uk.telecom.voip - fasttrack

I see that another proposal has been made to fasttrack uk.telecom.voip..
though there has been no discussion on it in news.config - perhaps everyone
has missed it in the announce group (like I had) as (OE at any rate) had put
it down as a follow up post to the original attempt on the 5th April - not
as a new one.

As I have posted before - I don't think such a newsgroup is currently
necessary for the following reasons:

1. I feel a seperate newsgroup isn't really needed - in a couple of years
most calls will be VoIP anyway even if the end users don't realise it (i.e.
over BT's 21C network)

2. Is the only or main reason why this group is currently being suggested
because of the number of posts in uk.telecom on this? If so, I think you
will find that these posts are largely generated by half a dozen/a dozen or
so posters and mainly consist of posts says "xxxx is down again for me -
what about you?". There are currently very few "other" VoIP posts.

There are already some threads in uk.telecom such as Message-ID:
<(E-Mail Removed)> where people are fed up with these kind
of posts - however, this is not a sustainable basis for a new group -
instead it sounds as if these posters would be better off setting up a
mailing list for their favorite VoIP provider (90%+ of the posts seem to be
about Sipgate)

3. If the arguement is that VoIP posts currently form a reasonable % of
current posts in uk.t - that is true but mainly only because the number of
"other" posts has currently been reduced (i.e. I don't have as much time
these days to post messages in uk.t) - but am sure that this is only
temporary and the "other/normal" posts will increase in time and VoIP
specific ones will become a much smaller %.

I would want to see VoIP posts appearing for a lot longer before any such
decision was taken to introduce a new group.

Regards
Sunil

Sunil Sood wrote:
<pointless objections snipped>

With people like you around, how did any groups get formed?

What effect would a group that you probably wouldn't subscribe to have on
you?

"The Cable Guy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:tdude.23631$(E-Mail Removed) k...
> With people like you around, how did any groups get formed?

I do vote for new groups if they are relevant to me.

> What effect would a group that you probably wouldn't subscribe to have on
> you?

I am not saying I woudn't subscribe to it - In fact I probably would..
given I already subscribe to all the other uk.telecom.* groups

What I am saying is that I don't think a new group is warranted in this case
at this time.

Regards
Sunil

"Sunil Sood" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "The Cable Guy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:tdude.23631$(E-Mail Removed) k...
>> With people like you around, how did any groups get formed?
>
> I do vote for new groups if they are relevant to me.
>
>> What effect would a group that you probably wouldn't subscribe to have on
>> you?
>
> I am not saying I woudn't subscribe to it - In fact I probably would..
> given I already subscribe to all the other uk.telecom.* groups
>
> What I am saying is that I don't think a new group is warranted in this
> case at this time.
>
> Regards
> Sunil
>
>
Hi
well I want it
roy

Sunil Sood wrote:
> "The Cable Guy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:tdude.23631$(E-Mail Removed) k...
>> With people like you around, how did any groups get formed?
>
> I do vote for new groups if they are relevant to me.
>
>> What effect would a group that you probably wouldn't subscribe to
>> have on you?
>
> I am not saying I woudn't subscribe to it - In fact I probably
> would.. given I already subscribe to all the other uk.telecom.*
> groups
> What I am saying is that I don't think a new group is warranted in
> this case at this time.

So are you going to actively object..? Just so I know.

Ivor

Sunil Sood wrote:
> I see that another proposal has been made to fasttrack
> uk.telecom.voip.. though there has been no discussion on it in
> news.config - perhaps everyone has missed it in the announce group
> (like I had) as (OE at any rate) had put it down as a follow up
> post to the original attempt on the 5th April - not as a new one.
>
> As I have posted before - I don't think such a newsgroup is
> currently necessary for the following reasons:
>
> 1. I feel a seperate newsgroup isn't really needed - in a couple of
> years most calls will be VoIP anyway even if the end users don't
> realise it (i.e. over BT's 21C network)

If that's the case then submit an RFD for the group's removal at that time
;-)

> 2. Is the only or main reason why this group is currently being
> suggested because of the number of posts in uk.telecom on this? If
> so, I think you will find that these posts are largely generated by
> half a dozen/a dozen or so posters and mainly consist of posts says
> "xxxx is down again for me - what about you?". There are currently
> very few "other" VoIP posts.

How many posts are needed before you feel a group is necessary..? No, that
isn't the only reason, although it is one of them. I proposed a new group
in order that the emerging field of VoIP etc. could be discussed in the
same way that the mobile phone networks are discussed in uk.telecom.mobile
and broadband internet is discussed in uk.telecom.broadband.

> There are already some threads in uk.telecom such as Message-ID:
> <(E-Mail Removed)> where people are fed up with
> these kind of posts - however, this is not a sustainable basis for
> a new group - instead it sounds as if these posters would be better
> off setting up a mailing list for their favorite VoIP provider
> (90%+ of the posts seem to be about Sipgate)

Not altogether true, there are a lot about 1899 and others. Sipgate is
very stable at the moment :-)

> 3. If the arguement is that VoIP posts currently form a reasonable
> % of current posts in uk.t - that is true but mainly only because
> the number of "other" posts has currently been reduced (i.e. I
> don't have as much time these days to post messages in uk.t) - but
> am sure that this is only temporary and the "other/normal" posts
> will increase in time and VoIP specific ones will become a much
> smaller %.

Possibly; if so then as I said above feel free to submit an RFD for the
new group's removal at that time, but at least give it a chance.

> I would want to see VoIP posts appearing for a lot longer before
> any such decision was taken to introduce a new group.

How much longer..?

Ivor

Mon, 2 May 2005 19:17:37 <(E-Mail Removed)>
uk.net.news.config Sunil Sood <(E-Mail Removed)>

>I see that another

another?

> proposal has been made to fasttrack uk.telecom.voip..
>though there has been no discussion on it in news.config - perhaps everyone
>has missed it in the announce group (like I had) as (OE at any rate) had put
>it down as a follow up post to the original attempt on the 5th April - not
>as a new one.

I doubt that. You have until May the 4th to object.

[snip]

You need to e-mail your objection to the committee. It doesn't count if
you just post it.

--
Wm ...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days from date of posting

> How many posts are needed before you feel a group is necessary..? No, that
> isn't the only reason, although it is one of them. I proposed a new group
> in order that the emerging field of VoIP etc. could be discussed in the
> same way that the mobile phone networks are discussed in uk.telecom.mobile
> and broadband internet is discussed in uk.telecom.broadband.

<snip>

> How much longer..?
>
> Ivor

I'm in favour of a separate group for VoIP, it makes sense. Folk that are
interested in VoIP can subscribe to both groups, others that have no
interest in VoIP will have no need to spend time looking through questions
and debate that don't interest them (this doesn't apply to myself).

Bring it on Ivor.

Mike

[SNIP]

I fully agree with a seperate group, and would be subscribing when my news
server carries it.

On 2 May 2005 19:17, "Sunil Sood" wrote:

>I see that another proposal has been made to fasttrack uk.telecom.voip..
>though there has been no discussion on it in news.config - perhaps everyone
>has missed it in the announce group (like I had) as (OE at any rate) had put
>it down as a follow up post to the original attempt on the 5th April - not
>as a new one.

One view. Lots of people (fortunately) use other news readers and anyway,
a new post should be identifiable even if it is one within a thread that
you've already seen, so it's still more likely that others were in favour
or had no view, rather than that they 'just missed it' perhaps.

>1. ... in a couple of years most calls will be VoIP anyway even if the

At that point there will still, no doubt, be a range of PABX, pricing and
other issues which currently get discussed in uk.telecom and would remain
so, separate from the technology, protocols, interfacing and problems any
VoIP user might be interested in/face at work.


>because of the number of posts in uk.telecom on this?

The fact you posted to both uk.telecom and uk.telecom.broadband is telling
enough, as posts come up in one or other at present, because neither is
seen as the unique newsgroup where these posts are best suited. Next,
someone will suggest that there will be too many items cross-posted to a
combination of uk.telecom.voip and some other group(s)

(The same suggestion was made when uk.telecom.mobile was proposed, and most
of the time it did not, and does not, happen that often.)

>instead it sounds as if these posters would be better off setting up a
>mailing list for their favorite VoIP provider

From time to time, I saw mention of the "Orange mail list" (concerning the
mobile phone network) but never knew about it before seeing it mentioned
in the newsgroup (and never felt keen enough to seek it out, because to
a great extent, a newsgroup is more 'open' for lurking, searching with
Google and is simple to use, without various nuisances that might affect
any mail list method. I get a tiny number of items by e-mail compared to
reading newsgroups or seeing information on websites/subscription sites/
RSS-style collections of headlines. Any such mail list as suggested, to
be about a particular VoIP provider, is unlikely to meet the needs of a
potential user looking for comparison and unbiassed views.

>mainly only because the number of "other" posts has currently been reduced
>(i.e. I don't have as much time these days to post messages in uk.t) -

Well, that's quite a claim...

>I would want to see VoIP posts appearing for a lot longer before any such
>decision was taken to introduce a new group.

I'd be in favour of such a group. It would live or die depending on whether
it was used, and it would be an ideal group for plenty of future requests in
u.t, u.t.b, u.c.h-n or similar. Since there is no ideal 'home' at present,
I can only see confusion over which group is suited, mostly u.t/u.t.b may
be used, but others will also get posts appropriate to such a group. PGM