djhill@rodan.acs.syr.edu ( Number_6 **) (11/10/89)
Two things:
1) Comp.sys.apple2.tech seems like a good idea except that it means
-a another newsgroup to read
-b getting it distributed as far as comp.sys.apple might not be easy
especially as BRL.MIL isn't doing the job anymore.
-c why not just clean up the existing comp.sys.apple?
2) How does the situation w/ BRL.MIL affect the other networks that also
pick up the feed - ProLine springs to mind, BITNET?
- Doug Hill
djhill @ rodan.acs.syr.edufarrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) (11/10/89)
In article <1294@rodan.acs.syr.edu> djhill@rodan.acs.syr.edu ( Number_6 **) writes: >Two things: >1) Comp.sys.apple2.tech seems like a good idea except that it means > [...] > -c why not just clean up the existing comp.sys.apple? The situation in comp.sys.apple is such that the technical information is being mixed too heavily with the non-tech info. This is fine for some people, but others would like to be able to read only one type of info or the other. By "cleaning up" comp.sys.apple, we would be forced to limit our discussions to certain issues, and besides going against the first amendment, that task would require a full time moderator (read *censor*). Personally, I would like to see as much information flow on the Apple II family as possible (ok, so I'm biased :-), and organizing the discussions seems to be a logical course in keeping that information flowing. >- Doug Hill > >djhill @ rodan.acs.syr.edu Cary Farrier -- +--------------+-------------------------+ | Cary Farrier | farrier@apple.com | +--------------+-------------------------+
abc@BRL.MIL (Brinton Cooper) (11/10/89)
Doug Hill asks: > How does the situation w/ BRL.MIL affect the other networks that also > pick up the feed - ProLine springs to mind, BITNET? We are working on getting Bitnet access to comp.sys.apple. There is precedent, and I'm hopeful. Proline: How does it get info-apple now? If it's by Internet mail, then there should be no problem since Usenet/Internet traffic is often passed. You might ask Berkeley. He also asks: > -c why not just clean up the existing comp.sys.apple? Silly boy! _Brint aka info-apple-request@brl.mil
shatara@memit.enet.dec.com (Chris Shatara) (11/11/89)
I've given this some thought over the past few days and fell some
definitions are in order. What constitutes technical?
Are questions dealing with compatability "technical"?
Asking about Hyperstudio's ability to handle existing stereo cards...is
this technical?
Is asking how to pack and unpack programs technical?
Some of the comments made or examples given suggest that IF we have
another newsgroup that being called
comp.sys.apple.programming
may be more appropriate. We will ahve to be more explicit in what mean.
If we're trying to weed out the flames maybe a newsfeed called
comp.sys.apple.political
might be an answer :-) [just joking folks!]
=============================================================================
| Chris Shatara | Internet: shatara@memit.enet.dec.com |
| Opinions expressed are | DEC Easynet: memit::shatara |
| mine and mine only! | UUCP: ...!decwrl!memit!shatara |
=============================================================================farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) (11/11/89)
In article <1049@mountn.dec.com> shatara@memit.enet.dec.com (Chris Shatara) writes: >I've given this some thought over the past few days and fell some >definitions are in order. What constitutes technical? IMHO, here are some examples: TECHNICAL NON-TECHNICAL -------- ------------- - ToolBox information - Video Game Surveys - GS/OS information - Help with application software - Hardware information - Where to get a Kermit/VT100 terminal - Programming Techniques - New product announcements >============================================================================= >| Chris Shatara | Internet: shatara@memit.enet.dec.com | >| Opinions expressed are | DEC Easynet: memit::shatara | >| mine and mine only! | UUCP: ...!decwrl!memit!shatara | >============================================================================= Cary Farrier -- +--------------+-------------------------+ | Cary Farrier | farrier@apple.com | +--------------+-------------------------+
PATZNER@DBNINF5.BITNET (11/11/89)
> If we're trying to weed out the flames maybe a newsfeed called > comp.sys.apple.political > might be an answer :-) [just joking folks!] > | Chris Shatara | Internet: shatara@memit.enet.dec.com | Don't forget comp.sys.apple.stupid for discussions about copy protection and copyright... Achim (Patzner@DBNINF5.bitnet; if that won't work, try {anything}!unido!bnu!patzner)
shatara@memit.enet.dec.com (Chris Shatara) (11/11/89)
> IMHO, here are some examples: > > TECHNICAL NON-TECHNICAL > -------- ------------- > > - ToolBox information - Video Game Surveys > - GS/OS information - Help with application software > - Hardware information - Where to get a Kermit/VT100 terminal > - Programming Techniques - New product announcements > A great start! I just went through and looked at the last 196 articles and did a quick binning of them. I found SEVEN (7) as clearly falling into the TECHNICAL catagory, and SEVENTEEN (17) as questionable and the remainder clearly non technical. Amoung the questionable ones were topics concerning: - Bug reports or perceieved bug reports - How do I change the default finder shutdown option - Like to have.... - Is there a way to ... - How does one hook A to B.. - Compatibility probs with new O.S. or Hardware. If the bulk of these fall into the non-tech catagory, then maybe we need to revisit what it is we are trying to accomplish. Lets keep adding to the above list. I think it would be helpful to really understand what it is that is being proposed. I would have gone back further (this data went back to monday the 6th) but the articles were not available on the server I use. Hope this helps...Chris ============================================================================= | Chris Shatara | Internet: shatara@memit.enet.dec.com | | Opinions expressed are | DEC Easynet: memit::shatara | | mine and mine only! | UUCP: ...!decwrl!memit!shatara | =============================================================================
STEIN@UCONNVM.BITNET (Alan Stein) (11/11/89)
Rather than split the group, it would be much better if we could just find a way of cutting out the flames. Perhaps we should all send notes of complaint to anyone who sends a flame? Alan H. Stein | stein@uconnvm.bitnet Department of Mathematics | stein%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu University of Connecticut | ...psuvax1!UCONNVM.BITNET!STEIN 32 Hillside Avenue | Waterbury, CT 06710 | Compu$erve 71545,1500 (203) 757-1231 | GEnie ah.stein
ART100@PSUVM.PSU.EDU ("Andy Tefft 862-6728", 814) (11/11/89)
I see problems with splitting the groups into technical and non-technical (besides trying to get the info to the people who get info-apple by mail). First, I do read this group for the technical discussions, but not all of them. I don't have a GS and don't plan on owning one (I think my next computer purchase will be a Unix box, maybe a Sparcstation) so the toolbox stuff bores me to death, as does the stuff about NDA's, etc. So only a small part of the technical discussions would interest me. Similarly, I like a lot of the non-technical discussion (not as much, but stuff about communications which Cary put under 'non-technical' is included), but not stuff about Appleworks, where to get BinSCII for the 8th time, etc... but what's really annoying is the stuff about dropping the //...... Whoever made the suggestion (in jest) about comp.sys.apple.politics, I think this is actually the better way to go! The proposed way, I have to wade through 2 groups and probably more articles, but with a politics group, I only have to read the other! It's in the POLITICS that all the bickering goes on (gee, the piracy stuff could go here, and the copyright stuff...)! Also keep in mind that these monthly postings that are now in the making should cut down on the noise considerably. Someone could be the keeper of these files and mail them to anyone who asks a question which can be answered by reading them. Then everyone else can keep quiet, and we've probably stopped at least 10% of the traffic. Andy
sschneider@pro-exchange.cts.com (The RainForest BBS) (11/12/89)
Comment to message from: STEIN%UCONNVM.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Alan Stein) RE: Flames and weeding them out.. Alan... Do what I do to "flames".... P*SS on 'em.... /steve <That was a joke...> +===========================================================================+ | UUCP: crash!pro-exchange!sschneider COMPU$ERVE : 75166,2544 | | ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!sschneider@nosc.mil GENIE : sschneider | | INET: sschneider@pro-exchange.cts.com APLINK.PE : <shrug> | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | The RainForest @ 305-434-4927 / PO Box 841422, Pembroke Pines, Fl, 33084 | +===========================================================================+
rankins@zaire.crd.ge.com (raymond r rankins) (11/14/89)
In article <1055@mountn.dec.com> shatara@memit.enet.dec.com (Chris Shatara) writes: > Amoung the questionable ones were topics concerning: > > - Bug reports or perceieved bug reports > - How do I change the default finder shutdown option > - Like to have.... > - Is there a way to ... > - How does one hook A to B.. > - Compatibility probs with new O.S. or Hardware. >.... I think it would be helpful to really understand what it is >that is being proposed. I think the original list of topics for comp.sys.apple.tech was too narrow. To me, technical means related to programming, hardware use and setup, software use, and operating system related questions. Non-technical would be gripes, complaints, where-to-find questions, product announcements, what's the best X questions, and rumors. I think a split along these lines would be more of a 50-50 split than the original suggestion. I also think it would limit the amount of cross-posting that will invariably take place between the two groups. In my opinion, comp.sys.apple should become more of a discussion type group, and comp.sys.apple.tech would be more of a question and answer type group. Ray --- Ray Rankins | (518) 387-7340 | INTERNET: rankins@zaire.crd.ge.com 2 Moonglow Rd. | (518) 583-3320 | COMPUSERVE: 71131,3236 Gansevoort, NY 12831 | | AmericaOnline: RayRankins <insert standard disclaimer here>
brianw@microsoft.UUCP (Brian Willoughby) (11/15/89)
In article <8911110117.aa05699@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> ART100@psuvm.psu.edu writes: >I see problems with splitting the groups into technical and >non-technical (besides trying to get the info to the people who >get info-apple by mail). I tend to agree. >First, I do read this group for the technical discussions, but not >all of them. I don't have a GS and don't plan on owning one I may buy a GS one day, but the point is that I do not have one either. This fact would still have me wading through GS technical stuff to find the II technical stuff. i.e. there would still be a mixture of topics even in a technical group. I thought of suggesting a GS spinoff, but having a GS-specific group would also be a disadvantage. I have been able to take advantage of many things revealed in seemingly GS-specific postings. Also, the first mention of "non-technical" subjects included "what hard disk to buy". For me, this is a very technical question involving multiple users of a single SCSI drive, and partitioning on a non-GS. If this group is split, I would end up needing to read both anyway. Besides, several people would no doubt find it necessary to cross post, and the volume would be a problem again. Brian Willoughby UUCP: ...!{tikal, sun, uunet, elwood}!microsoft!brianw InterNet: microsoft!brianw@uunet.UU.NET or: microsoft!brianw@Sun.COM Bitnet brianw@microsoft.UUCP