Xref: utzoo comp.binaries.ibm.pc:638 comp.sys.ibm.pc:13427 news.groups:2938
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!amdahl!dlb!plx!slvblc!dick
From: dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc,comp.sys.ibm.pc,news.groups
Subject: Re: Creation of comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Message-ID: <1190@slvblc.UUCP>
Date: 18 Mar 88 19:21:47 GMT
References: <5551@swan.ulowell.edu>
Sender: uupc@slvblc.UUCP
Reply-To: slvblc!dick@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (Dick Flanagan)
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc,news.groups
Organization: SLV Systems Group, Ben Lomond, California
Lines: 23
Summary: Isn't this a little premature?
Disclaimer: none


In article <5551@swan.ulowell.edu> boneill@hawk.ulowell.edu (SoftXc Coordinator) writes:
> Since another discussion has broken out of the "Do we need a moderator"
> battle about the creation of a discussion group about binaries posted to
> comp.binaries.ibm.pc, I will tally the votes for the creation of the
> newsgroup [comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d]. . . .

Isn't it a bit premature to be voting on the creation of a *.d newsgroup
when the jury is still out on whether comp.binaries.ibm.pc is even going
to be moderated in the first place?

Personally, I feel very strongly that comp.binaries.ibm.pc SHOULD be
moderated (Rahul, where are you?) and that a comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
newsgroup SHOULD be created.  I'm just wondering if perhaps we don't
have horse-and-cart problem here.

(No follow-ups to comp.binaries.ibm.pc, please)

Dick

--
Dick Flanagan, W6OLD                         GEnie: FLANAGAN
UUCP: ...!ucbvax!ucscc!slvblc!dick           Voice: +1 408 336 3481
Internet: slvblc!dick@ucscc.UCSC.EDU         LORAN: N037 04.7 W122 04.6
USPO: PO Box 155, Ben Lomond, CA 95005