Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:14511 news.groups:3317 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!wind!tr From: tr@wind.bellcore.com (tom reingold) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,news.groups Subject: Re: New group? Message-ID: <6747@bellcore.bellcore.com> Date: 15 Apr 88 19:45:28 GMT References: <1485@silver.bacs.indiana.edu> <6237@swan.ulowell.edu> Sender: news@bellcore.bellcore.com Reply-To: tr@wind.UUCP (tom reingold) Distribution: na Organization: Bellcore, Morristown, Noo Joizy Lines: 69 In article <1485@silver.bacs.indiana.edu> creps@silver (Steve Creps) writes: $ $ It seems that this group is becoming more and more cluttered, in my $ opinion, with postings that are discussions that are more political, $ or gripes about customer service, "where can I get...," discussions on $ piracy, and so forth, and fewer techinical questions. Personally I'm $ getting bored to death with all the non-technical questions. $ This is not a new group proposal YET, so don't send me any votes yet, $ but how would people feel about a new ibm group for technical questions $ only? It could be called comp.sys.ibm.pc.tech. Let's get some discussion $ on this and see if a call for votes is justified. In article <6237@swan.ulowell.edu> boneill@hawk.ulowell.edu (SoftXc Coordinator) writes: $ [I've cross posted this to news.groups, where it should also appear. -B] $ $ It seems you forget that a new group has already been proposed, and voting $ is about to close. It is for comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d, designed to relieve $ comp.sys from the postings about binaries, and comp.binaries from non-binary $ postings (which will no longer be possible, as soon as Rahul takes his place $ as moderator). Wait until this is done, and see about traffic through $ comp.sys, and if it is still to much, then propose a new group. This may sound ridiculous, but I think it has its merits. Feel free to bash it for the lousy idea you think it is. Ok, I know you won't hesitate to do so :-) . . . The people in comp.binaries.ibm.pc who dare to post text there (and I am not one of them) are asking for a discussion group. The people in comp.sys.ibm.pc want to have a technical group. The traffic volume in the latter group suggests that we may want to have a "news" group to talk about the sort of gossip found in PC Week. One person suggested having comp.sys.ibm.pc.news. I like this idea better than changing comp.sys.ibm.pc to comp.sys.ibm.pc.tech because that's what comp.sys.ibm.pc is supposed to be. In fact, that's what all comp.* groups are supposed to be. My proposal is to have the following four groups: 1. comp.sys.ibm.pc (for technical talk) 2. comp.sys.ibm.pc.news (for microsoft bashing, etc.) 3. comp.binaries.ibm.pc (for binary file distribution - moderated) 4. comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d (for discussion and documents pertaining to the binary files posted to group number 3. If the idea of Microsoft bashing sounds like a waste of bandwidth, it's really a joke. But there are many discussions around about the ethics of copy protection, copyrights, shareware, etc., whose volume warrants a newsgroup. Furthermore, I rarely read them and think I speak for many people when I say I wish comp.sys.ibm.pc were devoted to PC programming tips and usage tips for packaged software, etc. One disadvantage I see to my proposal is that with more newsgroups, it becomes unclear, especially to neophites, as to where to post what. This would result in meta-discussions of the variety, "Don't post THAT topic to THIS newsgroup." And by the way, I never post things like that. I really don't think they help, even though their content is usually right. If I feel that strongly, I send the poor sucker private mail. He'll get the point. I don't think I can take on the task of "educating the public" since the turnover on the net is very large. Tom Reingold PAPERNET: |INTERNET: tr@bellcore.bellcore.com Bell Communications Research |UUCP-NET: bellcore!tr 445 South St room 2L350 |SOUNDNET: (201) 829-4622 [work], Morristown, NJ 07960-1910 | (201) 287-2345 [home]