Xref: utzoo unix-pc.general:3335 comp.sys.att:7015
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watmath!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!apple!ames!zorch!pacbell!safari!whizz!alexc
From: alexc@whizz.uucp (Alex M. Chan)
Newsgroups: unix-pc.general,comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: Too much cross-posting?
Message-ID: <705@whizz.uucp>
Date: 18 Jul 89 20:49:21 GMT
References: <674@whizz.uucp> <159@zorch.UU.NET> <696@whizz.uucp> <490@manta.pha.pa.us> <704@whizz.uucp>
Reply-To: alexc@whizz.UUCP (Alex M. Chan)
Organization: McCormick & Hovell, Inc.
Lines: 22

In article <704@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes:
>In article <490@manta.pha.pa.us> brant@manta.pha.pa.us (Brant Cheikes) writes:

	Well, I agree with some of the posting in here, but I think that
	the groups should be renamed to comp.sys.unic-pc, comp.binaries.unix-pc
	.... and follow the norm for general. This way most of the backbone
	sites would have the group(s), this means that if people who is/are
	interested in getting them could do so.

	But I got kind of upset when some people say that "if you want
	this group, you have to call long distance or so inorder to get it.
	......" this seems to be against the orginal reason for USENET.

	This is just my $0.02, if you have any responces ot so, please
	use E-mail instead and not follow up.


 
Alex M. Chan. | E-Mail     : sun!nosun!{qiclab|whizz}!tanya!root
/------------\| DISCLAIMER : The above stated is only my personal opinion,
| Beam me up Scotty......  | ...in no way it represent my employer or my
\------------/             |              organization....