Final RFD for sci.physics.acoustics / LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS

[Big-8 Management Board]

LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS (LCC)
unmoderated group: sci.physics.acoustics

This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) for the creation of the
unmoderated newsgroup sci.physics.acoustics

NEWSGROUPS LINE:
For your newsgroups file:
sci.physics.acoustics Topics in acoustics and vibrations.

RATIONALE:

The group alt.sci.physics.acoustics in the same topic space was
started in 1995 and has been a successful group with productive
discussion since, but has not had the more broadly accepted Big 8
newsgroup posture.

FEEDBACK:

The following comments favored the formation of
sci.physics.acoustics:

Peter Larsen <digilyd...>:
- <002e6db2$0$20840$***@news.astraweb.com>

robert bristow-johnson <rbj...>:
- <f21de343-57b1-4334-b0c6-***@j27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
- <6337a8ec-a1b0-425e-b626-***@d27g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>

Ethan Winer <blow_166...>:
- <ff351a4d-82a1-4439-ba33-***@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>

Steve Bonine <spb...>:
- <***@mid.individual.net>

Doug Freyburger <dfreybur...>:
- <hn3k5b$732$***@news.eternal-september.org>

David E. Ross <nobody...>:
- <i-***@posted.docknet>

Angelo Campanella" <***@att.net>:
- <hmsehi$1c6j$***@adenine.netfront.net>

CHARTER:

This news group is intended for serious discussion on all technical
fields of acoustics and vibration as indicated by the Acoustical
Society of America. See page B1 in the 2006 (Green) ASA membership
directory. These are:

Architectural Acoustics
Engineering Acoustics
Musical Acoustics
Noise Acoustics
Physical Acoustics-
Animal Bioacoustics (now includes Acoustical Oceanography)
Psychological & Physiological Acoustics
Structural and Vibrations Acoustics
Speech Communications Acoustics
Underwater & Propagation Acoustics
Biomedical Ultrasound Acoustics
Bioresponse to Vibration Acoustics
Signal Processing in Acoustics

1. Consider this news group to be where Hello's are exchanged
followed by knowledgeable discussions on acoustics and vibration
question that may evolve. However, detailed repartee on elementary
hobbies such as loudspeaker design and amplified audio problems
should be discussed elsewhere on hobby groups, etc.

2. Our discussions should be concise, involving relatively short
messages; a few screen-loads usually suffice.

3. Avoid public debate that switches to smaller and smaller matters.
Private E-Mail is for that. Rather, stick to main issues from which
all of us will learn and also enjoy the benefits of this public
medium.

4. Resist the temptation to author large treatises here. Save that
energy for a separate E-mail file targeted to a recipient, or the
telephone

5. When including a copy of the message to which you respond, DELETE
all extraneous, non-germane lines. Leave only pertinent succinct
lines that will precede your learned response.

6. AVOID quarrelsome and profane language that ultimately detract
from the credibility of the arguments and the validity of the
information presented.

7. AVOID ad hominem and defamatory comments.

8. Brief "Jobs Available" or "Help Needed" postings are welcome
during economic malaise.

In these ways, we will all welcome and enjoy each other's thoughts.


POLICY IN LIEU OF MODERATION:

The group will be unmoderated. Messages which are off topic,
profane, spam, inflammatory, personal attacks, unduly argumentative,
or excessive "Jobs available" announcements are discouraged.

PROCEDURE:

Please refer to the newsgroup creation policies listed here:

http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=policies:creation

All discussion of active proposals should be posted to
news.groups.proposals.

To this end, the followup header of this RFD has been set to
news.groups.proposals.

If desired by the readership of closely affected groups, the
discussion may be crossposted to those groups, but care should be
taken to ensure that all discussion appears in news.groups.proposals
as well.

The final comment period lasts for five (5) days from the time that
this RFD is posted.

DISTRIBUTION:

This document has been posted to the following newsgroups:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups.proposals
alt.sci.physics.acoustics
sci.physics

PROPONENT:

Angelo Campanella <***@att.net>

CHANGE HISTORY:
2009-06-14 1st RFD.
2010-03-05 2nd RFD.
2010-04-03 Final RFD / Last Call (B8MB).

[Kathy Morgan]

Post by Big-8 Management Board
LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS (LCC)
unmoderated group: sci.physics.acoustics
This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) for the creation of the
unmoderated newsgroup sci.physics.acoustics
sci.physics.acoustics Topics in acoustics and vibrations.

Would those of you who participate in alt.sci.physics.acoustics move to
the new group sci.physics.acoustics if it is created? It is likely that
more news servers would carry the new group, but discussion of acoustics
would probably suffer if half of you stay here and half move to the new
group.

Some news servers do not carry any alt.* groups. If all or most of you
move to the new group, discussion may be improved because more people
will have access to the new group--but of course there is no guarantee.
Also, at first, some people currently using the alt.* group will not be
able to access sci.physics.acoustics; they will need to ask their news
server admins to add the new Big 8 group.

[Ken Plotkin]

Post by Kathy Morgan
Would those of you who participate in alt.sci.physics.acoustics move to
the new group sci.physics.acoustics if it is created? It is likely that
more news servers would carry the new group, but discussion of acoustics
would probably suffer if half of you stay here and half move to the new
group.

[snip]

I would definitely move to the new group. I'd probably peek in at the
old one to see if anything was still happening, but
sci.physics.acoustics would be primary.

Ken Plotkin

[robert bristow-johnson]

Post by Ken Plotkin

Post by Kathy Morgan
Would those of you who participate in alt.sci.physics.acoustics move to
the new group sci.physics.acoustics if it is created?  It is likely that
more news servers would carry the new group, but discussion of acoustics
would probably suffer if half of you stay here and half move to the new
group.  

[snip]
I would definitely move to the new group.  I'd probably peek in at the
old one to see if anything was still happening, but
sci.physics.acoustics would be primary.

i would peek in on the this one, just to send any non-spammers to
sci.physics.acoustics. i've always felt that there was where this
newsgroup should have been in the first place.

r b-j

[robert bristow-johnson]

<list snipped>
I am not convinced that this list of support is really adequate to
justify a new group.

Me, neither.
There is on-topic traffic in the existing newsgroup.
I don't see a lot of people from that newsgroup asking
for the creation of s.p.a.

there is not a lot of people on a.s.p.a in the first place, but
*currently* is reasonably spam free. but back around August, it
didn't look so good.

the *main* reason that i have always felt this name and hierarchy
would be good (even earlier than
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sci.physics.acoustics/msg/ada875513e06e7e5
)
is because that is the correct name and hierarchy. acoustics is a
legit field of physics. and it is sufficiently differentiated from
the rest of physics to deserve it's own newsgroup in the sci.physics.*
hierarchy. this newsgroup deserves to be in the sci.* hierarchy and
out of the alt.* hierarchy.

i simply do not understand what the fuss or resistance is all about.
it's not a frivolous addition to the sci.* hierarchy, why should
anyone be opposed to it? it's science, it's physics, and it's
acoustics. it's mainstream. it's not alternative anything.

r b-j

[Kathy Morgan]

Post by robert bristow-johnson

There is on-topic traffic in the existing newsgroup.
I don't see a lot of people from that newsgroup asking
for the creation of s.p.a.

there is not a lot of people on a.s.p.a in the first place, but
*currently* is reasonably spam free. but back around August, it
didn't look so good.

Be aware that moving to the Big 8 will probably have little or no affect
on spam levels in the group, and spam may even be worse in a sci.*
group. To avoid the spam, users will have to choose news servers that
filter out the spam and/or learn to use filters of their own. People
using Google will still be seeing all the spam and maybe even more than
before. Are you willing to obtain a news account on a real news server
and get a real newsreader and learn to use it? Are others? Are you
ready to help them learn how to use them?

Post by robert bristow-johnson
the *main* reason that i have always felt this name and hierarchy would be
good [...] is because that is the correct name and hierarchy. acoustics
is a legit field of physics. [...] this newsgroup deserves to be in the
sci.* hierarchy and out of the alt.* hierarchy.

The "alt" in alt.* hierarchy refers to an alternative way of creating
groups; it does not refer to the subject matter of the groups.
Acoustics is just as legitimate in alt.* as in sci.*. The difference is
that to get a group in sci.*, you have to convince the Big 8 hierarchy
management that your group would be successful and well used. A group
with no traffic that duplicates an existing group will simply cause
confusion and reduce the quality of discussions.

Post by robert bristow-johnson
i simply do not understand what the fuss or resistance is all about.

The problem is that even if the group is created, the alt.* group will
not go away. That means that some of the people who currently discuss
acoustics will still be doing so in alt.sci.physics.acoustics, and some
will be using sci.physics.acoustics. The traffic levels in both may be
so low as to discourage participation in either group.

To make sci.physics.acoustics successful if it is created would require
participants in the alt group to move to and post to the sci group.
They should at first probably crosspost all their messages to both
groups, since some people will not immediately have access to the new
group. If the new group is not available on their server, they should
request it be added. (Those who use Google are out of luck; Google adds
new groups if and when they choose and appear to be oblivious to users'
preferences or requests.) Someone will need to regularly post notice in
the alt.* group advising about the new group; on say a monthly basis for
at least a year.

I am particularly concerned because some of the demand for the new group
is coming from users like yourself who are accessing
alt.sci.physics.acoustics from Google; Google is not going to
immediately add the sci.* group, so you will not be able to participate
in the sci.* group for some unknown length of time. How successful will
the new group be if none of you using Google can access it?

[robert bristow-johnson]

Post by Kathy Morgan
The problem is that even if the group is created, the alt.* group will
not go away.  That means that some of the people who currently discuss
acoustics will still be doing so in alt.sci.physics.acoustics, and some
will be using sci.physics.acoustics.  The traffic levels in both may be
so low as to discourage participation in either group.
To make sci.physics.acoustics successful if it is created would require
participants in the alt group to move to and post to the sci group.

i think that will happen.

Post by Kathy Morgan
They should at first probably crosspost all their messages to both
groups, since some people will not immediately have access to the new
group.

i think that will happen also. but eventually (maybe after a year) i
would stop cross-posting.

Post by Kathy Morgan
 If the new group is not available on their server, they should
request it be added.  (Those who use Google are out of luck; Google adds
new groups if and when they choose and appear to be oblivious to users'
preferences or requests.)

i've seen a couple of sci.* groups get added and Google seemed to
follow along. i thought that when a new group is created in the big
8, someone of authority sends some control post down the pike in some
news.group."something" group and the NNTP servers down the pike add
that newsgroup to their list of groups they carry. no one makes the
servers do that, and i can imagine it would take some time for a new
group to stick in all of the servers. is Google Groups much
different?

Post by Kathy Morgan
 Someone will need to regularly post notice in
the alt.* group advising about the new group; on say a monthly basis for
at least a year.  

i think that will happen. Ange or i or someone else will make sure
that happens.

Post by Kathy Morgan
I am particularly concerned because some of the demand for the new group
is coming from users like yourself who are accessing
alt.sci.physics.acoustics from Google; Google is not going to
immediately add the sci.* group, so you will not be able to participate
in the sci.* group for some unknown length of time.  How successful will
the new group be if none of you using Google can access it?

i saw sci.physics.foundations light up in Google Groups about as soon
as i saw it announced in sci.physics.research and sci.physics.

i just don't think it will make matters worse. and since some servers
don't carry alt.*, i think that a move to sci.* will be appreciated
down the road.

but, i dunno.

r b-j

[Dave Sill]

Post by robert bristow-johnson
i've seen a couple of sci.* groups get added and Google seemed to
follow along. i thought that when a new group is created in the big
8, someone of authority sends some control post down the pike in some
news.group."something" group and the NNTP servers down the pike add
that newsgroup to their list of groups they carry. no one makes the
servers do that, and i can imagine it would take some time for a new
group to stick in all of the servers. is Google Groups much
different?

The B8MB posts "newgroup" messages requesting that groups be created,
and some sites do honor them automatically, but these days most sites
are configured to require manual intervention to create new groups.
Google Groups is no different, though they seem especially slow and
unusually selective.

Post by robert bristow-johnson
i just don't think it will make matters worse. and since some servers
don't carry alt.*, i think that a move to sci.* will be appreciated
down the road.
but, i dunno.

Thanks for your feedback.

-Dave

[Angelo Campanella]

Post by Kathy Morgan
Be aware that moving to the Big 8 will probably have little or no affect
on spam levels in the group, and spam may even be worse in a sci.*
group.

It can't be any worse than it was about five years ago... Despite all of
the clutter, we kept our dialogs going. But all during our fifteen years, we
participants - serious tecnical folk - bemoaned the fact that we were
practicing on an "alt." group which is often viewed with disdain by many of
our colleagues... We knew that it would take a lot of effort to create a
standard "sci." group, and we all waited for "George" to do it. You now
witness that creation process in progress, finally.

Some may view "acoustics" as an acrchaic and a "dead" branch of
physics... But I only have to point to the weather as another archaic
science... It's not dead yet, either. A few recent frontiers in acoustics
are ANC, acoustic holography and cochlear implants... hardly archaic... As
much as one may want to regard those to now be but mundane engineering
technologies, the wellspring of knowlege that drives those frontiers falls
right back into the highest levels of the acoustical sciences, which is what
we want to promulgate in sci.physics.acoustics.

Post by Kathy Morgan
To avoid the spam, users will have to choose news servers that
filter out the spam and/or learn to use filters of their own. People
using Google will still be seeing all the spam and maybe even more than
before. Are you willing to obtain a news account on a real news server
and get a real newsreader and learn to use it? Are others? Are you
ready to help them learn how to use them?

Filtering technologies and practices are much better today than they
were even five years ago. We have faith that they will facilitate our use of
s.p.a. to our benefit and pleasure. Intellectually, their use is a piece of
cake as compared to the scientific problems we face daily.

Post by Kathy Morgan
The "alt" in alt.* hierarchy refers to an alternative way of creating
groups; it does not refer to the subject matter of the groups.
Acoustics is just as legitimate in alt.* as in sci.*. The difference is
that to get a group in sci.*, you have to convince the Big 8 hierarchy
management that your group would be successful and well used. A group
with no traffic that duplicates an existing group will simply cause
confusion and reduce the quality of discussions.

The increased exposure for the rest of our domestic and our worldwide
colleagues is what we seek. It's not our fault that the alt. groups are
second best.

I can admit that it IS my fault that I did not pursue this status way
back in 1995 when I noticed the lack of acoustics Groups (still the case).
So I have now risen out of my lethargy and attacked the task, now in
progress for a significnat part of a year.

Post by Kathy Morgan
The problem is that even if the group is created, the alt.* group will
not go away.

Well, not right away. But it is our intent to request the cancellation
of a.s.p.a after the s.p.a. group has developed its momentum. That alt.
status has always been a millstone.

Post by Kathy Morgan
That means that some of the people who currently discuss
acoustics will still be doing so in alt.sci.physics.acoustics, and some
will be using sci.physics.acoustics. The traffic levels in both may be
so low as to discourage participation in either group.

If you say that it is as impossible to eradicate a.s.p.a. as it is to
expunge your IRS record, perhaps that would be right. But..... I don't think
so....

Post by Kathy Morgan
To make sci.physics.acoustics successful if it is created would require
participants in the alt group to move to and post to the sci group.
They should at first probably crosspost all their messages to both
groups, since some people will not immediately have access to the new
group.

Correct.

Post by Kathy Morgan
If the new group is not available on their server, they should
request it be added. (Those who use Google are out of luck; Google adds
new groups if and when they choose and appear to be oblivious to users'
preferences or requests.) Someone will need to regularly post notice in
the alt.* group advising about the new group; on say a monthly basis for
at least a year.

Correct.

Post by Kathy Morgan
I am particularly concerned because some of the demand for the new group
is coming from users like yourself who are accessing
alt.sci.physics.acoustics from Google;

Not so for me... I use freenet because it's free. A recent survey brought
about a half dozen other possibilities.

Post by Kathy Morgan
Google is not going to
immediately add the sci.* group, so you will not be able to participate
in the sci.* group for some unknown length of time.

Always the case in Internet proceedings. We are learning beings... We
adapt.

Post by Kathy Morgan
How successful will
the new group be if none of you using Google can access it?

Answered above.

Post by Kathy Morgan
--
Kathy, member of Big 8 Management Board but speaking only for myself

Welcome aboard. What are some of your acoustical interests? See the
acoustics FAQ:

http://www.campanellaacoustics.com/faq.htm

which we developed HERE over a decade ago with the primary collaboration of
Andrew Silverman of the UK (whom I have never met). We solicited a starter,
then comments over a year or two. Andrew Then compiled its original file.
When "completed", we found no archive takers. So I had it compiled into a
searchable file and stored it on my web page, where I maintain it. I have
had requests, granted, to translate it into Dutch and into Chinese.


Ange



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---

[Steve Bonine]

Post by Angelo Campanella
If you say that it is as impossible to eradicate a.s.p.a. as it is to
expunge your IRS record, perhaps that would be right. But..... I don't think
so....

In the sense that both are vanishingly close to zero, they're about
equal. Groups in the alt hierarchy simply do not go away. Bogus
rmgroup control statements are so common for alt groups that no NSP can
honor them.

It's bad enough for removing big-8 newsgroups; we just went through that
discussion related to the whole idea of removing dead moderated
newsgroups in the big-8. Many people hold the opinion that it's a
complete waste of time to even bother. And that's for a managed
hierarchy that sends PGP-signed control messages. For alt, all control
messages are created equal; the concept of a "legitimate control
message" simply does not exist.

Please forget the idea that the alt group will go away. That doesn't
mean that a new newsgroup in the big 8 won't succeed, only that you will
always have the issue of new users finding the alt group first.

Always. Yes, it's a long time.

[Angelo Campanella]

Post by Angelo Campanella
If you say that it is as impossible to eradicate a.s.p.a. as it is to
expunge your IRS record, perhaps that would be right. But..... I don't think
so....

In the sense that both are vanishingly close to zero, they're about equal.
Groups in the alt hierarchy simply do not go away. Bogus rmgroup control
statements are so common for alt groups that no NSP can honor them.

Thanks very for the heads-up.

We can go as planned. Since the NSPs least likely to respond to rmgroup
are also those we most want to engage with s.p.a., little harm is done.
Those lingering may repose in comfort.

It's bad enough for removing big-8 newsgroups; we just went through that
discussion related to the whole idea of removing dead moderated newsgroups
in the big-8. Many people hold the opinion that it's a complete waste of
time to even bother. And that's for a managed hierarchy that sends
PGP-signed control messages. For alt, all control messages are created
equal; the concept of a "legitimate control message" simply does not
exist.

In acoustics, I know of none that have been obsoleted... as none have
existed to my knowledge other than a.s.p.a.

Please forget the idea that the alt group will go away.

If it means that the dregs will remain there, it's OK.

That doesn't mean that a new newsgroup in the big 8 won't succeed, only
that you will always have the issue of new users finding the alt group
first.

We can still montor a.s.p.a. From time to time, we will post a "where to
go" message there. The worse outcome would be were it highjcked for another
use.

Angelo Campanella



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---

[Kathy Morgan]

Post by Angelo Campanella

Post by Kathy Morgan
The problem is that even if the group is created, the alt.* group will
not go away.

Well, not right away. But it is our intent to request the cancellation
of a.s.p.a after the s.p.a. group has developed its momentum. That alt.
status has always been a millstone.

Post by Kathy Morgan
(snip)

If you say that it is as impossible to eradicate a.s.p.a. as it is to
expunge your IRS record, perhaps that would be right. But..... I don't think
so....

I think it's harder than getting your IRS record expunged! ;-) If the
new group is created and subscribers periodically check the old a.s.p.a.
to direct newcomers to the new group, that will surely help.

Post by Angelo Campanella
Welcome aboard. What are some of your acoustical interests? See the
http://www.campanellaacoustics.com/faq.htm

(laugh) I thought I had no acoustical interests, until I dropped by
a.s.p.a. as a result of this RFD discussion. There is some fascinating
discussion there. Sand as a sound proofing? It seemed
counter-intuitive, but it does make sense when I think about it.

[Ken Plotkin]

Post by Kathy Morgan
(laugh) I thought I had no acoustical interests, until I dropped by
a.s.p.a. as a result of this RFD discussion. There is some fascinating
discussion there. Sand as a sound proofing? It seemed
counter-intuitive, but it does make sense when I think about it.

That's the cool part about acoustics. It's interdisciplinary, and
includes all kinds of things that might not occur to a normal person.
FWIW, there's an acoustics FAQ that won a writing award from the
Acoustical Society of America (which is part of the American Institute
of Physics), much of its content based on posts in
alt.sci.physics.acoustics.

I'm not sure where Angelo gets the idea that "Some may view
"acoustics" as an archaic and a "dead" branch of physics..." It's
very nuch alive. Old topics move to the archives and new ones arise.
Of course, Angelo is the guy who started an "alt" group when it really
should have been "sci". :-)

Ken Plotkin

[Angelo Campanella]

Post by Ken Plotkin

Post by Kathy Morgan
(laugh) I thought I had no acoustical interests, until I dropped by
a.s.p.a. as a result of this RFD discussion. There is some fascinating
discussion there. Sand as a sound proofing? It seemed
counter-intuitive, but it does make sense when I think about it.

I've seen test results about designing against footfall sounds purveying
a floor to the room below; where the construction was a layer of sand about
1"-2" thick between sleepers, then the tread surface laid on top, finished
normally. The sound isolation performance was better than many other ways..

Post by Ken Plotkin
That's the cool part about acoustics. It's interdisciplinary, and
includes all kinds of things that might not occur to a normal person.

The interdisciplinary aspect of acoustics and the Acoustical Society of
America has kept me intrigued since 1954 when I attended my first ASA
meeting. The loayalty and diversity of the members continues to be a
stimulation for all. I believe that the sciences involved (there are many)
are actually stimulated to be "greater than the sum of the parts". Perhaps
the cochlear implants would not have come so soon if it were not for the ASA
and its diversity. In my time, we oicked up ocean acoustics, acoutical
signal processing and animal bioacoustics asn new ASA branches. These are a
welcome addition to the exxiting groups of Audiology, Speech Communication.
In the '25's and '60's we lost Audio (now the Audio Engineering Society) and
noise (Now the Institute of Noise Control Engineers). I think those losses
sparked the recent new additions.. My Thoughts.

`In its own way, a.s.p.a has hepled a little... It could be improved by
s.p.a., I think...

Post by Ken Plotkin
FWIW, there's an acoustics FAQ that won a writing award from the
Acoustical Society of America (which is part of the American Institute
of Physics), much of its content based on posts in
alt.sci.physics.acoustics.

I'm not familiar with that item.. I thought my FAQ was the only one
extant... unless........

Post by Ken Plotkin
I'm not sure where Angelo gets the idea that "Some may view
"acoustics" as an archaic and a "dead" branch of physics..."

Likely a fallback to my advanced education which occurred not too long
after WWII, when nuclear science became King of the Hill in physics. I often
felt in the interim that nuclear physics set Classical Physics back by about
20 years. It wasn't until the laser came along (the transistor raised but a
few eyebrows) that Classical Physics resumed its progress (my personal
thoughts).

Post by Ken Plotkin
It's very nuch alive. Old topics move to the archives and new ones
arise.
Of course, Angelo is the guy who started an "alt" group when it really
should have been "sci". :-)

Guilty as charged. It was not difficult. Acquintances at the Ohio State
Univerity's Compluter Center advised me of staff that would do it for me in
a few days provided that I would accept an "alt."status. (I have no direct
connection with OSU. I'm an independednt consultant, sometimes viewed as a
competitor to OSU professors that consult on the side in acoustics and noise
control.)

I chose a LONG name (a.s.p.a) as a ploy in 1995 to "keep the riff-raff
from finding it", and figuring that persons that knew how to spell acoustics
would certainly be welcome. It took the riff-raff (spam) a few years to find
it. By then it was well established. Users eventually bemoaned the fact that
some company servers would not allow access to alt groups... The rest is
history here.


Ange




--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---

[Big-8 Management Board]

RESULT
sci.physics.acoustics will be created

The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 2010-04-03 initiated a five-day
period for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8
Management Board has decided by vote to create unmoderated group
sci.physics.acoustics.

Vote results (yes-no-abstain): 10-0-0

NEWSGROUPS LINE:
For your newsgroups file:
sci.physics.acoustics Topics in acoustics and vibrations.

RATIONALE:

The group alt.sci.physics.acoustics in the same topic space was
started in 1995 and has been a successful group with productive
discussion since, but has not had the more broadly accepted Big 8
newsgroup posture.

FEEDBACK:

The following comments favored the formation of
sci.physics.acoustics:

Peter Larsen <digilyd...>:
- <002e6db2$0$20840$***@news.astraweb.com>

robert bristow-johnson <rbj...>:
- <f21de343-57b1-4334-b0c6-***@j27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
- <6337a8ec-a1b0-425e-b626-***@d27g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>

Ethan Winer <blow_166...>:
- <ff351a4d-82a1-4439-ba33-***@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>

Steve Bonine <spb...>:
- <***@mid.individual.net>

Doug Freyburger <dfreybur...>:
- <hn3k5b$732$***@news.eternal-september.org>

David E. Ross <nobody...>:
- <i-***@posted.docknet>

Angelo Campanella" <***@att.net>:
- <hmsehi$1c6j$***@adenine.netfront.net>

CHARTER:

This news group is intended for serious discussion on all technical
fields of acoustics and vibration as indicated by the Acoustical
Society of America. See page B1 in the 2006 (Green) ASA membership
directory. These are:

Architectural Acoustics
Engineering Acoustics
Musical Acoustics
Noise Acoustics
Physical Acoustics-
Animal Bioacoustics (now includes Acoustical Oceanography)
Psychological & Physiological Acoustics
Structural and Vibrations Acoustics
Speech Communications Acoustics
Underwater & Propagation Acoustics
Biomedical Ultrasound Acoustics
Bioresponse to Vibration Acoustics
Signal Processing in Acoustics

1. Consider this news group to be where Hello's are exchanged
followed by knowledgeable discussions on acoustics and vibration
question that may evolve. However, detailed repartee on elementary
hobbies such as loudspeaker design and amplified audio problems
should be discussed elsewhere on hobby groups, etc.

2. Our discussions should be concise, involving relatively short
messages; a few screen-loads usually suffice.

3. Avoid public debate that switches to smaller and smaller matters.
Private E-Mail is for that. Rather, stick to main issues from which
all of us will learn and also enjoy the benefits of this public
medium.

4. Resist the temptation to author large treatises here. Save that
energy for a separate E-mail file targeted to a recipient, or the
telephone

5. When including a copy of the message to which you respond, DELETE
all extraneous, non-germane lines. Leave only pertinent succinct
lines that will precede your learned response.

6. AVOID quarrelsome and profane language that ultimately detract
from the credibility of the arguments and the validity of the
information presented.

7. AVOID ad hominem and defamatory comments.

8. Brief "Jobs Available" or "Help Needed" postings are welcome
during economic malaise.

In these ways, we will all welcome and enjoy each other's thoughts.


POLICY IN LIEU OF MODERATION:

The group will be unmoderated. Messages which are off topic,
profane, spam, inflammatory, personal attacks, unduly argumentative,
or excessive "Jobs available" announcements are discouraged.

DISTRIBUTION:

This document has been posted to the following newsgroups:

news.announce.newgroups
news.groups.proposals
alt.sci.physics.acoustics
sci.physics

PROPONENT:

Angelo Campanella <***@att.net>

CHANGE HISTORY:
2009-06-14 1st RFD.
2010-03-05 2nd RFD.
2010-04-03 Final RFD / Last Call (B8MB).
2010-04-14 Result

--

[robert bristow-johnson]

                             RESULT
             sci.physics.acoustics will be created

atta boy, Ange!

r b-j

(dunno why, but my previous reply only went to the
news.groups.proposals destination.)

i dunno how we'll find out the new group exists, but when it does pop
up, we should consistently try to direct legit posts here to over
there.

r b-j

[Riccardo]

Post by robert bristow-johnson

                             RESULT
             sci.physics.acoustics will be created

atta boy, Ange!
r b-j
(dunno why, but my previous reply only went to the news.groups.proposals
destination.)
i dunno how we'll find out the new group exists, but when it does pop
up, we should consistently try to direct legit posts here to over there.
r b-j

Same here... hey when are we going to see it (google not yet, my ISP not
yet) as soon as available please let us know...

Riccardo

[Kathy Morgan]

Post by Riccardo

Post by Big-8 Management Board
RESULT
sci.physics.acoustics will be created

Same here... hey when are we going to see it (google not yet, my ISP not
yet) as soon as available please let us know...

The control message will probably go out tomorrow. Individual.net,
Albasani and a few other servers will pick it up immediately; some won't
pick it up until the checkgroups message showing it in the list goes out
or a user requests it.

I believe the checkgroups list goes out monthly and the next one is due
tomorrow; I don't know if the new group will make it onto the list or
maybe not be on it until next month. Google probably won't add the
group until some (unknown to me) minimum number of posts have been made
to the new group.

[Kathy Morgan]

[Followups set to sci.physics.acoustics]

Post by Kathy Morgan

Post by Riccardo

Post by Big-8 Management Board
RESULT
sci.physics.acoustics will be created

Same here... hey when are we going to see it (google not yet, my ISP not
yet) as soon as available please let us know...

The control message will probably go out tomorrow. Individual.net,
Albasani and a few other servers will pick it up immediately; some won't
pick it up until the checkgroups message showing it in the list goes out
or a user requests it.

The first control message has been sent, and I see that Individual.net
does have the group now, so it should be showing up also on at least
some other servers as well. Depending on your newsreader, you may need
to refresh your list of all groups available on your server to be able
to see it.

[Robin Stober]

Post by Kathy Morgan
The first control message has been sent, and I see that Individual.net
does have the group now, so it should be showing up also on at least
some other servers as well. Depending on your newsreader, you may need
to refresh your list of all groups available on your server to be able
to see it.

Also available on Eternal September.

[Angelo Campanella]

Post by Robin Stober

Post by Kathy Morgan
The first control message has been sent, and I see that Individual.net
does have the group now, so it should be showing up also on at least
some other servers as well. Depending on your newsreader, you may need
to refresh your list of all groups available on your server to be able
to see it.

Also available on Eternal September.

I tried eternal september today... When I downloaded their newsgroup list,
all I got was eternal september related groups... no sci groups.

So I did a little more digging to learn that you can request your news
server supplier to list a group you want by going to your respective

<>.grouprequests

where special requests are posted...

An interesting answer to another request in my server is the following:
(Question was "How easy is it to get groups listed here?" (motzarella):.

---quote---
No. For the Big 8 and other managed hierarchies, signed newgroup and
checkgroup control messages are honoured and no groups outside the
canonical group list will be created. For alt.*, groups will be added on
demand, provided there is a newgroup control message for the group in
the isc.org archives (i.e. a formally correct control message was sent
for this group at some time). This means that we will not add
alt.windows7.general at this time.
---unquote---

Kathy says that the sci.physics.acoustics control mesage will go out 16
Apr'10.......

I just posted a request for s.p.a to be displayed in my (freenews) server.

Ange




--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---

[Alexander Bartolich]

Post by Angelo Campanella
[...]
I tried eternal september today... When I downloaded their newsgroup list,
all I got was eternal september related groups... no sci groups.

http://www.eternal-september.org/index.php?showpage=faq#Login-No-Auth
# I can only see the hierarchy eternal-september.*
#
# This hierarchy is open for reading and posting without registration.
# You have either forgotten to configure your client to use your user-
# name and password or the client does not send the user data, as it
# assumes they are not required.
# In this case it is necessary to force the client to send authenti-
# cation data.

--

[Angelo Campanella]

Post by Alexander Bartolich
http://www.eternal-september.org/index.php?showpage=faq#Login-No-Auth
# I can only see the hierarchy eternal-september.*
#
# This hierarchy is open for reading and posting without registration.
# You have either forgotten to configure your client to use your user-
# name and password or the client does not send the user data, as it
# assumes they are not required.

OK. I found an eternal september message stting that very same item to
me, so I revised the Outlook settings for the eternal September account,
then found i could download the thousands of news groups it purveys. a.s.p.
was indeed there, no surprise...

Thanks loads.

Ange

[Asbjørn]

Post by Robin Stober

Post by Kathy Morgan
The first control message has been sent, and I see that Individual.net
does have the group now, so it should be showing up also on at least
some other servers as well. Depending on your newsreader, you may need
to refresh your list of all groups available on your server to be able
to see it.

Also available on Eternal September.

Yeah, I know, but nothing more is happening here ....

Asbjørn

[Kathy Morgan]

Post by Asbjørn

Post by Robin Stober

Individual.net does have the group now, so it should be showing up also
on at least some other servers as well.

Also available on Eternal September.

Yeah, I know, but nothing more is happening here ....

Right at first some people will not have direct access to the new group.
One thing that will help is to crosspost messages, as you did this one,
including replies to questions, to both groups. Those who don't yet
have the new group will still be able to see the messages, and the
increased traffic in the new group may eventually prompt Google (one of
the larger sources of Usenet messages) to start carrying it.

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Kathy Morgan

Post by Asbjørn

Post by Robin Stober

Individual.net does have the group now, so it should be showing up also
on at least some other servers as well.

Also available on Eternal September.

Yeah, I know, but nothing more is happening here ....

Right at first some people will not have direct access to the new group.
One thing that will help is to crosspost messages, as you did this one,
including replies to questions, to both groups. Those who don't yet
have the new group will still be able to see the messages, and the
increased traffic in the new group may eventually prompt Google (one of
the larger sources of Usenet messages) to start carrying it.

Everybody's on their way to the ASA meeting in Baltimore and not checking
their Usenet feed, thus the lack of postings to the new group.
--scott

[Steve Bonine]

. . . and the
increased traffic in the new group may eventually prompt Google (one of
the larger sources of Usenet messages) to start carrying it.

Or not. It's one of the great mysteries of the universe what it is that
triggers the addition of a new newsgroup at Google. One of the possible
theories, and it is certainly nothing but a theory, is that Google
notices articles that are crossposted to groups that they don't carry.
If the number of these is beyond some threshold, a human is alerted.

Other theories include relative humidity, phase of moon, and the
acoustic properties of material between the ears of certain dogs.

[Angelo Campanella]

Post by Kathy Morgan

Post by Asbjørn

Post by Robin Stober

Individual.net does have the group now, so it should be showing up also
on at least some other servers as well.

Also available on Eternal September.

Yeah, I know, but nothing more is happening here ....

Right at first some people will not have direct access to the new group.
One thing that will help is to crosspost messages, as you did this one,
including replies to questions, to both groups. Those who don't yet
have the new group will still be able to see the messages, and the
increased traffic in the new group may eventually prompt Google (one of
the larger sources of Usenet messages) to start carrying it.

Now tha the smoke has cleared, I have to express a big THANKS!!!
to Kathy for hangin' in there to shepherd us through the process.

To Marty; likewise....

Recent traffic is slow, to be sure, but we occasionaly pick up a new
person that clearly apprciates this sci.physics.scoustics group. We will
have a long and prosperous run....

Ange

[Angelo Campanella]

Post by Big-8 Management Board
RESULT
sci.physics.acoustics will be created

Post by Big-8 Management Board
RESULT
sci.physics.acoustics will be created

woo-hoo!
atta boy, Ange.
r b-j

I could not have done it without yours and Noral's help... supporting and
willing to risk being a moderator if things had turned that way.
We'll keep a watch for s.p.a. to come up on line...

Ange



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---

[GregS]

Post by Angelo Campanella

Post by Big-8 Management Board
RESULT
sci.physics.acoustics will be created

Post by Big-8 Management Board
RESULT
sci.physics.acoustics will be created

woo-hoo!
atta boy, Ange.
r b-j

I could not have done it without yours and Noral's help... supporting and
willing to risk being a moderator if things had turned that way.
We'll keep a watch for s.p.a. to come up on line...
Ange

In my case I would have to ask the computer people to add the group, but my current reader
would not pick it up anyway.

greg