Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!phigate!nlgvax!hans From: hans@nlgvax.UUCP (Hans Zuidam) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: ARexx script postings. Summary: comp.sys.amiga.arexx is a bad idea. Keywords: Rexx Message-ID: <248@nlgvax.UUCP> Date: 22 May 89 08:48:07 GMT References: <2420@van-bc.UUCP> <2101@blake.acs.washington.edu> Reply-To: hans@nlgvax.UUCP (Hans Zuidam) Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga Organization: Philips Research Geldrop Lines: 28 Expires: Sender: In article <2101@blake.acs.washington.edu> dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu (Dale Larson) writes: >I am not at all interested in ARexx scripts. It is clear, however, that >a lot of people are. From the number of postings I see here and elsewhere >about ARexx, I think it's time for comp.sys.amiga.arexx. There are already >to many topics flying around in comp.sys.amiga! There is no need for a separate group. Either use comp.sys.amiga until we all get annoyed with the amount of ARexx postings or start using the group comp.lang.rexx. The last one doesn't have any traffic and is (as far as I noticed) not restricted to VM/CMS Rexx implementations ;-). It is of course also possible to read the 'rn' manual and use kill-files to weed out unwanted subjects. And then it is also possible to ask me how to do it (using kill-files, not reading manuals :-) )... As a byline: why do people always start proposing new groups when there is no need for them, traffic wise? Please check which groups are appropriate for your postings and start posting there. Then, when traffic about a certain subject starts to fill or dominate the group think about creating a new one. This is how comp.sys.amiga.tech started. Thank you for your attention, Hans -- Hans Zuidam E-Mail: hans@pcg.philips.nl Philips Telecommunications and Data Systems, Tel: +31 40 892288 Project Centre Geldrop, Building XR Willem Alexanderlaan 7B, 5664 AN Geldrop The Netherlands