karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) (11/04/88)
[This doesn't belong in the groups where it was posted, it belongs in news.groups (discussion about groups and creation/deletion). I have redirected all followups to that newsgroup. Also - - READ THE ENTIRE POSTING before replying to this with email, REPLIES HAVE BEEN REDIRECTED for sites which parse the "From:" line as well -- KSD] In article <2060@ddsw1.MCS.COM> pete@ddsw1.UUCP (Peter Franks) writes: >In article <417@chief.UUCP> root@chief.UUCP (Lance Ellinghouse) writes: >>I'm calling for votes, either YES or NO, for a new news group called >> comp.bbs.xbbs >> >>This group would discuss different areas concerning one of the fastest growing >>*nix BBSes around. Also the source and revisions will be posted here to make >>it easy for people to keep current with XBBS. Also utilities that people write >>for it will be made available for it here. >> [. . .] > >I think it's rather selfish to name a group after a single bbs if its intent >is to have discussions of ALL unix BBSes. How about 'comp.unix.bbs' for the >main discussions and subgroups (if necessary) for specific discussions and >source/update/utilities, etc. > >I do agree, though, that something like this is needed. I don't like to >wade through alt.bbs and find nothing about unix boards. I have to agree with Pete here, and disagree with Lance. Sandy already provides a means for people to get updates to, and the code for, XBBS. XBBS is but one of many different BBS systems which run on Unixoid operating systems; AKCS, Picospan, and Magpie being a few others. While AKCS and some others are commercial, XBBS is free for the asking.... which is wonderful for those who like the package. BUT -- you have to spend your dollar(s) to call and pick up the source, patches, and utilities, which I contend is a _good thing_. Why devote an entire newsgroup to this _one_ particular bbs system? I can find no purpose in it _except_ to have everyone pay to transmit, store and forward the source code to this package rather than having those who are interested enough pay for their own call(s) to Sandy's BBS! Creating this group would be like creating a newsgroup for "comp.sys.ibm.pc.arc" for distributing ARC sources. And if XBBS, then why not "comp.unix.bbs.akcs"? After all, AKCS is rapidly expanding, we have strong demonstrated interest in the product, and by gosh, it even links with both other systems running AKCS and the Usenet (in fact, I could be posting this from AKCS right now and you would have a hard time knowing it)! Sure it's commercial, but what if we decided to release it to PD? (no, we're NOT going to do this). Secondly, this is the first posting I've seen on this subject. Netetiquette and voting procedure mandate a discussion period before a vote is called. I guess we get to enforce that by having this discussion now 1/2 :-) (given the recent newgroup/rmgroup noise, I don't expect that the vote-callers lack of consideration on this point will mean much). You will find that I support a "comp.unix.conference" group, or even "comp.unix.bbs", although I find that advanced software, such as AKCS and Picospan, makes the format and readability of the information far too pliable (by the _user_) to call the end result a "bbs". "Conferencing system" is much more accurate than "bbs" for most of these packages. To support this group, or vote yes on it, would be foolish. One vote of NO has been mailed. I suggest you do the same, and have included the proper reply address and an appropriate subject for your convenience. The "R" key should do the rest of the work for you. Our maps show 'chief' as being a valid mapped site, so mailers should be able to reach it without problems. -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, ddsw1!karl) Data: [+1 312 566-8912], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality solutions at a fair price"