Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!devcom!netsys!len
From: len@netsys.NETSYS.COM (Len Rose)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,u3b.misc
Subject: Re: "comp.sys.3b2" and "comp.sources.3b2" anyone?
Summary: We tried a long time ago.. Apathy.
Keywords: time to continue the process?
Message-ID: <20590@netsys.NETSYS.COM>
Date: 7 May 91 07:43:20 GMT
References: <1991Jan28.012133.13672@mtek.com> <1991May6.164352.19533@cbfsb.att.com>
Followup-To: u3b.misc,comp.sys.att
Organization: Netsys Inc.
Lines: 20


 Creating comp.sys.3b2 is fine as long as there enough traffic. We tried to
 create it before and we weren't able to generate enough interest. Look
 at the statistics for the u3b subnet.. 

 Creating comp.sources.3b2 is not a good idea. The software is generic
 (how much more generic can AT&T System V get?) , and there really isn't
 anything 3B2 specific to post (that can't be sent to alt.sources, or even
 comp.sources.misc ... 

 This rampant group creation blitz since the cabal bit the dust has had
 some really bad side effects. 

 The info-3b2 mailing list is still intact, albeit out of date. If anyone
 still wants to be added, it can be done. I will be passing off the list
 of names to Steve Friedl sometime in the summer, before I go to club fed.

 Let's just see how a vote progresses... 
 
 Just an opinion (I shouldn't even be posting,since I am officially gagged)