Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-ngp.UTEXAS
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!vecpyr!lll-crg!mordor!ut-sally!ut-ngp!mberns
From: mberns@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Mark Bernstein)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.news.adm,net.news.group,net.auto
Subject: Re: new newsgroup needed!
Message-ID: <2413@ut-ngp.UTEXAS>
Date: Tue, 24-Sep-85 10:14:35 EDT
Article-I.D.: ut-ngp.2413
Posted: Tue Sep 24 10:14:35 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Sep-85 07:20:53 EDT
References: <1178@vax1.fluke.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: UTexas Computation Center, Austin, Texas
Lines: 54
Xref: linus net.news:3158 net.news.adm:365 net.news.group:3167 net.auto:7254


> ..........Below are people who expressed their opinion to
> me over the last week.  net.driving or net.auto.tech are only two ideas, but
> regardless a another newsgroup is needed.

> net.driving				
> ___________				

> Dale Chaudiere, FLUKE			
> Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Automation Sys.	
> Chris Meier, Honeywell SRC
> Mark Bernstein, Texas Computation Cen.
> .
>  .
>   .

> net.auto.tech
> _____________

> Pat Vilbrandt, FLUKE
> .
>  .
> etc.


Do we need to form "camps"?   I'm fairly new to the net (reading for
a few months now) and perhaps not as familiar with protocol as I should be.
What is the significance of finding one's name on one or another of the
lists above?  This may not be an important issue, but I'm not sure.

My support for the idea of splitting net.auto came about actually because 
I, too, had become tired of reading the polemics about "driving" (insurance, 
DWI, radar detectors, social security numbers on licenses, etc.) interspersed
among the technical discussions, 
and thought it might be a good idea to have the "driving" topics 
in another group for those who are interested.  Or conversely, I suppose,
(and maybe this is where the confusion arose) create a new group solely for 
technical discussions.  Whichever.  If I'm not mistaken, I seem to recall 
that the original impetus for this idea (article titled something 
like "... Time to leave this group..") was in a similar spirit.  I'd much 
prefer to focus my attention on the "net.auto.tech" topic(s) and *not* have 
to wade through the material which would go into "net.driving".

Hence, for the record, I think I'd rather be "included" (if that is what 
this is about, and if this is necessary for some reason) in the 
net.auto.tech group in lists such as the above.  Perhaps others who have 
indicated their interest in this idea feel similarly, and all this could 
be sorted out.

Or perhaps none of this list business matters in any real sense, and I'm 
making a big deal out of nothing.   Please, no flames if that's the case -
I'm really not at all sure. 

Mark Bernstein (UT Austin, Speech Communication)


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com