Xref: utzoo news.groups:18573 comp.sys.mac:50283
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!dptg!lzsc!hcj
From: hcj@lzsc.ATT.COM (HC Johnson)
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Do not reorganize comp.sys.mac.*
Summary: is 180 a quorum?
Keywords: multiple creation renaming crossposting
Message-ID: <1381@lzsc.ATT.COM>
Date: 9 Mar 90 18:55:43 GMT
References: <1990Mar7.195114.1077@diku.dk> <25F6D310.5483@tct.uucp>
Organization: AT&T BL Middletown/Lincroft NJ USA
Lines: 28

In article <25F6D310.5483@tct.uucp>, chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
> According to stodol@diku.dk (David Stodolsky):
> >There are no guidelines for creating more than one group at a time (this was
> >pointed out to me strongly, see enclosed below), and none for renaming. It is
> >very hard to predict the outcome of multiple changes. The most needed new
> >group should be created. After a few months of heavy cross-posting the actual
> >character of the new group, and thereby, the remainder of c.s.m, will become
> >obvious. Then further changes can be considered.
> 
> 
> Now we have Chuq trying to do the same thing he criticized earlier.

Are we to believe that 180 responses to chuq is really a quorum.

Perhaps chuq would be more advised to take a weeks traffic and
tell us (title lines only) how he would have distributed them differently,
and then each of us can judge whether we would have not wanted to read
the subsection these fell into.

This looks to me a way to fracture comp.sys.mac into littler peices with
only one beneficiary, chuq.

Should chuq wish to take this as a vote, consider is NO, on any and all changes.

Howard C. Johnson
ATT Bell Labs
att!lzsc!hcj
hcj@lzsc.att.com