Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!rutgers!sunybcs!bowen
From: bowen@cs.Buffalo.EDU (Devon E Bowen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: Archives for Commodore
Message-ID: <5641@cs.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 3 May 89 03:54:07 GMT
References: <844@alzabo.UUCP> <16958@usc.edu>
Reply-To: bowen@sunybcs.UUCP (Devon E Bowen)
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 26

In article <16958@usc.edu> acliu@skat.usc.edu (Alejandro Liu) writes:
>(BTW, why there is no "comp.binaries.cbm" or "comp.sources.cbm"?.  Is this
>a conspiration against Commodore users or what?)

The creation of one of these groups was attempted last year and it failed.
If I remember correctly, the primary reasons were that

1) The only thing that would be posted would be games and nothing useful.
   We all know that's the only use for a Commodore, right?

2) Binary groups in general are a waste. Never figured this one out since
   these same people did not propose removal of the other binary groups.

3) Commodore machines aren't as popular as others, so the extra bandwidth
   used by these groups would be wasted on only a few people. This argument
   is somewhat valid given that the average readership of binary groups
   as compared with the sys groups is usually only about 25%-30%. Given
   that, the expected readership of a cbm binary group would only be about
   1700 (this group has a readership of about 6200). A readership like
   that would put the group very near the bottom of the newsgroup popularity
   list.

So the solution at the time was just to post things here. If someone doesn't
like it, they can stop carrying the group.

Devon