> > On Sun, 29 Jan 1996, Tom Salsberg wrote:
> > A veg-raw newsgroup would be nice too.

> > I think there is one that's not very active that has the keyword
> > "vitality-for-life" or something like that in it. Definitely the
> > word "vitality". I think it likely to be alt.food.vitality-4-life but am
> > not sure. Do a search for it and it'll probably come up. Then post post post!

> I looked in the usenet and found a group called
> "alt.org.vitality-4-life".  There weren't any posts in it.  Does anyone
> know anything about the group?  Whats it about?  Is anyone administering
> it or is it just a regular anarchic alt newsgroup?  Would posts about raw
> foods be acceptable there?

Thanks for taking the time to make positive I.D. on this newsgroup
alt.org.vitality-4-life, Michael.

> The amount of posts that I have been getting is much higher than I had
> expected.  With the old mailing list we were lucky to get a handful of
> posts a week.  Now my mailbox is inundated every night.  There are a
> number of different threads that seem to be going on.  I am finding it
> hard to follow all of them.  I imagine others are too.

> It seems to me that this level of posts would be better in a usenet group
> than in a mailing list.  The usenet software would automatically group the
> posts by topic.  Thread are retained in order.  You can read the posts at
> your leasure, following the threads that interest you.

> The thing is I have no idea how to go about setting up a newsgroup.  If
> we could use the above newsgroup that would make life much simpler.

It's been inactive for months since I first discovered it. I suggest we
board that vessel and take it over. Arrrrrrgghhh, maties! Are you WITH ME?!!

> Another option would be to just start posting to the vegetarian and vegan
> newsgroups but identifying the posts as raw foods in the subject header.
> If the level of posts warranted it a raw foods sub-group could be
> created.  This would be a more appropriate place for a newsgroup than the
> alt.org.vitality-4-life location above.

We don't know that. Maybe the original charter of alt.org.vitality-4-life was
to promote raw foods and Natural Hygiene in general which promotes raw foods.
It could be that posting to alt.org.vitality-4-life could be the more
appropriate location. I guess it depends on whether "org" stands for
organic or organization. I prefer to guess that it stands for organic and
act as if I'm right. That being said, there's nothing wrong with having some
raw-veg threads going in rec.food.vegetarian also, but I think there
will be lots of flak from the people already esconsed in there who are
really into eating cooked glop.

> I would like to look into starting a usenet group but don't have the time
> with the amount of time I'm putting into this list.  Perhaps other people
> on the list are more knowledgeable in this area.

I don't know how to do it, but if we start posting to alt.org.vitality-4-life
and commit to continuing to use it for the rest of 1996, with a re-evaluation
of the situation close to the end of the year - say right after
Hallowe'en? - that would give you almost a whole year to research and
implement a new newsgroup that could be called rec.food.veg-raw or something.
When it's ready, you could e-mail us all with the announcement as well as
posting it on alt.org.vitality-4-life.

> For people unfamiliar with the usenet, unmoderated groups also have their
> downsides.  They can easily convert into mindless never-ending
> flamewars.  A handful of obnoxious posters can chase out serious
> posters.  Its really up to the users to maintain the group.

> So to me it seems the best thing is to have both a moderated and an
> unmoderated venue for discussion.  The unmoderated venue can handle the
> large amounts of posts that can be just too voluminous for anyone to
> screen.  The moderated venue can be a back up if the unmoderated venue
> gets out of hand.

> So the bottom line is that I just don't have the time to continue
> responding to and/or forwarding everything that comes in.  I have other
> commitments that demand my time.

> In reviving the mailing list I wanted to give raw foodists a chance to
> communicate.  There are really so few of us that the internet seems
> the best way to communicate.  But I can't do it myself.  So what I will
> do is continue to forward some of the posts that come in.  Preference
> will be given to any posts responding to this message, especially ones
> with suggestions and solutions.  As things slow down I will send out the
> backlog.  Mailings that seem to be back and forth discussions between two
> people would be better emailed between just the two participants.

This sounds quite sensible, considering you're doing this all manually.
Another alternative would be to speak to your service provider about
possibly automating Veg-Raw. That is, assuming you haven't already done
so, which you probably have, in which case, never mind.... :)

I'm going to sign off here, Michael, but not before thanking you again
for bringing this movement forward in the way that you have.

Best wishes,

Tom

> If a newsgroup gets off the ground I will continue to maintain this
> mailing list.  However I will use more selective judgement as to what
> gets sent out and mailings may not be as timely.

> Also someone emailed me about a raw foods web page he was setting up.  If
> he emails me again with the web page address that will also be sent out.
> Any suggestions for the page should be sent directly to him.

> Michael