Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!reading!chive!ac1
From: ac1@chive.cs.reading.ac.uk (Andrew Cunningham)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: information overload
Message-ID: <2456@onion.reading.ac.uk>
Date: 30 Jun 90 21:33:27 GMT
References: <1990Jun28.153531.3657@Solbourne.COM> <92N402sN01Qr01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
Sender: news@reading.ac.uk
Reply-To: ac1@rosemary.cs.reading.ac.uk (Andrew Cunningham)
Organization: Comp. Sci. Dept., Reading Univ., UK.
Lines: 34

In article <92N402sN01Qr01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kpc00@JUTS.uts.amdahl.com (Kimball P Collins) writes:
>This looks like a useful newsgroup, but there are a lot of articles on
>different kinds of topics.
True
>Perhaps we can split the group?
I'm pretty sure this has been discussed before, but it seems like a
good idea to me.
>Maybe:
>
>        o Motif
>        o general X discussion
>        o future X versions
>        o Xt
>        o Xlib
>        o other libraries
>

This seems like *one* good division.  I think the traffic is large enough
to warrant splitting comp.windows.x.  

Based on my experince reading c.w.x I think that just to split the
group as r3/r4/general (c.w.x.r3, c.w.x.r4, and c.w.x) would be
sufficient to minimize the amount of irrelevant (to me) stuff I have to
wade through every day.

Any comments?  (flames > /dev/null).




Yours etc,                      | e-mail: ac1@csug.cs.reading.ac.uk
Captain B.J. Smethwick          |------------------------------------------
in a white wine sauce with      | Nobody agrees with my opinions, though
shallots, mushrooms and garlic. | everybody is entitled to them.