There have been 50 people who responded to me via E-Mail about the
original RFD for comp.lang.logo about 2 weeks ago. Additionally,
there have been a handful of posts on news.group about it, mostly
asking where the discussion was. So the question is, will a hundred
people even vote if we move a CFV? Remember that summer vacation is
also pending and this when many educators step outside their normal
schedule.
All replies I received have been enthusiastically in favor of the
group, some even waxed ecstatic about the opportunities it afforded
for future discussions and exchanges of information. All seemed to
accept the aims, scope and goals section without suggestions for major
change. The only noticeable comment was that as cute as
comp.mindstorms might be, it shouldn't be used because people would
continue viewing Logo as only child's play.
From past experience, I know there have got to be well over a hundred
people on at least a periodic basis who read/write/think/post about
Logo in both the obvious and obscure groups. As an experiment, I
instrumented the newspipe to find occurrences of Logo in news articles
over a 48 hour period. Sure enough this morning, I checked wc on the
capture file and found over 400 lines of entries for Logo references.
407 405 15366 total
However, checking the articles that were referred to in the file [ a
real tedious job], most were not about comp.lang.logo. The stats for
legitimate comp.lang.logo references along with the general topic
area are:
newsgroup No. Area of discussion
---------------|--|---------------------------------------------------------
comp.lang.forth 5 comparison of LOGO to Forth for children on an Atari 800XL
comp.scheme 3 Relationship of Lisp, Scheme and Logo, improvements to each
sci.psychology 1 Semantics, children, and Logo as an exploration tool.
misc.kids 1 Doylestown Horror
comp.ai.philosoph2 Use of Logo enables CP victim to acquire skills
comp.edu 1 Plea from CIS for information; repeated in about 15 groups
---------------|--|----------------------------------------------------------
Total 13 Articles on Logo that would have resided in comp.lang.logo
Additionally there been a series of questions in comp.software-eng and
sci.math about languages suitable for children use in advanced study,
independent exploration, or as a present. Today, there was a request
for help with an approach to learning BASIC. This topic probably
would have crossed over to comp.lang.logo sometime ago if it existed.
Where are we:
By separate cover, I am writing the advice group at rpi for their
insights or recommendations on when [and whether] to CFV. I also put
together a first cut a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) list, which I
am also posting. I have started on a draft of answers, but suspect we
should farm this out to those who are the most qualified to write the
answers. If I get time to clean it up in the next week, I will post
the draft answers and my recommendations on who to get to write the
real answers.
I believe that James Gow has secured the appropriate E-Mail addresses
for a vote on comp.lang.logo, vote counting software is being sent to
him, and we are probably ready to start a vote from a services
viewpoint.
This is not a call to flood anyones mailbox [I had enough trouble
responding to the 50+ people who volunteered interest, experience,
support and participation], or newsgroup with preliminary votes.
However, let us know if we have forgotten anything necessary for
successfully establishing a logo newsgroup. Let us also know if there
is a route to maximize voting participation by Logo friends and
mindstorm lovers to ensure successful passage of the newsgroup.
graham
--
Graham O'Neil ·····@aio.jsc.nasa.gov ······@nasamail
Lockheed 2400 NASA RD 1 Houston, TX 77058 (713)333-7197
----------------------------------------------------------
Practice Random Kindness and Senseless Acts of Beauty