Xref: utzoo news.groups:32762 comp.graphics:18509 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ukma!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!gatech!prism!mailer.cc.fsu.edu!sun13!murray From: murray@sun13.scri.fsu.edu (John Murray) Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.graphics Subject: Re: Where Is Everybody? (Comments on names for new c.graphics.* group) Message-ID: <3181@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> Date: 9 Jun 91 10:59:53 GMT References: Followup-To: news.groups Organization: SCRI, Florida State University Lines: 71 Yes, I know discussions like this belong in news.groups, but it's pretty obvious that the people who are frustrated with wading through comp.graphics are also not bothering to wade through news.groups. Just trying to stimulate discussion, so we can resolve this stuff. In article adrianho@barkley.berkeley.edu (Adrian J Ho) writes: > > comp.graphics.research IMO this is still the best name for the group. The fact that we went through the first three weeks or so of unofficial discussion and the first week or two of official discussion without much serious opposition to this name indicates to me that the name is at least acceptable to most people. I also think it's the best name for discouraging requests for VGA-based GIF displayers. I think most of the latest name discussions have come up out of boredom more than anything else. IMO of course. > comp.graphics.interesting Ack! Personally I don't think this should have even been suggested. Not only is this associated with John Woolverton's bogus CFV, but the general consensus at the time seemed to be that it was a *terr*ible name. Obviously the most interesting stuff in graphics for us is not the most interesting graphics stuff for the guy trying to get a look at this month's Playmate. > comp.graphics.development I'm kinda neutral on this name. IMO .research would tend to suggest a higher level of discussion. After all, doesn't building your own image file displayer constitute development? Requests for image file formats is the second or third largest category of postings in comp.graphics. (requests for image file displayers and converters being the largest by a margin of 20% or so.) > comp.graphics.programmer I don't like this for the same reason I don't like .software. Not everyone doing interesting graphics is doing programming. Also see the comments under .development. Same thing applies to .programmer. > comp.graphics.mod It's not immediately clear what this group is about. I'd rather have a name that gave some idea what the purpose of the group is. > comp.graphics.theory My second favorite after .research. Still gets across the idea that this is *not* the group to go to to find a GIF <--> BIFF converter. > comp.graphics.software An obvious bash against the graphics hardware guys, as has been mentioned. >Send your vote for newsgroup name to: > > groupname@barkley.berkeley.edu > >You may place the name you choose anywhere in the message. Let's get the official creation vote going on time! The name and mod issues need to be gotten out of the way. -- *Standard Disclaimers Apply*| ---Get Out Of HELL Free!--- John R. Murray |The bearer of this card is entitled to forgive murray@vsjrm.scri.fsu.edu |Himself of all Sins, Errors and Transgressions. Supercomputer Research Inst.| -- D. Owen Rowley