Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!mmdf From: peterson@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu (Eric J. Peterson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Splitting Up Comp.Sys.Amiga Message-ID: <6073@nigel.udel.EDU> Date: 14 Dec 89 07:12:09 GMT Sender: mmdf@udel.EDU Lines: 87 [Editor's Note: Sorry if this message has been distributed several times across the net, but I've had problems with the mail system here. AGAIN, here is a repost.] -- Seems as though the talk about creating a Comp.Sys.Amiga.Games has subsided ... and Amiga-Relay crashed right before my message about it went through! So here's a repost which is actually a first post ... After taking a look at the messages in here extensively for the past four weeks or so since the messages first started appearing regarding C.S.A.Games, I've noticed that relatively few of the messages pertain to games. However, C.S.A is one of the top groups in terms of number and size of messages that pass through it daily. There is just too much in C.S.A to keep up with if I miss even a day, and even though I am an avid user of ^N and K, there are just too many message threads to sift through ... (for instance, I've found that K usually only deletes two or three messages AT THE MOST on the average ... this means that there are approximately 30-50 individual threads going on in C.S.A or more at any one time). I've also noticed that most of the messages DO fall into a few individual categories. Since it is not necessarily easy to sift through all of the C.S.A messages to pick out individual categories, why not break them up into a few separate groups? This makes sense ... that is what individual groups are for. Here is a proposed division of the current C.S.A* group ... comp.sys.amiga -- For miscelaneous or other short postings and message threads that don't fit anywhere else. I would also recommend that game messages go here, in Comp.Sys.Amiga.Questions, or in Rec.Misc.Games. comp.sys.amiga.tech -- Same as the current group, which is for highly technical postings regarding hardware and AmigaDOS (and Amix as well hopefully! 8-) comp.sys.amiga.hardware -- For all the messages related to attaching various peripherals to your Amiga, especially hard drives, expansion chassis' (sorry, I'm a poor A-500 owner ...), expansion cards, etc. comp.sys.amiga.art -- Covering all aspects of the Amiga in graphics and sound production software and hardware, including topics such as genlocks, MIDI, and animation. (Originally I had thought of C.S.A.Graphics or C.S.A.Anim, but .Art seemed to cover it all better) comp.sys.amiga.questions -- Similar to comp.unix.questions (whereas C.S.A.Tech is similar to comp.unix.wizards). An area for messages such as "What Fish Disk is Gdinglefidget Ver 1.4 on?" or "I've got a problem using VLT with my Bogus Brothers 2400 modem ..." There are various other ideas that fall into the "It-Would-Be-Nice-But-There- Ain't-Enough-Readership" category, such as C.S.A.Games, C.S.A.AmigaDOS (or Comp.OS.AmigaDOS ... probably the first one is better), C.S.A.Dealers ... finally C.S.A.[Insert Your Interest Here]. But I think the above five groups are a good suggestion. Suppose that the combined average of C.S.A. and C.S.A.T is 125 messages per day. Distributing them out over five groups brings each group down to 25 message per day (again on average), and it is easier to avoid articles that you have no interest in (using the above, I personally would skim C.S.A and C.S.A.Art and thoroughly read C.S.A.Questions). I will probably get flamed by comp.sys.amiga.readers.die-hard for suggesting the creation of three new groups, much less one. But think about it ... the bandwidth is very high in this group and new groups would provide the mechanism for evening out the traffic and making interest areas manageable. Again, this concept is based not on a spur-of-the-moment idea for group creation, but after observing the message patterns on the net for several weeks (please note that this is an informal observation, but I will be happy to verify it if challenged on it). In regard to some of the other suggestions ... putting "GAME" in the subject line won't work -- people just won't follow that suggestion. Besides, if everyone ends up putting their keyword for their particular message in the subject line, isn't this effectively the same as creating a new group? DISCLAIMER: The opinions and ideas expressed here are just that -- opinions and ideas. As with all other open-minded and non-omniscient and non-omnipresent individuals, I'm prone to error in my views -- prove me wrong before you flame me for my beliefs. Whew! Been wanting to say that for a while. Eric . |~~ Eric J. Peterson ... peterson@{cs,{nu,fsucs}.cs}.fsu.edu _O_] [ V "You cannot really know anything." -- William Payne (wpayne@digi.UUCP) _< >_ "How do you know?" -- Dan'l DanehyOakes (djo@PacBell.COM)