Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!occrsh!occrsh.ATT.COM!rjd
From: rjd@occrsh.ATT.COM
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: Dividing comp.sys.att
Message-ID: <144800006@occrsh.ATT.COM>
Date: 2 Jan 88 19:53:00 GMT
References: <167@mcmi.UUCP>
Lines: 20
Nf-ID: #R:mcmi.UUCP:-16700:occrsh.ATT.COM:144800006:000:979
Nf-From: occrsh.ATT.COM!rjd    Jan  2 13:53:00 1988


>> Isn't it about time that comp.sys.att spawned comp.sys.att.3b1?
>> 
>The traffic on this group doesn't warrent splitting it, plus there
>are also discussions about 6300s, 6300+s, 6386s.  Should they be
>split off too? No, of course not.  If you don't want to read an article
>about a 3b1 press 'n'.
>            \\\!///		From: Pete Schmitt

  Yeah, right.  For the first time, I am supporting the creation of another
group, for what my opinion is worth.  The traffic DEFINATELY warrants 3b1/7300
having their own newsgroup.  Due to the similarity in the 6300, 6300+, 7300
and common questions that occur, maybe the could be lumped together.  I am
solely interested in 3B2/5/15/4000/20 articals and the traffic lately has
been VERY heavy on the PC stuff.  Now, I do not know if their is enough
traffic on 3B2/5/15/4000/20 machines to have their own, so maybe lumping
these together would be acceptable.  Sounds like a count of articals should
be made on these subjects.

Randy