Xref: utzoo news.groups:18308 comp.sys.mac:49750
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!dino!mehl
From: mehl@cs.iastate.edu (Mark M Mehl)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Comp.Sys.Mac reorg -- 2/23/90 update
Message-ID: <721@dino.cs.iastate.edu>
Date: 2 Mar 90 21:27:05 GMT
References: <38902@apple.Apple.COM> <38904@apple.Apple.COM> <710@dino.cs.iastate.edu> <10522@hoptoad.uucp> <1628.25ee76c8@csc.anu.oz>
Sender: usenet@dino.cs.iastate.edu
Reply-To: mehl@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Dept of EE/CprE -- IOWA STATE UNIV
Lines: 45

pfr654@csc.anu.oz writes:
>In article <10522@hoptoad.uucp>, tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) writes:
>> Well, it appears that my argument is being ignored.

>(Stuff about the way that the proposed split will just degenerate, so that 
>we will have to check all of the new groups anyway.)

>You just need someone at your site to spend about an hour per day checking 
>through c.s.m.* [hierarchy] to see if anything relevant
>to their site is there.

>I had thought that the reorg was a good idea, but now think not.-- 

I share "some" of you feelings as well.  The initial proposal (#1-5)
looked really good.  Having all the application issues presented into
one comp.sys.mac.apps group that application-oriented people could
subscribe to was an excellent idea.

Now things have changed.  The general applications group is going to
be replaced by a misc group--of all things--that everyone is going to
have to waste time viewing.  Moreover, we are now going to replace
comp.sys.mac.apps with "lots" of little dinky groups like
c.s.m.games, c.s.m.comm, c.s.m.virus, and c.s.m.weird-stuff.  I
seriously don't think there's enough "weird-stuff" traffic in each
little area like games, comm, virus, etc. to make a special group for
each of them.

I would like to appeal to the Usenet voters to vote YES on any
general applications group like comp.sys.mac.apps (or c.s.m.appl)
and vote NO on creating any special-purpose weird-stuff applications
group.  I would also like to urge voters to vote NO on any kind of
proposal that requires posting "application-specific" issues to a
"general" misc group (such as c.s.m.misc).  For example, we shouldn't
have to post graphics stuff to c.s.m.misc JUST BECAUSE there isn't
a special-purpose c.s.m.graphics group on Usenet.  Naturally, there
isn't enough graphics postings in c.s.m to justify a special graphics
group; that is why we must create comp.sys.mac.apps; it's needed
to takeup the slack in the application domain.  And the misc group
should be designed--solely--to takeup the slack in the NON-application
domain.
--
 /\ Mark M Mehl, alias Superticker (Supertickler to some)
<><> Internet: mehl@atanasoff.cs.IAstate.edu
 \/ UUCP: {{mailrus,umix}!sharkey,hplabs!hp-lsd,uunet}!atanasoff!mehl
Disclaimer: You got to be kidding; who would want to claim anything I said?