Xref: utzoo comp.sys.att:10809 unix-pc.general:6419
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!uwvax!daffy!gumby.cs.wisc.edu!upl
From: upl@gumby.cs.wisc.edu (Undergrad Projects Lab)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,unix-pc.general
Subject: comp.sys.3b1?? (WAS: Re: Monthly posting about Unix-PC network)
Summary: should we have a comp.sys.3b1
Keywords: comp.sys.3b1
Message-ID: <1990Nov12.160511.25395@daffy.cs.wisc.edu>
Date: 12 Nov 90 16:05:11 GMT
References: <1990Nov1.080516.14051@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <1990Nov3.045636.12735@cs.ucla.edu> <603@nih-csl.nih.gov>
Sender: news@daffy.cs.wisc.edu (The News)
Reply-To: harier!sparkie@cs.wisc.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Lines: 29

In article <603@nih-csl.nih.gov> crtb@helix.nih.gov (Chuck Bacon) writes:

[ ... ]

>I vote for comp.sys.unix-pc, or perhaps comp.sys.3b1 (shorter).

Currently in the unix-pc.* groups there is a lot of confusion with PC users
running things like Xenix.  They think the group is a general discussion group
for PC unices.  The name "comp.sys.3b1" would help eliminate that confusion.
I would recommend that we do something like the current unix-pc.* groups:
	comp.sys.3b1.general
	comp.sys.3b1.sources
	comp.sys.3b1.uucp
It seems to me that these are reasonable groups to have, although the latter
two do not seem to get that much usage.  Perhaps just comp.sys.3b1 would be
adequate.

Does anyone want to start a call for discussion in news.groups?  I don't
run news software at my site, so I couldn't possibly create the groups
if it were passed.  Besides, I'm sure that there is someone out there who
is more knowelagble than I am in the process of creating non-alternative 
news groups.  

Personally, I'd like to see this.  Anyone else have an opinion?
- sparkie
P.S.	PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not reply to the account from which this article
	was posted.  Instead, reply to:
		harier!sparkie@cs.wisc.edu
	Thanks.