Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site uwmacc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!rick
From: rick@uwmacc.UUCP (the absurdist)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: New group proposal: net.micro.{flame,compet,bench,argue,...}
Message-ID: <1229@uwmacc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Jun-85 15:59:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: uwmacc.1229
Posted: Wed Jun 19 15:59:52 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Jun-85 00:05:43 EDT
References: <963@bnl44.UUCP>
Reply-To: rick@uwmacc.UUCP (Rick Keir)
Distribution: net
Organization: UWisconsin-Madison Academic Comp Center
Lines: 23

[ This bug is a lot faster than your bug, nyah, nyah ]

Ditto!  Net.micro.bench would be a TERRIFIC way of improving 
the micro groups.  As it stands, cross-postings to 
net.micro[pc,68k, mac] and net.arch are all too common.
Even if the original posting really did justify the scatter
gun approach (rare...), the followups don't. 
	Putting all this in its own group would let those of us
who USE micros concentrate on how to exploit what we have, while
giving room for those who want to talk about chip design.
	I'd like to add a suggestion that net.micro.bench also be
described as the appropriate place to start discussions of
compiler benchmarks.  These discussions have the same scattergun
problem that the chip speed discussions do, with the bonus that
they slop over into the net.lang discussions and end up in 
religous flames about C vs. Ada vs. Pascal....
	Start a new group ... and make my working day easier.

-- 
"I get PAID to read all this net.micro stuff"
Rick Keir -- MicroComputer Information Center, MACC
1210 West Dayton St/U Wisconsin Madison/Mad WI 53706
{allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!rick