Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!lll-lcc!seismo!mcvax!enea!chalmers!uddeborg
From: uddeborg@chalmers.UUCP
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin,news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Call for one LESS group - news.admin vs news.sysadmin
Message-ID: <1275@chalmers.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Mar-87 12:23:58 EST
Article-I.D.: chalmers.1275
Posted: Fri Mar  6 12:23:58 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Mar-87 16:28:20 EST
References: <487@u410a.stl.stc.co.uk> <499@u410a.stl.stc.co.uk>
Reply-To: uddeborg@chalmers.UUCP (G|ran Uddeborg)
Distribution: world
Organization: Dept. of CS, Chalmers, Sweden
Lines: 19
Xref: utgpu news.groups:477 news.admin:213 news.sysadmin:64

In article <499@u410a.stl.stc.co.uk> dww@stl.UUCP (David Wright) writes:
>Ten days ago I posted an article to news.groups proposing that, since they
>usually contain the same postings and mostly have the same readers, the
>two admin groups be combined into one.    Since then I have had one mail
>message in favour and one against.   While I still think it is pointless 
>having two groups when only one is needed, the level of interest in this 
>question clearly does not justify taking any action.

I would come to the opposite conclusion.  Since (almost) noone objects to
this cleanup, go ahead and and get the group removed!  Groups are created
when there is enough interest to motivate a separate forum.  They should be
removed (or, as in this case, combined), when there isn't enough interest
any more.  Obviously, there isn't very much interest to keep these to groups
separate.
-- 
"For me, UNIX is a (way of) being."

	G|ran Uddeborg
	uddeborg@chalmers.{UUCP,CSNET}