Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site islenet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!ptsfa!dual!islenet!jons
From: jons@islenet.UUCP (Jonathan Spangler)
Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.news.adm,net.micro.atari,net.micro.cbm,net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: New Group Needed
Message-ID: <1868@islenet.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 24-Nov-85 06:07:04 EST
Article-I.D.: islenet.1868
Posted: Sun Nov 24 06:07:04 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Nov-85 05:17:19 EST
References: <622@tekigm.UUCP>
Reply-To: jons@islenet.UUCP (Jonathan Spangler)
Distribution: net
Organization: Islenet Inc.,  Honolulu
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath net.news.group:4705 net.news.adm:440 net.micro.atari:1760 net.micro.cbm:1839 net.micro.amiga:855

In article <622@tekigm.UUCP> aegroup@tekigm.UUCP (Dennis Ward) writes:
>Similarly if either Commodore or Atari come out with 32 bit machines, then new
>subgroups could be established.  ST and Amiga are too specific names, a more
>general generic name should be established so that if Atari or Commodore come
>out with new 16 bit machines with different names, the catagories would still
>be appropriate.

No, I totally disagree. You obviously have not seen the size of 
net.micro.amiga or net.micro.atari. It seems to me that if anything
we *really* need to split the atari group, in the same manner as
the split of the Commodore group.

We need to have net.micro.atari for all pre-ST machines.
Then, have a net.micro.520st or net.micro.st for the ST.

Please, Mr. Spafford, if you read this, consider it a plea well-done.

Aloha,
Jonathan Spangler
{ihnp4,dual,vortex}!islenet!jons

-- 
Jonathan Spangler
{ihnp4,vortex,dual}!islenet!jons