Xref: utzoo news.groups:16109 comp.sys.ibm.pc:41158
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen
From: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: comp.sys.ibm.pc.{tech,programmer,...}
Message-ID: <376@sixhub.UUCP>
Date: 4 Jan 90 04:41:15 GMT
References: <:EXZGDny2@ficc.uu.net> <25A26459.27214@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
Reply-To: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: *IX Public Access UNIX, Schenectady NY
Lines: 16

In article <25A26459.27214@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn) writes:

|    How will this group differ from alt.msdos.programmer, other than wider
| distribution?  (which leads to the related question - why wasn't a.m.p
| set up as a comp group in the first place?)

  To create a comp group you have to pass a vote. One of the best ways
to do that is to set up an alt group and prove that it has enough
readers and low enough noise to be useful. Alt distribution is getting
better and I'm not sure that we really NEED a comp group, but if that's
what people want I won't object.
-- 
	bill davidsen - sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX
davidsen@sixhub.uucp		...!uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen

"Getting old is bad, but it beats the hell out of the alternative" -anon