Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pa.dec.com!hollie.rdg.dec.com!ryn.mro4.dec.com!ultnix.enet.dec.com!taber From: taber@ultnix.enet.dec.com (Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber) Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds Subject: Re: ONE WEEK TO CALL FOR VOTE Message-ID: <4068@ryn.mro4.dec.com> Date: 4 Mar 91 17:18:06 GMT References: <6433@rex.cs.tulane.edu> Sender: guest@ryn.mro4.dec.com Reply-To: taber@ultnix.enet.dec.com (Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber) Organization: KC1TD@KB4N.NH.USA.NA.EARTH.SOLAR_SYSTEM.UNIVERSE.MIND_OF_GOD.01463 Lines: 33 In article <6433@rex.cs.tulane.edu>, mandel@vax.anes.tulane.edu (Jeff E Mandel MD MS) writes: |> [...] Thus, I am most interested in the views of |>those individuals who I see as most affected by the choice - those HP |>users who |>use 28s and other non-48 systems. Do you want to stay in the |>.handhelds group |>or do you want to go to the new group? Let's not skew the question too much -- there is no new group. There won't be a new group unless a vote indicates that one is desired. The question then becomes do the readers want the new group to be for 48's only or 28's and 48's or for all HP calculators? You've appointed yourself to coordinate the vote and so you get to call the shots to some extent about the name you're going to propose. But the readership in general should be polled for input to that choice -- it's not proper to partition the readership. After all, why do the 28 users get a choice of staying or being evicted when the 48 users are not being extended the same choice? Their only choice comes with the vote. Once again, I point out that moving the traffic on the 48 out of the group is a point solution and suffers from the failing of all point solutions -- a changing world will make it obsolete. -- >>>==>PStJTT Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber, KC1TD If I was authorized to speak for my employer, I'd be too important to waste my time on this crap....