Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!p.cs.uiuc.edu!gillies
From: gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Voting period concluded for comp.re
Message-ID: <76700066@p.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 28 Apr 89 15:51:00 GMT
References: <3954@ficc.uu.net>
Lines: 20
Nf-ID: #R:ficc.uu.net:3954:p.cs.uiuc.edu:76700066:000:740
Nf-From: p.cs.uiuc.edu!gillies    Apr 28 10:51:00 1989


I want to restate my view:  I think this is a bad idea.  And I work on
  scheduling for real-time systems.

I believe that a new group should be created only when 
  1.  The traffic in a group becomes very heavy
  2.  The traffic can be divided into (at least) two parts
  3.  There are people who read one portion or another exclusively

Examples:
  1.  comp.sys.mac -> comp.sys.mac + comp.sys.mac.programmer
		      + comp.sys.mac.hypercard
  2.  sci.physics  -> sci.physics + alt.fusion



According to the above criteria, you have no good reason to create the
new discussion group.  If there really is a high level of interest,
why don't we see heavy discussion about real systems in comp.os.research,
comp.theory, or other newsgroups?