Xref: utzoo news.groups:7084 comp.sys.ibm.pc:23835
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!haven!rutgers!att!pegasus!psrc
From: psrc@pegasus.ATT.COM (Paul S. R. Chisholm)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Creating comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Summary: c.s.i.p.tech *and* .programmer???
Message-ID: <2538@pegasus.ATT.COM>
Date: 23 Jan 89 05:51:53 GMT
References: <657@ur-cc.UUCP> <1778@edison.GE.COM> <11079@gryphon.COM>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 37

<"He seemed like such a nice man . . . and then he turned out to be a writer!">

> >In article <657@ur-cc.UUCP>, akk2@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Atul Kacker)
suggests that we form a new subgroup of comp.sys.ibm.pc, a group which
currently is too big to conveniently keep up with.

> In article <1778@edison.GE.COM> rja@edison.GE.COM (rja) suggests that
we call it "comp.sys.ibm.pc.programming (or something similar)."

In article <11079@gryphon.COM>, richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
> While suffixing ``.programmer'' is indeed an established practice
> with .mac as a precedent, ``.tech'' as a suffix also an older
> precedent (rec.autos.tech) and has the advantage that it's
> shorter = less characters to type and transmit.
(and sites the Mac and Amiga groups as examples).
>richard@gryphon.COM ...!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov

I think splitting off the programming stuff would be a great benefit.
It's also possible that having a separate "technical" (but not
programming) group would make the whole thing more manageable.  There
is the danger that some information would be considered both general
and technical (e.g., "What's a good RLL controller/hard disk
combination?"), or technical and programming ("What's the interrupt for
joystick control?").  We want to discourage cross posting.  (Do we
really want another ".questions" vs. ".wizards" fiasco?)

I recommend that we spawn a subgroup specifically related to progamming
the IBM PC and compatibles, called comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer.  I also
suggest we consider having a technical subgroup on non-programming
issues, called comp.sys.ibm.pc.tech.  I think that the former will
discourage cross-posting more than the latter.  (In fact, having
written this article, I think maybe ".tech" won't solve our problems
much at all!)

Paul S. R. Chisholm, psrc@pegasus.att.com (formerly psc@lznv.att.com)
AT&T Bell Laboratories, att!pegasus!psrc, AT&T Mail !psrchisholm
I'm not speaking for the company, I'm just speaking my mind.