Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!oddjob!ncar!ames!elroy!gryphon!richard
From: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: THIS NEWSGROUP NEEDS SPLITTING.
Summary: Cymru am Byth
Message-ID: <5395@gryphon.CTS.COM>
Date: 9 Aug 88 05:16:24 GMT
References: <43@cybaswan.UUCP> <2371@epimass.EPI.COM>
Reply-To: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton)
Distribution: comp.arch
Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA
Lines: 33

In article <2371@epimass.EPI.COM> jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck) writes:
>In article <43@cybaswan.UUCP> eeartym@cybaswan.UUCP (Dr. Boyo) writes:
>>Comp.arch has got out of hand, I think.  Is there any support for splitting
>>it into 4 or 5 topical subgroups representing the bulk of traffic over the
>>last few months?  The present flat structure was OK a year or so back, but
>>the great increase in traffic makes it quite unwieldy now. 
>
[...]

>Often a discussion starts off on computer architecture and drifts; when
>this happens, it can be moved into other groups by adding a crosspost
>and a Followup-To line.  For example, if the answer to a question really
>involved the subtleties of the C language, you can say
>
>	Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.lang.c
>	Followup-To: comp.lang.c
>
>and warn people in the body of the article that followups are going some
>place else.

(especially if it's talk.bizarre)

Sagely advice, to be sure. The only point no covered seems to be what
to do with all these 'old' computers that brought up in fits
of nostalgia: RCA-1802'sm 6502's, IBM 1130's 8088's :-)

Chuck McManis jokingly proposed comp.nostalgia about a year
ago. Is it time ?


-- 
                   Who are these ones that would lead us now ?
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM                               {backbone}!gryphon!richard