Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!porthos.rutgers.edu!pleasant From: pleasant@porthos.rutgers.edu (Mel Pleasant) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: 417K waste of money postings (was: Re: PICNIX V3) Message-ID: Date: 18 May 88 16:30:00 GMT References: <1559@slvblc.UUCP> <111@pigs.UUCP> <435@rd1632.Dayton.NCR.COM> <44310@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> <21649@amdcad.AMD.COM> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 21 To: phil@amdcad.UUCP In article <21649@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) writes: > Perhaps so, but the Unix box this msg was sent from is owned by a billion > dollar company whose most important product (which I work on) gets a great > deal of benefit from the PC groups. I personally would scream long and loud > if anything happened to them. And I am sure my boss would back me up. I'm given to understand that the appropriate way to scream long and loud is for those sites affected in a negative way to band together and FORM NEW LINKS. Another alternative is to recreate the groups in the alt distribution. If there is a fear that some other distribution may ultimately cut the groups in the same manner, form your own new toplevel. If your boss (and your bean counters) are really in your camp, then all of the choices above should seem quite reasonable to them. On the other hand, if your boss and bean counters aren't willing to fork out the bucks for the activity, then I'll claim you haven't quite got the support you think you have. You can always tell when a bean counter is supporting you. Ultimately, his yardstick is the bottom line. -- Mel Pleasant {backbone}!rutgers!pleasant pleasant@rutgers.edu mpleasant@zodiac.bitnet