Xref: utzoo news.groups:32203 comp.sys.handhelds:7943
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!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: news.groups,comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: Re: RFD comp.sys.handelds split
Message-ID: <4895@ryn.mro4.dec.com>
Date: 20 May 91 16:04:58 GMT
References: <7567@rex.cs.tulane.edu>
Sender: guest@ryn.mro4.dec.com
Reply-To: taber@ultnix.enet.dec.com (Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: KC1TD@KB4N.NH.USA.NA.EARTH.SOLAR_SYSTEM.UNIVERSE.MIND_OF_GOD.01463
Lines: 65

In article <7567@rex.cs.tulane.edu>, mandel@vax.anes.tulane.edu (Jeff E
Mandel MD MS) writes:
|>1) Unless I seriously misunderstand David Lawrence (and he is invited
|>to
|>correct me), the idea of comp.sys.handhelds, comp.sys.palmtops will
|>not be
|>acceptable. If we stick with names under comp.sys.handhelds,
|>comp.sys.handhelds.handhelds & comp.sys.handhelds.palmtops doesn't
|>quite make
|>it. I know some of you think that whatever makes sense to you as a
|>reworking of
|>the namespace must obviously be a candidate solution, but I found out
|>otherwise.

Excuse me?  Comp.sys.handhelds exists now.  That must carry some weight
in terms of it being acceptable.  If we go with the naming that seems to
be gaining support, then the new group would be comp.sys.palmtops. Seems
to fit the pre-approved hierarchy, but since this is being discussed
publicly in news.groups then the net.gods have a chance to speak.  

|>2) Every proposal I have tried (comp.sys.handhelds.hp,
|>comp.sys.handhelds.hp48,
|>comp.sys.handhelds.hp2848, to name a few) has had a number of zealots
|>who hate
|>it. Most of these people seem to take the attitude that "we don't
|>really need a
|>split, but...". Well, there are a lot of people who feel we need a
|>split, and
|>we aren't going to be convinced that a group that is defacto HP48
|>programmers
|>is appropriately named comp.sys.handhelds just because a few people
|>can't stand
|>the idea of reading two newsgroups because the split is not exactly
|>along the
|>lines they desire.

Excuse me again, but this latest round of postings sounds like it's
*you* who are throwing a tantrum over not having the split go the way
you desire.  You personally don't get the dictate the name.  The group
creation guidelines require that there be open discussion and the name
be arrived at by consensus then voted on.  So far, there seems to be a
movement toward general groupings and AWAY from a specific group for
HP48's only.  I'm sure there are people who agree with your desire to
isolate the HP48 from everyone else, but unless they speak up, voting an
HP48-only group will clearly fly in the face of the group creation
guidelines.

|>3) There are several individuals (and I'm sure you know who you are) whose
|>opinions are well known. I would appreciate it if some other people
|>would make
|>their opinions known. Not that I don't love hearing from all of
|>you...

Odd as it sounds, I join Jeff in soliciting opinions from the readership
at large.  I believe he's wrong in thinking that an HP48-only group is a
good solution, but I believe more in open discussion and consensus. 
Remember that the more discussion in news.groups the better a chance of
the final solution being acceptable to all.


--
                                             >>>==>PStJTT
                                     Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber, KC1TD

"Nerd" is so demeaning, I prefer "fashion-impared."