Xref: utzoo comp.sys.att:10818 unix-pc.general:6424
Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!trac2000!das13!dave
From: dave@das13.snide.com (Dave Snyder)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,unix-pc.general
Subject: Re: comp.sys.3b1?? (WAS: Re: Monthly posting about Unix-PC network)
Keywords: comp.sys.3b1
Message-ID: <1450@das13.snide.com>
Date: 13 Nov 90 01:56:26 GMT
References: <1990Nov1.080516.14051@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <1990Nov12.160511.25395@daffy.cs.wisc.edu>
Followup-To: poster
Distribution: na
Organization: Snide Inc. - Folcroft, PA
Lines: 21

In article <1990Nov12.160511.25395@daffy.cs.wisc.edu>, upl@gumby.cs.wisc.edu (Undergrad Projects Lab) writes:
-> 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.
-> 
Not that my two cents matters, but I like these groups.  I don't care whether
they are alternate groups or groups buried in comp.sys; I will still want them
on my machine no matter how the heirarchy is.  I can honestly say though, that
I like the "3b1" verbage better than the "unix-pc" wording (too much leadway
for incorrect assumptions w/ "unix-pc").
-- 
David Snyder @ Snide Inc. - Folcroft, PA

UUCP:  ..!uunet!trac2000!das13!dave     INTERNET:  dave@das13.snide.com