Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pro-exchange.cts.com!rich
From: rich@pro-exchange.cts.com (Rich Sims)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Call For Discussion
Message-ID: <15801.apple.info-apple@pro-exchange>
Date: 9 Dec 89 21:37:06 GMT
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 22

In-Reply-To: message from farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier)

I'd have to agree with those that advocate keeping to the existing scheme of
things as far as group names go.  The length of the name is not a factor, it's
the format that matters in this case.

I'd be in favor of renaming comp.sys.apple -> comp.sys.apple2 and also for
creating comp.sys.apple2.tech, but I'd be against the comp.tech.<whatever>
where <whatever> is a specific computer type.

btw- I don't think the comp.sys.apple2.tech group would gain us a lot, but
it's certainly worth a shot.  I base that on my readings of the comp.sys.amiga
and amiga.tech groups, where most articles are cross-posted to both, which
just increases the density instead of splitting it into more manageable chunks.

Maybe we Apple users could do it better, though.... hope! hope!

-Rich Sims-

UUCP: crash!pro-exchange!rich
ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!rich@nosc.mil
INET: rich@pro-exchange.cts.com