created and every time it gets re-created. Also consider the consequence on the readers of the newsgroup. If their articles are only getting to a small minority of sites, is it even worth it? _"But All These People Agree" Considered Irrelevant:_ You might get 20 people who haven't read this FAQ to agree that your newsgroup is a good idea. This isn't likely to convince anyone either, if any of the reasons above apply. 3. Some Positive Suggestions * Propose your group in alt.config. Listen to constructive criticisms. Beware, the "discussions" in alt.config can seem very petty, vindictive, and altogether unpleasant at times. Alt.config is frequented by news admins, news.wannabes, net.gods, and net.idiots. Sometimes it's a wonder that anything useful comes out of it, but the alternative is total anarchy and mob ethics. Look past the ad hominem attacks, the finger pointing, the name calling, and political posturing. There are actually a few people in alt.config with good ideas on creating groups. * Look for an appropriate place in existing alt hierarchies. alt.binaries, .books, .comp, .culture, .fan, .games, .lang, .music, .politics, .religion, .sex, .society, and .tv are all fairly well accepted. Keep top-level hierarchies as broad as possible. * Make the component names a real hierarchy, rather than a message to news readers. * Spell the newsgroup name correctly. (or at least choose the most popular spelling :-) ) * And please, try using existing Big Seven newsgroups, alt newsgroups, or mailing lists before insisting on creating another alt group. For example, don't create alt.drink.recipies when there's a perfectly good group already, rec.food.drink, with wider (and probably more well-informed) readership. * If you are trying to create a sub-topic of a high-traffic Big Seven group, try to attempt to get the Big Seven group split first before attempting an alt group. For example, if you're tired of wading through rec.sport.golf for college golfing, don't try to create alt.sport.golf.college, try to create rec.sport.golf.college first. If the group is high-traffic, most likely readers will welcome a legitimate split. * If your group is related to current events, then create the group under alt.current-events.*. Note that alt.current-events.* is for short-lived current events, not extended discussions about some ongoing topic that just happens to be in the news today. Remember that there's already an existing group for current events: misc.headlines. * If your group contains binaries or other large files, create it under alt.binaries.*. Newsadmins will thank you for it, as they typically expire these groups more quickly to compensate for their large size. * Once you decide that it's time to create your newsgroup, contact your local news administrator. If you are a news administrator, the consult your news software documentation on how to issue a "newgroup" control message. The format of Usenet messages is defined in RFC 1036, which you may want to refer to. Alternatively you can modify someone else's control message if you forget all the syntax. Just look in the "control" newsgroup. One thing that is nice is to include a "For your newsgroups file:" line in the body of the message, to automatically have news software enter a description for the newsgroup. Many newsreaders use this description. * Also, many sites do NOT automatically honor "newgroup" messages; the news software at these sites will send mail to the news administrator, who will who will evaluate your request and decide whether or not to create the group. It may take a couple of days for the control message to propagate and be acted upon, so don't expect instant availability of the new group, particularly if you post the control message on a Friday night. Epilogue by Mark Weber: Here ends the lesson. This may sound like a lot of rigamarole, and it is. The purpose is to discourage creation of alt groups that might be better off as mainstream groups, or that might be better off left uncreated. Don't take this all too seriously, though. The "alt" net is the last remaining refuge away from the control freaks, namespace purists and net.cops (like myself) that maintain and enforce the mainstream newsgroup guidelines. There is still some room for spontaneity out here on the "alt" frontier. Successful groups have been created without following these suggestions. Almost any non-forged, serious newgroup message will at least be considered by most news admins. Some groups have been created just on a whim. The concept behind the group better be good (or a least entertaining), though! Credits: _Based on previous work by:_ * jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews) "Common Reasons Why People Oppose Proposed Alt Newsgroups" * ccs@aber.ac.uk (Christopher Samuel) "Creating a new "alt" group -- guidelines" originally by markw@gvlf8.gvl.unisys.com (Mark H. Weber) * ziegast@uunet.uu.net (Eric Ziegast) "Welcome to ALT" _With submissions from:_ * twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)