Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!palo-alto!vixie
From: vixie@palo-alto.DEC.COM (Paul Vixie)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: comp.sources.x: current status
Message-ID: <3504@palo-alto.DEC.COM>
Date: 19 Jul 88 06:03:03 GMT
References: <1050@wyse.wyse.com> <8807190201.AA00201@scrod.ardent.com>
Organization: DEC Western Research Lab
Lines: 29

I apologize to the Internet readers of this message.  It's aimed primarily
at the Usenix side of the list.

In article <8807190201.AA00201@scrod.ardent.com> jkh@ardent.UUCP writes:
# I don't think it's necessary to post a list of "yes" votes to xpert, getting
# Gene or Mark to agree that it's a "good thing" should be enough (you can show
# them the "yes" list if necessary). 

Gene (Spafford) is on vacation right now; Mark (Horton) doesn't really get
that involved with newgroup proposals these days.  In either case, someone
from the backbone simply agreeing that it's a "good thing" is _not_ enough
to get a group created (nor is enough to keep a group from being created if
the BB thinks a group is a "bad thing").  

Posting the "yes" vote list is nec'y because of the basic unreliability of
mail.  If someone voted "yes" and did not see their name on the list, they
would know to send another vote.  Posting them here in comp.windows.x is
approp- riate, since it's the only related group in Usenet right now.  I
didn't check, but if the "yes vote list" wasn't cross-posted to news.groups,
it should have been.  That's common practice.

Again, I apologize to the Internet contingent of this list; Usenet is in an
unstable state right now and I wanted to make sure that Jordan's innocent
confusion about the newgroup process didn't lead to any further confusion.
-- 
Paul Vixie
Digital Equipment Corporation	Work:  vixie@dec.com	Play:  paul@vixie.UUCP
Western Research Laboratory	 uunet!decwrl!vixie	   uunet!vixie!paul
Palo Alto, California, USA	  +1 415 853 6600	   +1 415 864 7013