Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!think!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!giza.cis.ohio-state.edu!rd_francis
From: rd_francis@giza.cis.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Status of comp.sys.mac reorg: 2/21/90
Message-ID: <77475@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 22 Feb 90 16:56:11 GMT
References: <38851@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: usenet_news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Reply-To: RD Francis <francis@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Organization: Ohio State University Computer and Information Science
Lines: 57

In article <38851@apple.Apple.COM> chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) writes:
[Proposal for reorganization of comp.sys.mac]

I agree strongly with Chuq's statement that no individual should
allow his/her own preferences to dictate which groups should *not* be
offered up *in the proposal*.  Naturally, we can all vote our minds,
and state our opinions in advance, but if some significant number of
people support a proposal, it should be included in the proposal.
Now, about that stating of opinions in advance, unless otherwise
noted, I have no qualms about any of the groups listed before, and
support their eventual creation.

>Proposal 1: rename comp.sys.mac to comp.sys.mac.misc....
>Proposal 2: Creation of comp.sys.mac.os....
As stated in Chuq's message, he is now leaning towards c.s.m.system.
I favor this, as it would be the clearest option I can think of to the
greatest number of people.

>Proposal 3: Creation of comp.sys.mac.apps.misc.....
>Proposal 4: renaming comp.sys.mac.hypercard to comp.sys.mac.apps.hypercard.
I suspect this one will fail, due to a large number of indifferent
people, myself included.

>Proposal 5: creation of comp.sys.mac.wanted....
>Proposal 6: Creation of group comp.sys.mac.apps.games....
>Proposal 7: Creation of group comp.sys.mac.apps.comm....
>Proposal 8: Creation of group comp.sys.mac.virus....
Perhaps I am wrong about this, but what is the basic criteria for
spin-off newsgroups?  My impression has been a lot of existing traffic
is needed.  Three existing newsgroups cover the territory of 3 of the
above (rec.games.misc, comp.protocol.appletalk, comp.virus).  Even
though i might be tempted to vote for one or more of these myself, I
feel that this information should be pointed out to everyone.  None of
these are subjects that I have seen taking up considerable amounts of
bandwidth in c.s.m so far (by comparison with various and sundry
general discussions, problems with various applications, and talks
about the system software.  If we were to issue this proposal one
request at a time (thank goodness we won't be, but for the sake of
argument...) I guess my question is would there be an incentive to get
these groups created.

>Proposal 9: Creation of group comp.sys.mac.announce....

To expand on a theme in my paragraph above, I strongly suggest that
when we vote, we at least try to look at each facet of the proposal as
if it were completely independent of the rest.  Don't just send in a
blanket "yes" vote because you don't feel like typing in the extra
characters to vote "abstain" on one part.  The last thing anyone wants
is a situation where people are saying "Well, if that proposal had
been made through *normal* channels, that newsgroup would *never* have
been created!"  I would imagine that there are other sub-hierarchies
on the net that could stand the sort of re-organization we are after,
and I suspect that our efforts here may wind up being pointed to in
the future as a reason to (or not to) try to do things the way we are.

--
R David Francis   francis@cis.ohio-state.edu