Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!rutgers!mcnc!thorin!clocs!davis
From: davis@clocs.cs.unc.edu (Mark Davis)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Re: for sale ... ad nauseam
Summary: Too Hard
Message-ID: <6300@thorin.cs.unc.edu>
Date: 21 Jan 89 22:19:31 GMT
References: <6803@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> <640004@hpcilzb.HP.COM>
Sender: news@thorin.cs.unc.edu
Reply-To: davis@clocs.UUCP (Mark Davis)
Organization: University Of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lines: 24

In article <640004@hpcilzb.HP.COM> rog@hpcilzb.HP.COM (Roger Haaheim) writes:
>I agree;  however,
>I tried to decide, of the split groups that would result, which
>one would I NOT subscribe to.  I'd probably read them all
>anyway.

Actually, I have a better split:
	1 comp.sys.ibm.pc.good-stuff
	2 comp.sys.ibm.pc.things-I-agree-with
	3 comp.sys.ibm.pc.questions-I-can-answer

	4 comp.sys.ibm.pc.things-I-dont-agree-with
	5 comp.sys.ibm.pc.questions-I-cant-answer
	6 comp.sys.ibm.pc.flames
	7 comp.sys.ibm.pc.bad-stuff
	8 comp.sys.ibm.pc.meta-discussions

Personally, I would subscribe to 1-3 and "u" 4-8.

Unfortunately, if we split into N groups, I think almost everyone would
read all and cross post to all, resulting in an N increase in the
number of article numbers and little added efficiency.

Thoughtfully, Mark (davis@cs.unc.edu or uunet!mcnc!davis)