Xref: utzoo news.admin:10533 news.groups:23463 comp.unix.internals:83 Path: utzoo!mnetor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!math.lsa.umich.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!ziggy!screamer!tscs!tct!chip From: chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups,comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: c.u.wizards vs. c.u.internals Message-ID: <26E4EC42.42AB@tct.uucp> Date: 5 Sep 90 12:14:58 GMT References: <34639@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <18530@rpp386.cactus.org> Followup-To: news.groups Organization: Teltronics/TCT, Sarasota, FL Lines: 22 [ Followups to news.groups ] According to pjg@acsu.buffalo.edu (Paul Graham): >Is anyone concerned that others will refuse to use c.u.i because >they find it inappropriate (or believe that their unix source >license prohibits them from posting to a group called c.u.i)? I don't think the newsgroup name will be a factor. After all, if people realize that comp.sources.unix isn't for proprietary UNIX[tm] source code, then they should also realize that c.u.internals will not be a vehicle for trade secret disclosure. According to jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II): >How about people who've un-aliased the group after being convinced >the name change really was a bad idea? As for people who think c.u.internals was a bad idea, well, the group passed its vote according to the guidelines. Anyone who thinks it should be renamed is free to run another vote. I should hope that administrators will carry c.u.internals in the meantime. -- Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT ,