Xref: utzoo comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:510 news.groups:4805
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!necntc!dandelion!ulowell!hawk.ulowell.edu!boneill
From: boneill@hawk.ulowell.edu (SoftXc Coordinator)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d,news.groups
Subject: Re: bin.net
Message-ID: <7890@swan.ulowell.edu>
Date: 2 Jul 88 19:09:19 GMT
Sender: news@swan.ulowell.edu
Reply-To: boneill@hawk.ulowell.edu (SoftXc Coordinator)
Organization: University of Lowell, CS Dept.
Lines: 18

I cannot see any reason for creating the proposed bin.net. If anything, it
will start separating Usenet into chunks, creating confusion rather than
lower phone bills. Besides, check out the latest Arbitron reports.
copm.binaries groups account for a small percentage of net traffic now,
unlike previous months. The moderation of comp.binaries.ibm.pc has helped
considerably, as it no longer appears at the top of the lists (which had put
it at the top of several people's hit lists as well). The moderation is
going very well, keeping the traffic low.

If you're still going to argue about the traffic, apply your arguments to
ALL groups, not just the binaries groups, or any group you don't like. After
the 38 part posting of mahjongg in comp.sources.games, which was useful only
for Suns, I don't see anybody arguing for a sources.net...

============================================================================
Brian O'Neill, MS-DOS Software Exchange Coordinator
ArpaNet: boneill@hawk.ulowell.edu 
UUCP   : {(backbones),harvard,mit-eddie,et. al.}!ulowell!hawk!boneill