xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/06/90)
Note and respect the followup-to line; we don't need the rest of the
discussion crossposted, this is just to gather the attention of others
who might want to participate in the discussion, but keep away from the
volume of comp.sys.amiga normally, and might miss the start of things.
I only let myself get dragged into these things because I'm bored and
I can't keep up with comp.sys.amiga and read any of the rest of the
net as well. Here's my long promised start on the politics of a new
comp.sys.amiga heirarchy.
Thanks to those who have already emailed suggestions. To get the ball
rolling, from previous discussions plus new email:
Very early cut at a new group breakdown; probably too many, probably
overlapped, probably left your favorite out. EMAIL suggestions so I'm
sure to keep them; post discussions as well, of course. The creation of
moderated groups posits the existance of volunteers to moderate them. da
Silva? This is your big chance to shine.
announce -- moderated: FF-disks, digestified for-sale notes, meetings,
new products, shareware releases, uploads to archives, etc.
[I really want this one; I've missed two meetings (BADGE and
NewTek's Toaster kickoff) in the last four weeks because I
can't keep up with the present group, and saw the
announcements only after the meetings.]
reviews -- moderated, archived: where to put your formally written up
impressions of new stuff: hardware and soft- free, share,
or commercial -ware.
software -- commercial and other, other than games, to focus the
discussion; also one of two followup-to groups for the
reviews group discussions.
hardware -- as is, but pull review stuff to reviews, so this is more
a where to buy, and chat group; also the other followup-to
discussion group for reviews.
tech -- Discussing the interface between the programmer and the
delivered software (and possibly other tool level stuff
in common use, SKsh, Wshell, etc.)
games -- talking about buying and playing games; games reviews stay
here, or go to reviews for archiving?
education -- how to use the Amiga in a teaching environment.
graphics -- graphics hacks, algorithims and serious stuff for the amiga.
video -- for the person with a plan, a lot of time, and a VCR.
music -- for the MIDI crowd and the composers among us.
multimedia -- how to get it all going together: we need more slots!
verbal -- talking about spoken input and output
handicapped -- special focus on Amiga and the handicapped
productivity -- the Amiga as a tool to get other work done: CAD, DBMS,
WP, DTP, production video, Accounts Receivable, etc.
help -- I can't make xxx work with yyy; can someone tell me how?
futures -- trying to help Commodore plan the future (also nags and
rants, of course!)
misc -- I'm too lazy to figure out where to post this, so I'll
just put it here. ;-) The "c.s.a.talk" group.
unix -- sure to be needed very soon.
services -- things done for and by Amiga owners.
vendors -- praise and horror stories.
The goal being to eventually turn comp.sys.amiga into a node rather than a
group. I have no plan to touch comp.{sources,binaries}.amiga.
When we've chewed on this a bit, if there is some consensus to do it at all,
I'll put up a Call For Discussion on news.announce.newgroups and news.groups
to get things going formally, but I'd like to talk about it within the Amiga
groups for a while first to hammer out the worst bobbles without the help of
the whole net.
My own plan, if I can restrain myself, is to advocate nothing, but to try
to keep a current summary of the proposed breakdown available unexpired
by weekly(?) postings as consensus occurs/fails.
Kent, the man from xanth.
<xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
--
And they're off!peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/07/90)
Jesus Harold Christ, Kent... now I have to read comp.sys.amiga just to keep up on this? I haven't even dared look in there for MONTHS. Ah well, we each have our cross to bear. I hope my wife understands... In article <1990Oct6.051722.7143@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > moderated groups posits the existance of volunteers to moderate them. da > Silva? This is your big chance to shine. Ech. Moderating is too much like hard work... but if nobody else volunteers I'll do it. Get the groups lined up though. > announce -- moderated... Sounds good. Followups directed by the moderator to somewhere else, or just bounced? > reviews -- moderated, archived... Are there any review groups that actually work? This one sounds likely to be a nine-day-wonder. > software -- [except games] Check. > hardware -- [status quo] Check. > tech -- [status quo] Rename to .programmer? (Hey, can you believe I said that?) > games -- ... Check! > education -- ... If the volume gets up there in .misc. Is it really ready for this? > graphics -- ... Check. > video -- ... Seems would be largely overlapping with .multimedia, or .graphics. > music -- ... > multimedia -- ... Check, check. > verbal -- ... > handicapped -- ... Like education, leave 'em in .misc for now? > productivity -- ... Now this should be the biggest group. :-> The name is a bit condescending: this should be the core of .misc. > help -- ... Better name than .newusers, but why buck the trend? > futures -- ... I like the name. > misc -- ... Check! > unix -- sure to be needed very soon. And we can create it then. I'm not convinced about UNIX on the Amiga. > services -- things done for and by Amiga owners. > vendors -- praise and horror stories. Stick 'em in .misc for now. > My own plan, if I can restrain myself, is to advocate nothing, but to try > to keep a current summary of the proposed breakdown available unexpired > by weekly(?) postings as consensus occurs/fails. Mail me a copy? Naw, I'll be good and read .amiga. Ech. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/07/90)
More input:
comp.sys.amiga.{forsale,wanted}
This is the biggest junk-news channel on the net.
comp.sys.amiga.rumors
And this is the second-biggest. Crosspost facts to .amiga, but point
followups back to .rumors.
--
Peter da Silva. `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.liberato@dri.com (Jimmy Liberato) (10/08/90)
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >I only let myself get dragged into these things because I'm bored and >I can't keep up with comp.sys.amiga and read any of the rest of the >net as well. Here's my long promised start on the politics of a new >comp.sys.amiga heirarchy. I'm curious, are there people out there who actually try to read c.s.a. sequentially without preselecting individual articles/threads? Newsreaders like nn and second generation versions of rn such as trn allow very EASY preselection according to subject line and author. I am not in favor of a proliferation of subgroups for a few reasons. First, just as discussion threads tend to meander off into areas unrelated to the original subject line so too would the purity of the subgroup be affected by such entropic tendencies. Second, the incidence of crossposting will increase dramatically. That in itself doesn't increase the bit volume but it does defeat the purpose of insulated discussion threads. (Note how hardware stuff is still being crossposted to tech which was supposed to be for programming discussions.) Next, although sites should always accept redirected subgroups (after all it is not really an increase in volume, right) there always seems to be a problem with this (witness c.s.a.games). So you will get posts that say: "Our site doesn't get c.s.a.video so I am posting it here." Finally, I often stumble upon threads that are interesting that I may never have discovered if they where in a subgroup I had arbitrarily excluded. If indeed there are categories of discussion that maintain a consistent life of their own then I would be in favor of further splitting. As far as I can see, most problems can be addressed with the use of a modern newsreader and judicious use of accurate and timely subject line. -- Jimmy Liberato liberato@dri.com ...uunet!drivax!liberato
martens@python.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens) (10/08/90)
In article <1990Oct6.051722.7143@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >announce -- moderated: FF-disks, digestified for-sale notes, meetings, > new products, shareware releases, uploads to archives, etc. > [I really want this one; I've missed two meetings (BADGE and > NewTek's Toaster kickoff) in the last four weeks because I > can't keep up with the present group, and saw the > announcements only after the meetings.] I really like the idea of this newsgroup. I'm not sure if we need the for sale stuff here (just to keep the moderator's job a bit smaller), but another thing to add would be the monthly ftp list (that nobody seems to see, judging from the ftp questions regularly posted). -- -- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu) Dan Quayle on education: "We're going to have the best educated American people in the world."
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/08/90)
In article <YPCRMFW@dri.com> liberato@dri.com (Jimmy Liberato) writes: > I'm curious, are there people out there who actually try to read c.s.a. > sequentially without preselecting individual articles/threads? Newsreaders > like nn and second generation versions of rn such as trn allow very EASY > preselection according to subject line and author. Oh, is this the sucessor to the old "are there actually people who read <fill in the group> without kill files" argument? It sure doesn't improve with age... it was a bad argument back then and it remains a bad argument today. > I am not in favor of a proliferation of subgroups for a few reasons. First, > just as discussion threads tend to meander off into areas unrelated to the > original subject line so too would the purity of the subgroup be affected > by such entropic tendencies. That's why you have the ability to crosspost, redirect followups, and so on. > Second, the incidence of crossposting will increase dramatically. That in > itself doesn't increase the bit volume but it does defeat the purpose of > insulated discussion threads. No, in fact it improves the ability of separate groups to act as filters. Which is the purpose of insulated discussion threads. I read c.s.a.bunyips because I'm interested in bunyips, not because I hate bigfoot. If a thread is crossposted to both because it's about both I'm still interested. > (Note how hardware stuff is still being > crossposted to tech which was supposed to be for programming discussions.) And there's still a lot of .tech stuff in .amiga, that *isn't* crossposted anywhere. Not enough groups, and .amiga needs to be changed to .misc. > > is not really an increase in volume, right) there always seems to be a problem > with this (witness c.s.a.games). So you will get posts that say: "Our site > doesn't get c.s.a.video so I am posting it here." So you get a few articles you're not interested in. That's sure better than getting a whole bunch of articles you're not interested in. > Finally, I often stumble upon threads that are interesting that I may never > have discovered if they where in a subgroup I had arbitrarily excluded. Ah, to have the luxury of time to read all the threads one wants to read. I have to K threads I *know* I'll be interested in because I just don't have the time. > If indeed there are categories of discussion that maintain a consistent life > of their own then I would be in favor of further splitting. .hardware .software .forsale .rumors .multimedia > As far as I can > see, most problems can be addressed with the use of a modern newsreader and > judicious use of accurate and timely subject line. ... and lots of time. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
arxt@quads.uchicago.edu (patrick palmer) (10/08/90)
In article <YPCRMFW@dri.com> liberato@dri.com (Jimmy Liberato) writes: >xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > >>I only let myself get dragged into these things because I'm bored and >>I can't keep up with comp.sys.amiga and read any of the rest of the >>net as well. Here's my long promised start on the politics of a new >>comp.sys.amiga heirarchy. > ... solid arguments that I essentially agree with omitted ... > >If indeed there are categories of discussion that maintain a consistent life >of their own then I would be in favor of further splitting. As far as I can >see, most problems can be addressed with the use of a modern newsreader and >judicious use of accurate and timely subject line. ^^ ^^ I strongly agree with this point. This includes using ? when you are asking a question; and, if you want to ask a question, indicate what it is about. For example, the subject line "Wordperfect" might lead to an article asking about availability of version x.x, or a comment that Wordperfect is overrated, or a specific question about how to do some arcane thing, or even an announcement of a new version. A different set of people would probably read each of these. Most of us slip up on this sometimes, but a bit more thought before posting might lead to more of the "right" people reading our posts. Pat Palmer (email: reply or ppalmer@oddjob.uchicago.edu)
martin@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Daniel Martin) (10/08/90)
Hello,
Yes, we need to slipt up c.s.a. Your proposed groups hierachy is interestig,
but too numerous. Here's my offering...
c.s.a.announce: As proposed. Good.
c.s.a.classified: (New) My A1000 with 1.1 for 1000$ :-).
c.s.a.hardware: As is.
c.s.a.media: (New) discussions regrouping sound, graphics, video, etc.
c.s.a.misc: future, rags, nags, bashing, etc.
c.s.a.reviews: As proposed. Good.
c.s.a.tech: As is.
c.s.a.games: As is. Reviews goes to reviews group.
c.s.a.help: Good for messages like "DAVE: my mouse is broken" :-)
c.s.a.unix: Will be usefull soon. Can be put in c.s.a.help.
Even with 10 groups I feel uncomfortable. Perhaps we can compress a little
bit more.
><xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
Daniel.
--
// Daniel Martin Universite de Montreal \\
// MediaLab, ca vous regarde! C.P. 6128, Succursale A, \\
\\// Mail: martin@IRO.UMontreal.CA Montreal (Quebec), CANADA, \\//
\/ Tel.: (514) 343-6111 poste 3494 H3C 3J7 \/amhartma@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Andy Hartman - AmigaMan) (10/08/90)
In article <YPCRMFW@dri.com> liberato@dri.com (Jimmy Liberato) writes: > >I'm curious, are there people out there who actually try to read c.s.a. >sequentially without preselecting individual articles/threads? Yep. >Second, the incidence of crossposting will increase dramatically. Well, the overall volume of articles would go down on c.s.a. >insulated discussion threads. (Note how hardware stuff is still being >crossposted to tech which was supposed to be for programming discussions.) Perhaps a better name should've been chosen for this group. If I didn't know what c.s.a.t.'s purpose was, I'd post technical stuff there, not programming stuff. Maybe comp.sys.amiga.programming would've been more clear... >Finally, I often stumble upon threads that are interesting that I may never >have discovered if they where in a subgroup I had arbitrarily excluded. Such is life... I wouldn't mind seeing one, maybe two more groups appear. this would cut down postings on c.s.a. and would isolate things. I definately think comp.sys.amiga.newprods would be a good idea. Maybe a monthly posting of the groups and their purposes would help. >Jimmy Liberato liberato@dri.com AMH * Andy Hartman | I'd deny half of this crap anyway!| "Somedays, you just * Indiana University | amhartma@silver.ucs.indiana.edu | can't get rid of a * // Amiga Man | AMHARTMA@rose.ucs.indiana.edu | bomb!" * \X/ At Large! | or just "Hey putz!" | - Batman (original)
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/08/90)
In article <YPCRMFW@dri.com> liberato@dri.com (Jimmy Liberato) writes: >xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > >> Here's my ... start on the politics of a new comp.sys.amiga heirarchy. >I'm curious, are there people out there who actually try to read c.s.a. >sequentially without preselecting individual articles/threads? Newsreaders >like nn and second generation versions of rn such as trn allow very EASY >preselection according to subject line and author. We've got _lots_ of folks who read comp.sys.amiga as _mail_. That you have a nice news reader doesn't do much for the fellow in Puerto Rico or on Bitnet who picks the group up in email. There are also lot and lots of "notes" users out there. Most of these folks have no choice in what newsreaders, if any, their systems offer. I'd like to qualify this as an argument not pertinent to the question. >I am not in favor of a proliferation of subgroups for a few reasons. First, >just as discussion threads tend to meander off into areas unrelated to the >original subject line so too would the purity of the subgroup be affected >by such entropic tendencies. Changing the odds for an article pertaining to my interest from 5% in a large group to 85% in a small group is a win for me; I can survive the remaining noise. >Second, the incidence of crossposting will increase dramatically. That in >itself doesn't increase the bit volume but it does defeat the purpose of >insulated discussion threads. (Note how hardware stuff is still being >crossposted to tech which was supposed to be for programming discussions.) Actually, this is where the modern newsreader helps. I have little interest in hardware, and if I read daily, I can usually look at a screen or two of subject lines, go directly to any I find interesting, and junk the rest; this filters them out of the main group too if they're crossposted. If I go through the smaller groups this way first, I get to trash lots of the stuff I don't want to read very quickly before getting to the general purpose group. >Next, although sites should always accept redirected subgroups (after all it >is not really an increase in volume, right) there always seems to be a problem >with this (witness c.s.a.games). So you will get posts that say: "Our site >doesn't get c.s.a.video so I am posting it here." Actually, the easy way to get the missing groups added is to send a (polite) letter to the sysop from which an inappropriate posting eminates, explaining why his/her site is inconveniencing the rest of the net by omitting a group where the site's users could appropriately post the same article. 60 44000 1134 91% 2388 3865.3 5% 0.14 4.2% comp.sys.amiga 172 27000 701 90% 413 712.6 7% 0.04 2.6% comp.sys.amiga.tech 192 26000 671 85% 407 722.9 5% 0.04 2.5% comp.sys.amiga.hardware 263 21000 542 78% 2 3.6 0% 0.00 2.0% alt.sources.amiga 282 20000 518 90% 2 124.7 0% 0.01 1.9% comp.sources.amiga 305 19000 480 80% 318 635.7 4% 0.05 1.8% comp.sys.amiga.games ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ readers propagation volume crossposts As you can see from the September news.lists report, comp.sys.amiga.games isn't doing at all badly in terms of site penetration, and it is doing exactly what it was intended to do: more than half the comp.sys.amiga readers don't follow comp.sys.amiga.games; it has helped that many people shorten their news reading day. From the volume, it has siphoned off about 1/7th of the traffic. Crossposting doesn't seem to be too bad a problem anywhere in the groups. My gut feel that 9/10ths of the games postings are gone seems about right. If more sysops add the group, the rest of the games stuff can move away from the main group. I suspect that adding more filter groups would have similar effects, which is the point of this thread. >Finally, I often stumble upon threads that are interesting that I may never >have discovered if they where in a subgroup I had arbitrarily excluded. Well, unless your news reader is severely broken, it's no harder to read the same articles spread across a dozen groups as in one, so if you want to skim it all, you aren't losing that choice, but you are giving the choice to avoid some topics to others by dividing the group. >If indeed there are categories of discussion that maintain a consistent life >of their own then I would be in favor of further splitting. As far as I can >see, most problems can be addressed with the use of a modern newsreader and >judicious use of accurate and timely subject line. Where that choice is available, to your first point, and yes, we all need to be more aware when it is time to change the subject line, to your second. That's only done about 1/5th as often as it should be to help out other readers. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> -- I knew I couldn't keep out of this. Sigh.
bernie@DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche) (10/08/90)
In article <1990Oct6.051722.7143@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >Very early cut at a new group breakdown; probably too many, probably ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Here is my bit of feedback: Strongly Approve: announce -- Excellent. Probably requires a moderator. games -- this works pretty good now. graphics -- Great. misc -- Why not? reviews -- Good Idea. Probably requires a moderator. Approve with reservations: futures -- Something must be done against "vapour" hardware -- This should be the area where the hardware junkies can sniff the solder flux. help -- Call it "questions". In line with comp.unix.questions multimedia -- If you do combine video, and verbal though, it'd be good. music -- Not only MIDI. productivity -- Call it "tools". Productivity's been given a bad name. software -- Perhaps it should be called "programmer" tech -- Discussion of the operating system and standard facilities. unix -- Inappropriate. Should be "comp.unix.amiga". Disapprove: education -- Too specific. More discussion... handicapped -- Too specific. More discussion... verbal -- Too specific. see multimedia video -- Too specific. see multimedia Strongly Disapprove: services -- No. Too vague. vendors -- Nah! Religious objection! >Kent, the man from xanth. ><xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> > -- >And they're off! I hope you have a fifo from your mailbox to /dev/null. bernie ________Bernd_Felsche__________bernie@DIALix.oz.au_____________ [ ] [ Phone: +61 9 419 2297 19 Coleman Road ] [ TZ: UTC-8 Calista, Western Australia 6167 ] [_______________________________________________________________]
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/09/90)
In article <6746@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
[Some very good points about creating new newsgroups]
...to which I add:
I think we need to do some statistics on comp.sys.amiga and see what
kinds of things are posted. The biggest category could be spun off
into a new newsgroup. We did this with comp.sys.amiga.games and it
worked well. Finally a newsgroup that I don't read! Hurray!
I would really like to see a moderated version of comp.sys.amiga. It
could be a mailing list and would contain all the posts from
comp.sys.amiga that shouldn't have been posted to .hardware or .tech
:-)
Less seriously, I would like to appoint a c.s.a.police-person. Someone
that we'd all permit to send mail to posters things like: "You idiot!
That should have gone in xxx newsgroup" or "You idiot! That's in the
monthly posting!" or "You idiot! Keep my-computer-is-better-than-your-
computer posting out of this newsgroup!"
Maybe this police-person could also forge cancel messages for really
silly messages :-)
-Tom
P.S. Of course, if I was the police-person, I'd consider canceling
this message.
--
tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice
tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites"
tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -meangst@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au (Angst) (10/09/90)
Kent Paul Dolan writes: > > [ ... lots of good argument deleted ... ] > Just for the record ... I concur with Peter and the man from xanth and the other advocates of having more c.s.a. groups. Let's have a _real_ vote. >Kent, the man from xanth. Angst --------------- The Moth: "GOOD LORD! TICK! You've been hit in the head by a ... by a meteor!!" The Tick: "I can understand your amazement, Arthur. But believe me, the novelty wears off after the first few times." ---------------
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (10/09/90)
In article <583@DIALix.oz.au> bernie@DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche) writes: >In article <1990Oct6.051722.7143@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >>Very early cut at a new group breakdown; probably too many, probably > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Here is my bit of feedback: > >Strongly Approve: >announce -- Excellent. Probably requires a moderator. >games -- this works pretty good now. >graphics -- Great. >misc -- Why not? >reviews -- Good Idea. Probably requires a moderator. > etc. This is beginning to get a bit ridiculous. If everyone remembers we couldn't even get the votes to create c.s.a.video. If we make a list of 10-20 groups people will not care and we won't get the minimum approval (100?). We should choose one or two subject that are most important to separate out. We also don't want groups that will have 2 messages a day! Even the msdos groups aren't THAT split. I would recommend c.s.a.multimedia for the reason that it includes audio, video, graphics and all their combinations in one group. This will give it more usage and thus more credibility. Hopefully it will pass where video failed. A suggestion for a second group, if desired. c.s.a.hot. It would contain hot/breaking stories. Examples would be press-releases (especially from Commodore) and new product releases and their reviews. This will also give it a large volume. -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu *Iraq += *Kuwait; NumCountries--; and by popular demand... free(Kuwait);
dksnsr@nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) (10/09/90)
This also does not account for the idiots who will cross-post to every c.s.a newsgroup in existence every time they post... -D. Khoe
cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu (Thomas Cleland) (10/09/90)
I *LIKE* the idea of budding off a c.s.a.#? newsgroup or two;
c.s.a. yields abou 150-200 msgs a day here! I also think that
we should take it slow. For the sake of unity behind good
sense,
I support Ethan Solomita's formula:
c.s.a.multimedia --- to put graphics, animation, sound,
and video together, the way the
Amiga makes it happen (and to
avoid fragmenting into nothingness)
c.s.a.announce/hot or some fancy synonym --- for hot
news, Expo reports, and such.
Spontaneous product reviews might
also fit here.
Either incorporated in announce/hot, or more likely spun off
*later*, after we see how the first two hold out...
c.s.a.bugs/reviews/reports -- bug reports, requests for
technical help, reviews of products
(in lieu of being in
announce/hot...)
There's my input. Comments?
Thom Cleland
cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.eduxanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/09/90)
My wits weren't quite all there when I made up my list; now that I've
plowed through all the AMAX, AMAX 2, Bridgeboard, Apple][, Atari ST,
and C64 emulation articles:
add either:
comp.sys.amiga.emulations -- running software meant for other computers
on the Amiga using hardware or software
emulations of the other computer
or more finely divided:
comp.sys.amiga.hw-emulations -- obvious
comp.sys.amiga.sw-emulations -- ditto
to the previous list (actually, I like "xeno" better than "emulations",
but I know I'd never sell it; too few Greek scholars on the net).
[ In fact, you could break it down to:
comp.sys.amiga.emulations.c64
comp.sys.amiga.emulations.ibm-pc
comp.sys.amiga.emulations.atari-st
comp.sys.amiga.emulations.appple2+
comp.sys.amiga.emulations.mac
comp.sys.amiga.emulations.cray3 ;-)
comp.sys.amiga.emulations.connection-machine ;-) ;-) ;-)
and kind of finesse the question of hardware, software, or industrial
strength magic emulations, but I'd never get that one by the voters
either.]
Also, what would be the reaction to aliasing comp.lang.rexx to
comp.sys.amiga.arexx? About half of the former would be appropriate
for the latter, but there's no sense in making a separate newsgroup.
It would make it easier for amiga-folk to find the rexx group, though.
I have no idea how obnoxious a permanent alias would be to the net;
would it be worth the grief?
Kent, the man from xanth.
<xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (10/10/90)
You realize, don't you, that splitting up the groups won't make it easier
to keep up with, it will end up being worse, as each and every group will
generate MORE postings, rather than less. So each supbgroup will have as
much traffic as comp.sys.amiga does now. :-)
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:
KD>announce -- moderated: FF-disks, digestified for-sale notes, meetings,
KD>reviews -- moderated, archived: where to put your formally written up
KD>software -- commercial and other, other than games, to focus the
KD>hardware -- as is, but pull review stuff to reviews, so this is more
KD>tech -- Discussing the interface between the programmer and the
OK but maybe change 'tech' to programmer (like Peter said)
KD>games -- talking about buying and playing games; games reviews stay
OK
KD>education -- how to use the Amiga in a teaching environment.
Not really needed yet.
KD>graphics -- graphics hacks, algorithims and serious stuff for the amiga.
KD>video -- for the person with a plan, a lot of time, and a VCR.
KD>music -- for the MIDI crowd and the composers among us.
KD>multimedia -- how to get it all going together: we need more slots!
I think that we should either have JUST multimedia or graphics and music and
NOT multimedia and video (the subjects will overlap too much and cause too
much cross posting). Multi media covers graphics, video and sound. and
graphics and video seem too closely related. Probably it will be better
to have graphics, and music. graphics can cover video, and animation, and
multimedia formats. Music can cover MIDI and sound discussions.
KD>verbal -- talking about spoken input and output
KD>handicapped -- special focus on Amiga and the handicapped
Not needed yet.
KD>productivity -- the Amiga as a tool to get other work done: CAD, DBMS,
KD> WP, DTP, production video, Accounts Receivable, etc.
How about 'applications' instead of productivity?
KD>help -- I can't make xxx work with yyy; can someone tell me how?
Not really a good idea, most questions would and will be asked in whatever
group covers the question. For example if someone has a question about a
hard drive, he should ask in the hardware group.
KD>futures -- trying to help Commodore plan the future (also nags and
Can we just call it comp.sys.amiga.marc? Just kidding. This seems like a bad
idea to me. It's not really needed and might just encourage arguments.
KD>misc -- I'm too lazy to figure out where to post this, so I'll
KD> just put it here. ;-) The "c.s.a.talk" group.
How about leaving comp.sys.amiga as the catch-all group?
KD>unix -- sure to be needed very soon.
KD>services -- things done for and by Amiga owners.
Hmm. maybe.
KD>vendors -- praise and horror stories.
This seems like it still should be in misc. it doesn't come up THAT often.
maybe 2 or three messages a week.
You forgot your favorite: comp.sys.amiga.forsale and comp.sys.amiga.wanted
[If I remember, you were worried about wasted bandwith of people selling
stuff thru the net?]
--
John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email
sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting,
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more.
A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nashnop@NIC.GAC.EDU (10/10/90)
In article , xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > My wits weren't quite all there when I made up my list; now that I've > plowed through all the AMAX, AMAX 2, Bridgeboard, Apple][, Atari ST, > and C64 emulation articles: > > add either: > > comp.sys.amiga.emulations -- running software meant for other computers > on the Amiga using hardware or software > emulations of the other computer Well, I'd vote for it. I think it's time for c.s.a.emu. Part of the surge of articles we're seeing is that the ST and 64 emulators got dumped on us at the same time, but the Bridgeboard and Amax people will continue to be around tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow. It's fairly obvious that people without an emulator have little or no interest on how to get it to run Package X. Therefore it would seem a logical partition. For no-good reasons, I'd dearly like to see the new groups named comp.sys.amiga.mac and c.s.a.msdos and c.s.a.st. Can you imagine the rage of the flamers from comp.sys.mac and comp.sys.atari.st when they see "New group comp.sys.amiga.yourmachine subscribed" at 8 AM? :-) On other matters: c.s.a.futures should have a statement in its charter stating that talk about (or requests for) future hardware should be taken to c.s.a.marketing. No smiley, we've put up with too many whiners who have no idea of the economics of hardware development and distribution. c.s.a.marketing would be soooooo nice. Jay Carlson nop@gac.edu "Excuse me--I'm just trying to find the _bridge_. Has anybody seen the bridge?"
kengo@pawl.rpi.edu (Kenneth Goldenberg) (10/10/90)
My two cents:
A moderated group for c.s.a. would be great. c.s.a.announce? fine! I moved
to trn recently, and I can usually cut my reading to less than 40 articles/day
I also realize that trying to read through c.s.a straight can be a problem: I
went away for the weekend, and came home to 400+ articles in c.s.a alone.
Using trn, possible, with rn, I would have marked everything as read, and
hoped that I hadn't missed anything important. My suggestion is:
-leave c.s.a. in it's wild (overgrown) state. breaking it up into many
parts would cause sites to pick and chose groups which would defeat the
purpose of breaking it up. i.e. THERE IS a comp.sys.amiga.hardware now.
since many sites don't get it, c.s.a. getshardware posts too...
-create a modified group so those who can't handle c.s.a. will still be able
to catch "New Virus on Lotus 1-2-12" reports, and "Amiga 4700 is out
based on a 8088, running BSD." My point is that posts like this can be
condensed into "Mitch says two groups: c.s.a. and -.announce" While
-real- posts can get reprinted in all their glory. I'm sure you all
get the gist
-Mitch
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\| Software Error Task Held |/////////////////////
kengo@pawl.rpi.edu | "I see." said Arthur, who didn't |We're the same person
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------ben@servalan.uucp (Ben Mesander) (10/10/90)
I suggest that we start a new group, comp.sys.amiga.newgroups, that we can move this thread about making new groups into. It'd lower the traffic in comp.sys.amiga by quite a bit. I vote for more groups. This groups is unreadable as it is. I read it on a friends Mac running A/UX, so I don't get all the traffic sent to my Amiga running AmigaUUCP. And no, AmigaUUCP's news reader does not select threads out of the whole morass very well. ben@epmooch.UUCP
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) (10/11/90)
How can c.s.a. on your system get 150-200 letters a day? Normally, here we get that many if you count ALL the c.s.a. groups. Today was special though, we got over 200. -Joseph Hillenburg UUCP: ...iuvax!valnet!joseph ARPA: valnet!joseph@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu INET: joseph@valnet.UUCP
zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle) (10/11/90)
In article <1990Oct6.051722.7143@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: Here are my comments on the proposed splits of c.s.a. >announce -- moderated: FF-disks, digestified for-sale notes, meetings, > new products, shareware releases, uploads to archives, etc. YES! This would be very nice to have. Would it be ok for actual commercial enterprises to post stuff here? I think maybe so, so long as it is a new product, and not just some dealer trying to ditch a lemon of an A2000 while pretending to be a user. >reviews -- moderated, archived: where to put your formally written up > impressions of new stuff: hardware and soft- free, share, > or commercial -ware. Also, yes. This is (IMHO) the most important part about the computer groups on Usenet. I used this to decide which computer to buy. I used this to learn which compiler to choose (actually, I decided they were pretty much a toss-up). I don't know if this should be moderated or not, though. I think the responses to reviews are often as valuable as the reviews themselves. Perhaps the responses could go in comp.sys.amiga.review.d? >software -- commercial and other, other than games, to focus the > discussion; also one of two followup-to groups for the > reviews group discussions. Software pretty much fits into all the other groups, doesn't it? I mean, how can you talk about any use of the Amiga without talking about software? >hardware -- as is, but pull review stuff to reviews, so this is more > a where to buy, and chat group; also the other followup-to > discussion group for reviews. Yes. Keep it. >tech -- Discussing the interface between the programmer and the > delivered software (and possibly other tool level stuff > in common use, SKsh, Wshell, etc.) Yes, especially since I have to start programming my new machine soon (read "tonight"). >games -- talking about buying and playing games; games reviews stay > here, or go to reviews for archiving? Yes, but only so games discussions don't clutter up the other groups. A good subset of the "software" group. >education -- how to use the Amiga in a teaching environment. This would be nice, but I don't see any discussion of this in any of the current groups. Is this really necessary? >graphics -- graphics hacks, algorithims and serious stuff for the amiga. The programming I am about to start is a line-based graphics package, so I guess I have to vote yes. >video -- for the person with a plan, a lot of time, and a VCR. Not much interest myself, but this is one of the few areas the Amiga dominates, so yes. >music -- for the MIDI crowd and the composers among us. Isn't there already a group for electronic musicians? I think this would better go in some rec.music.whatever. Those folks don't care as much about the platform, so the discussions should not likely be Amy-specific. I'll have to vote no on this one. >multimedia -- how to get it all going together: we need more slots! Not a big topic yet, but it should be! Perhaps this group could help get things started. >verbal -- talking about spoken input and output No. The Amiga is not commonly used for recognition (no reason for this, though). There is only one text-to-speech for the Amiga, and there's not much to say about it. There's also not much to say about digitizing voice. Electronic speech technology IS a hot topic (I should know), but (like music), there's no reason to associate it with the Amiga. The algorithms and tricks used for this will work on any machine. >handicapped -- special focus on Amiga and the handicapped Again, why the Amiga? comp.handicapped would be much more appropriate. >productivity -- the Amiga as a tool to get other work done: CAD, DBMS, > WP, DTP, production video, Accounts Receivable, etc. Yes. This is a good division of the "software" category. >help -- I can't make xxx work with yyy; can someone tell me how? Beautiful idea. However, I have a feeling that this sort of thing will end up in the more specific area to which the question belongs. This groups would only really be useful if you crosspost to it. I have to vote "maybe". >futures -- trying to help Commodore plan the future (also nags and > rants, of course!) A group dedicated to Commodore? How many companies have groups dedicated to them? I'm not sure that this is an appropriate use of Usenet. Yes, I admit to occasionally giving (sometimes, er, _emphatic_) advice to CBM, but I don't think they deserve to get a whole group about their business activities. >misc -- I'm too lazy to figure out where to post this, so I'll > just put it here. ;-) The "c.s.a.talk" group. Yes, but only on the condition that c.s.a itself is not something you can post to. Consider also a different name. >unix -- sure to be needed very soon. Let's not put it up until it is actually out, ok? I could understand it being a group local to VaTech, but not worldwide -- yet. When it is commercially available, it would be 1derful. >services -- things done for and by Amiga owners. I don't get this one. Give an example of what would happen here. >vendors -- praise and horror stories. Is there really a need for this group? It doesn't look like something that needs to be glued to the Amiga. Obviously, my "votes" aren't official. However, I do agree that c.s.a needs to be broken up. There is just too much traffic to follow it all, and I'm only interested in about half of it anyway. Part of the traffic to c.s.a.tech could be very justifiably diverted to a c.s.a.programmer. Part of the traffic on c.s.a.hardware could go to c.s.a.peripherals. The problems could be partially ameliorated by actually cutting down the traffic, instead of simply dividing it up. Most users are very good, but a few generate traffic that does not contribute to the general well-being. Unfortunately, there seems to be a need for a comp.sys.amiga.flamealltheothercomputersyoucan. When will people wake up and realize that different computers almost all have their own virtues? The "send me e-mail about it, too" message is my favorite useless message that shouldn't be posted. (send mail to the person who first requested help and ask for a summary, instead). A lot of people don't seem to understand that you can cut most of the quoted text when you put up a response, and this leads to traffic in the form of uselessly large individual messages. A certain educational salesman is particularly bad in this respect. On this same note, some people have signatures that are much too long. True, I CAN ignore them, but they still take up modem time and disk space. Keep it down to 4 lines, max. Then there is the perennial piracy debate that everybody has already heard. I wish that one would die down permanently. This gives me another idea. While the general Usenet has a new users area with basic introductions & such, there is no formal policy for periodic postings & such. Periodic postings could go up along the lines of: Introduction to the various comp.sys.amiga groups (restructured or not). Answers to common questions that always seem to come up. These are things like: "What is ftp and how do I use it?" "Is his last name Fish in real life?" "What are all the niggling details about adding RAM on the 3000?" "What do I have to do to get v2.0 of the OS to run on my 500?" "What's the difference between the assorted models of Amigas?" A formal and hopefully complete list of ftp sites A list of programs that do and do not run on a hard drive/A3000/2.0. A better list of how to post on these groups and what mistakes to avoid. I just put up a quickie. A formal document could be much better. I'd better stop here. I'm generating too much traffic. ;) Dan Zerkle zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (916) 754-0240 Amiga... Because life is too short for boring computers.
cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu (Thomas Cleland) (10/12/90)
I love the idea of expanding c.s.a. into several groups, but NOT TOO MANY at first! That's a great recipe for making the whole Amiga network bog down in bureaucracy. c.s.multimedia can include graphics/animation/sound/video for now. It can be broken up later if traffic becomes too thick, but aren't most of these media enhanced by the others anyway? Even a Mac can do still pictures ;-) c.s.reviews would be good. Product reviews strike me as something one is either in the mood for or not, at a particular time. I think, for the record, that cries for help and questions for the CBM CATS god(esse)s should stay in c.s.a itself. Reasons: they aren't numerous enough to justify their own group, and also people are less likely to prowl the .help group looking for people to assist than they are to answer a question that they just happen to come across in the general reading. A newsgroup dedicated to .help may well become a ghetto for frustrated users. I would like people to post information on the location of good software they come across that isn't marketed very well. Academic software, often freely redistributable, in particular; and programs like Maple that are commercial but not advertised in the Amiga market though there is an Amiga version (and people fret that the Amiga lacks professional math software while Maple languishes unpurchased). If you hear of it, please post it! User groups... grab it and circulate it! Hurrah. Thom Cleland cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/13/90)
In article <3378@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: > You realize, don't you, that splitting up the groups won't make it easier > to keep up with, it will end up being worse, as each and every group will > generate MORE postings, rather than less. So each supbgroup will have as > much traffic as comp.sys.amiga does now. :-) That is EXACTLY what the result of this current strategy will be. If you want to promote discussion of something you start a new hierarchy and follow this strategy. We need a strategy that will result in LESS messages for people to read. Case in point: I voted for comp.sys.amiga.games. Now, there is about as much traffic in comp.sys.amiga and comp.sys.games BUT I don't read comp.sys.games so it saves ME time. We need to create a newsgroup that I WOULDN'T WANT TO READ! :-) In a future post I will use the above strategy (in a serious mode) to propose a newsgroup. -Tom -- tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites" tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -me
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/13/90)
I think all of these groups are good ideas, but some of them aren't named correctly. My next post will be my full proposal. In article <1990Oct8.055618.27507@IRO.UMontreal.CA> martin@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Daniel Martin) writes: > c.s.a.announce: As proposed. Good. Good idea... who wants to be the moderator? > c.s.a.classified: (New) My A1000 with 1.1 for 1000$ :-). We have misc.forsale.computers already. > c.s.a.hardware: As is. > > c.s.a.media: (New) discussions regrouping sound, graphics, video, etc. I don't like this name. Diskettes are a kind of media. Though I don't like this newsgroup (I'll explain in a future post) the name should be .media.multi so that we could later have .media.audio and .media.video, etc. > c.s.a.misc: future, rags, nags, bashing, etc. > > c.s.a.reviews: As proposed. Good. Shouldn't a review be posted to the appropriate newsgroup? Well, maybe not. > c.s.a.tech: As is. > > c.s.a.games: As is. Reviews goes to reviews group. > > c.s.a.help: Good for messages like "DAVE: my mouse is broken" :-) About 90% of all messages are asking for help. Don't you think? A .help or a .questions newsgroup is silly. .q_and_a really means "I don't know enough about the question to know where to post it". > c.s.a.unix: Will be usefull soon. Can be put in c.s.a.help. I suggest comp.unix.sysvr4.amiga, comp.unix.amiga, or comp.unix.sysvr4.68k (since it Amiga UNIX will fit the 680x0 binary standard). My next post will be my strategy proposal. (Enough critique, I'm actually going to say something :^) Tom -- tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites" tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -me
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/13/90)
I have explained my strategy earlier, now I'm going to post my
research and my proposal.
From October 10 until Oct 12, 1990 I collected statistics on the
messages in "c.s.a". Anything that was crossposted to c.s.a.tech
or c.s.a.hardware was not included. Some messages were counted
twice if they were about many things. I should have collected
statistics for more days, in fact, I will continue for a while and
post if there is much of a difference.
I wish someone else would do this too, I'm sure that the categories
that I came up with weren't the same that everyone else would have.
Top Topics From Comp.Sys.Amiga on pilot.njin.net Oct 10-12, 1990:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Count Topic category
-----------------------------------------------------------------
33 Free/PD/Shareware/etc. Software
31 Commercial Software
19 Should have been posted to comp.sys.amiga.hardware
17 "Network" (Newsgroup creation/proper use, Usenet policies, how to FTP)
17 "Emulation" (AMAX, Bridgeboard, various emulators, (Minix too))
15 Other computers (should have posted to alt.???, comp.sys.?? or comp.sys.amiga.misc)
15 "C-A Policy" (Prices, Sales, Marketing, Edu. discounts, MB, etc.)
13 Hardware recomendations
11 Audio/sound/etc.
9 Compatibility with new hardware (3000, etc.)
8 For sale/wanted
7 Telecommunications (Marco was every other post :-)
6 Amiga OS Issues
6 Should have been posted to comp.sys.amiga.tech
5 Shows and conferences
5 Multimedia
3 Virus news
3 Networking (Ethernet, Appletalk, etc.)
2 Fonts
2 Printer recommendations
2 Animations
1 Tape drives
1 Announcements.
It seems that the discussion of specific software products
(Commercial as well as free/share/etc.) is the most popular things
discussed. This makes comp.sys.amiga.software a good choice. Of course,
programmers will post there instead of comp.sys.amiga.tech. Maybe the name
should be comp.sys.amiga.software.finished? :-)
I think the reorganization should be:
comp.sys.amiga.misc Replace comp.sys.amiga
comp.sys.amiga.software.dev For programmers (replaces comp.sys.amiga.tech)
comp.sys.amiga.software For the users
comp.sys.amiga.games Same as it is now
comp.sys.amiga.hardware Same as it is now
Considering that 19 posts should have been posted to
comp.sys.amiga.hardware, this makes me think that c.s.a.hardware is
either mis-named, or I don't understand it's purpose.:-) Assuming
the former, maybe people need to know that it is for hardware
developers AND users looking for recommendations AND users looking
to fix hardware-related problems. Maybe we need .hardware.users
and .hardware.developers so that people about to post to c.s.a will
see that there are better choices.
Anyway... as I said before (in another post) the purpose of
creating a new newsgroup is to make it so that readers can read
FEWER articles. Following that philosophy, *I* should propose a
newsgroup for something that *I* don't want to read. That would
clear that entire class of articles out of comp.sys.amiga.
Therefore, selfishly, since I don't read the "Emulations" I think
we should create a newsgroup for those articles.
I propose:
"comp.sys.amiga.emulations: A place to discuss software and
hardware emulation of other computers and operating systems
including (but not limited to) Mac, IBM, Atari ST, C-64's
microprocessors, etc."
What do you think? Is the "emulations" topic just a fad? Should
we do the above (first) reorganization, wait for the dust to
settle, then think about additional newsgroups?
-Tom
--
tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice
tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites"
tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -merwm@atronx.UUCP (Russell McOrmond) (10/13/90)
In article <3378@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: > You realize, don't you, that splitting up the groups won't make it easier > to keep up with, it will end up being worse, as each and every group will > generate MORE postings, rather than less. So each supbgroup will have as > much traffic as comp.sys.amiga does now. :-) In a message posted on 12 Oct 90 17:55:01 GMT, limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) wrote: TL>That is EXACTLY what the result of this current strategy will be. The thing is, this is good. People will then be able to discuss the things that they are interested in. Let's face it, not everyone is interested in every topic that is being discussed. I myself was also quite glad that the Games group was formed, as I myself had absolutely NO interest in reading about the different games. I'm also thinking that a .newusers group might be a good idea for those people that have JUST purchased their machine, and seem to be missing some information. Anyway, as long as we don't go overboard in defining TOO many groups, I'm all for any changes. (P.S. I do think a .multimedia would be better than a .graphics,.video, .music, .soundeffects separately) --- Opinions expressed in this message are my Own. My Employer does not even know what these networks ARE. Russell McOrmond rwm@atronx.UUCP {fts1,alzabo}!atronx!rwm FidoNet 1:163/109 Net Support: (613) 230-2282 Amiga-Fidonet Support 1:1/109
carpente@corinth.uucp (Michael A. Carpenter OSBU North) (10/13/90)
In article <Oct.12.14.22.15.1990.17190@pilot.njin.net> limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: >> c.s.a.classified: (New) My A1000 with 1.1 for 1000$ :-). > >We have misc.forsale.computers already. But a lot of of for sale/wanted messages are coming through c.s.a! Maybe we just need to educate people to use misc.forsale.computers. (I guess you'll have to flame everyone who puts in a For Sale ad in c.s.a :^) ) I would personally like to see the for sale messages out of c.s.a > >> c.s.a.help: Good for messages like "DAVE: my mouse is broken" :-) > >About 90% of all messages are asking for help. Don't you think? A >.help or a .questions newsgroup is silly. .q_and_a really means "I >don't know enough about the question to know where to post it". I agree.
david@starsoft.UUCP (Dave Lowrey) (10/14/90)
>In article <mqeuq7w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >How can c.s.a. on your system get 150-200 letters a day? Normally, here >we get that many if you count ALL the c.s.a. groups. Today was special >though, we got over 200. > Between last Friday afternoon and this Monday morning (0700), my system received 322 messages in comp.sys.amiga, and about 200 in all the other amiga groups combined. Trafic slows down tremendoulsy in the summer (when school is out), but it picks up radically in the fall. I was always a supporter of "The One Big Group". I found out alot of stuff I never would have noticed if the groups were split up. However, this is too much of a load for me to keep up with. I vote for the split! -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- These words be mine. The company doesn't care, because I am the company! :-) Dave Lowrey | david@starsoft or {uhnix1,moray}!starsoft!david Starbound Software Group | Houston, TX | "Dare to be stupid!" -- Weird Al Yankovic
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/15/90)
In article <564@roo.UUCP> carpente@corinth.uucp (Michael A. Carpenter OSBU North) writes: > But a lot of of for sale/wanted messages are coming through c.s.a! Maybe > we just need to educate people to use misc.forsale.computers. (I guess > you'll have to flame everyone who puts in a For Sale ad in c.s.a :^) ) > I would personally like to see the for sale messages out of c.s.a I think that we should appoint a person that would be permitted to followup to any post with a 1-line message that said, "This should have been posted to xxx, please do so in the future." We'll all agree to not flame this person, and he/she will agree to always be polite. (Just kidding... a little) -Tom P.S. Imagine that precident! Imagine if all newsgroups appointed one "police officer". The net.control.freaks would love it! I think what we could do is have a VERY short (10-line) weekly posting on "What belongs in what newsgroups" and include the comp.sys.amiga groups as well as groups that people SHOULD be posting to instead of here! -- tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites" tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -me
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/15/90)
In article <3378@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: > You realize, don't you, that splitting up the groups won't make it easier > to keep up with, it will end up being worse, as each and every group will > generate MORE postings, rather than less. So each supbgroup will have as > much traffic as comp.sys.amiga does now. :-) Yeh, but by that time c.s.a would have outperformed alt.sex.pictures. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/15/90)
In article <51731.655797309@atronx.UUCP> rwm@atronx.UUCP (Russell McOrmond) writes: > TL>That is EXACTLY what the result of this current strategy will be. > > The thing is, this is good. People will then be able to discuss the things > that they are interested in. Let's face it, not everyone is interested in > every topic that is being discussed. I myself was also quite glad that > the Games group was formed, as I myself had absolutely NO interest in reading > about the different games. I'm also thinking that a .newusers group might > be a good idea for those people that have JUST purchased their machine, and > seem to be missing some information. I do see what you mean about ".newusers" group being good. I also just recenltly thought that a group for software products (usage, recommendations, looking for, etc.) would be good. I'd suggest c.s.a.software (matches c.s.a.hardware) but then people writing software would always crosspost to .software and .tech. Maybe we should have .software.dev and .software.use. I've never been good at picking names, anyone have a good suggestion? Anyway, if we had such a group, all that would be left in c.s.a is rumors and industry news. This is actually quite good because there are times when I'm programming and all I want is the rumors and no "how do I use xxx product" messages. I assume there are others like me on the net. :-) > Anyway, as long as we don't go overboard in defining TOO many groups, I'm > all for any changes. Right... so now I've narrowed my vote to (1) create c.s.a.newuser and (2) create c.s.a.software.users (and re-organize a little [.tech could become c.s.a.software.devel and .games would be c.s.a.software.games]) What do you think? -Tom -- tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites" tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -me
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/15/90)
In article <Oct.12.15.25.03.1990.19780@pilot.njin.net> limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: > comp.sys.amiga.misc Replace comp.sys.amiga > comp.sys.amiga.software.dev For programmers (replaces comp.sys.amiga.tech) comp.sys.amiga.programmer. Why create a new level? > comp.sys.amiga.software For the users > comp.sys.amiga.games Same as it is now > comp.sys.amiga.hardware Same as it is now comp.sys.amiga.forsale, too. It might not be that high, but forsale and wanted messages have a high irritation value. .forsale? .wanted? .trade? And I think a .rumors or .futures group would absorb several of your categories and put it into the top few. If this goes on we'll need a .config group as well. :-> -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
bill@bilver.UUCP (Bill Vermillion) (10/15/90)
In article <63016@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> amhartma@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Andy Hartman - AmigaMan) writes: >In article <YPCRMFW@dri.com> liberato@dri.com (Jimmy Liberato) writes: >> >>Second, the incidence of crossposting will increase dramatically. >Well, the overall volume of articles would go down on c.s.a. Okay - a comment from a non-Amiga user. I have many amiga users as readers on this system. This past week I have told them they are going to have to be choosier, because I had to shorten the expire on comp.sys.amiga. My system was complaining that the directories were too large. On this system, a 25mHz, 386 with a 15mb/sec ESDI drive, a read of a typical directory, long listing, comp.sys.sun for example comes up in 4 seconds. I just timed the comp.sys.amiga at 24 seconds. And that is after cutting down it's expire time to ONE THIRD all the other groups. When directory sizes get above 5000 bytes and you start going to double-indirect blocks it really slows down. The directory listing took over 90 seconds last week before I removed 2/3 of all the files and rebuilt the directory to get the overhead. As an SA I don't care what you discuss, but if you don't follow through with more groups, the local Amiga readers are going to have to go like hell to keep up with any news, because as the volume grows, the expires WILL get shorter. -- Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill : bill@bilver.UUCP
bill@bilver.UUCP (Bill Vermillion) (10/15/90)
In article <1990Oct10.021956.24856@servalan.uucp> ben@servalan.uucp (Ben Mesander) writes: >I suggest that we start a new group, comp.sys.amiga.newgroups, that we can >move this thread about making new groups into. It'd lower the traffic in >comp.sys.amiga by quite a bit. > Discussions like this belong in news.groups, not in the system hierarchy. I just came into this group to post the previous message because I got new groups today that I don't beleive were ever discussed in the news.groups section. This affects those of us who administer systems, because we can't read all, but we do try to keep up with the news sections to better adminster the machines. I don't beleive I saw the new group proposals in the voting list that was posted last week, but I may be wrong. >I vote for more groups. This groups is unreadable as it is. I read it on a >friends Mac running A/UX, so I don't get all the traffic sent to my Amiga >running AmigaUUCP. And no, AmigaUUCP's news reader does not select threads >out of the whole morass very well. > >ben@epmooch.UUCP -- Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill : bill@bilver.UUCP
jeff@fang.clearpoint.com (Jeffrey J. Griglack) (10/15/90)
I do not feel that c.s.a should be split at all. I only get 100 to 150 articles a day now. Over the weekend (Friday morning to Monday morning) I had only about 490 total. Now, it may be a little cumbersom to have to wade through that many articles, but it is not all that bad. That is what the k (kill in 'rn') is for. Every once in a while I find something of interest in a thread that I would not normally follow. If those threads where shuffled off to other to other groups I would never see them. I have to beleive that I am like many other readers in this reguard. I never read c.s.a.games. Another reason why not to break up the group is indecision. How do you know where your particular thread belongs? Does a discussion about word processors belong in the general group of multimedia? If the word processor can handle pictures, isn't that multimedia? If it comes to a vote, I will vote 'no' unless someone can convince me otherwise. I feel that splitting the group will just add to the confusion and will probably not slow the traffic on c.s.a. Jeff -- Jeff Griglack | Now I quess I have to tell 'em that I jeff@fang.clearpoint.com | have no cerebellum -- The Ramones
ianr@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (Ian ROWLANDS) (10/15/90)
Gee, the references line is getting long! In article <6802@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <Oct.12.15.25.03.1990.19780@pilot.njin.net> limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: >> comp.sys.amiga.misc Replace comp.sys.amiga >> comp.sys.amiga.software.dev For programmers (replaces comp.sys.amiga.tech) > >comp.sys.amiga.programmer. Why create a new level? If you create comp.sys.amiga.programmer, what happens to c.s.a.tech? Do you just leave it? Do you remove it? Do you alias it to the new group and remove it some time later? >> comp.sys.amiga.software For the users >> comp.sys.amiga.games Same as it is now >> comp.sys.amiga.hardware Same as it is now >comp.sys.amiga.forsale, too. It might not be that high, but forsale and >wanted messages have a high irritation value. .forsale? .wanted? .trade? A .forsale and .wanted group is no use. Look what has happened to misc.forsale.computers, misc.forsale, misc.wanted. Everybody just crossposts to all three with computer equipment, plus the computer group(s) that may be interested. With the above group, it just means another group added to the crossposting list and hence is useless (as you will still read the damn forsale messages). While I'm on the subject, anybody know how to make a killfile entry to kill all messages that have 'for sale' in them, or just 'sale'? >And I think a .rumors or .futures group would absorb several of your >categories and put it into the top few. With all these sub-groups, rumours and futures will be the only thing left to discuss in the main group. Ian Ian Rowlands | Work : ianr@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au Dept. of Electrical Engineering, | OR munnari!mullian!ianr@uunet.uu.net (including Computer Science) | Home : ianr@gpark.pub.uu.oz.au (soon) University of Melbourne | OR munnari!labtam!eyrie!gpark!ianr@uunet
hclausen@adspdk.UUCP (Henrik Clausen) (10/16/90)
In article <Oct.12.13.55.00.1990.15937@pilot.njin.net>, Tom Limoncelli writes: > In article <3378@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: > > > You realize, don't you, that splitting up the groups won't make it easier > > to keep up with, it will end up being worse, as each and every group will > > generate MORE postings, rather than less. So each supbgroup will have as > > much traffic as comp.sys.amiga does now. :-) The total volume will be higher, true, but we need enough newsgroups to make each one manageable for the individual reader. > That is EXACTLY what the result of this current strategy will be. > If you want to promote discussion of something you start a new > hierarchy and follow this strategy. We need a strategy that will > result in LESS messages for people to read. Yes, this would require creating a more detailed set of newsgroups, so people can select the subjects of interest and discard the others. Would create a larger amount of messages, but the individual has the opportunity to read only the groups he wants. If someone wants to read _every_ Amiga newsgroup, fine, but there is no reason we should try to force the collective volume of the groups to a level manageable by most. > Case in point: I voted for comp.sys.amiga.games. Now, there is about > as much traffic in comp.sys.amiga and comp.sys.games. Certainly not true. Each of the three subgroups has significantly less traffic than the main one. At times, I'm most interested in .tech news. At times, I feel like a relaxer in the .games group. I might follow up on hardware as well, but in the c.s.a group, I can't manage, although interesting stuff does surface. > In a future post I will use the above strategy (in a serious mode) to > propose a newsgroup. Good. What about comp.sys.amiga.pd ('Where can I ftp foo?' 'Any hints on getting bar to work?' 'Is there a PD pap compiler somewhere?' This in addition to several of the other groups proposed. Have a nice day -Henrik | Henrik Clausen, Graffiti Data (Fido: 2:230/22.33) | | ...{pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmehq!adspdk!hclausen | \__"Do not accept the heart that is the slave to reason" - Qawwali trad__/
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/16/90)
In article <Oct.15.00.24.03.1990.21990@pilot.njin.net> limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: > Right... so now I've narrowed my vote to (1) create c.s.a.newuser and > (2) create c.s.a.software.users (and re-organize a little [.tech could > become c.s.a.software.devel and .games would be c.s.a.software.games]) More esthetic names: c.s.a.applications (your c.s.a.software.users) c.s.a.programmer (your c.s.a.software.devel) -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/16/90)
In article <5764@munnari.oz.au> ianr@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (Ian ROWLANDS) writes: > If you create comp.sys.amiga.programmer, what happens to c.s.a.tech? Trashcan. > A .forsale and .wanted group is no use. Look what has happened to > misc.forsale.computers, misc.forsale, misc.wanted. Everybody just crossposts > to all three with computer equipment, plus the computer group(s) that may be > interested. /forsale/h:j /wanted/h:j At the worst it becomes a *usable* keyword. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu (Doug) (10/16/90)
Being new to the net, I hesitated before suggesting this, but:
What about keeping the groups we have, and adding
comp.unix.amiga (when its released if the posts increase, right now
info on unix and amiga still fit under comp.sys.amiga)
comp.sys.amiga.multimedia (for the toaster,dctv, discussion on effects,...
when the toaster is shipped, and AV, the posts
will surely mean havok.)
As for the problems with .multimedia being confusing I suppose that is
the price you pay - but having a newsgroup by that name sends an interesting
signal to the net.
My only other suggestion might be comp.sys.amiga.future (as also suggested
by others) but that stuff might be better kept in comp.sys.amiga.
Bye,
Doug
--
---------------------------------//-------------------------------------
Doug Dyer Clemson University // Check Is In The Mail (HeeHeeHaaHaa)
ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu \\ // AMIGA3000
-----------------------------\X/----------------------------------------greendog@max.physics.sunysb.edu (Michael D Fischer) (10/17/90)
I don't think splitting the newsgroup up more is the best/only solution to the overcrowding of articles on comp.sys.amiga... If people used the current divisions of the group properly the problem might not be as bad. For example, today I read about 10 articles on c.s.a about the 1950 monitor jitter. Don't these belong on comp.sys.amiga.hardware? There are also lots of articles that I read in all three c.s.a groups. WHY CROSSPOST THEM? That defeats the purpose of splitting a group, and just takes up more disk space and reader time. Lets see if we can use what we have correctly before trying something new (which would suffer from these same problems!) Michael -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Michael D. Fischer | greendog@max.physics.sunysb.edu - - S.U.N.Y. at Stony Brook | mfische@csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu - -------------------------------------------------------------------------
md41@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Marcus Dolengo) (10/17/90)
So like when do the voting starts? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o o | This Space For Rent Amiga!! // << md41@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu >> | \\ // /> <\ | \X/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coming soon to a .sig near you- Quotes!
etxtomp@eos.ericsson.se (Tommy Petersson) (10/17/90)
Seeing the latest postings in c.s.a: Perhaps we should start comp.sys.amiga.mac and comp.sys.amiga.next ? :-)
akerman@qucis.queensu.CA (Richard Akerman) (10/17/90)
My suggestions are:
comp.sys.amiga (.misc) - general discussion / Amiga info.
comp.sys.amiga.games
comp.sys.amiga.programmer - C, Modula-2 ... programmers helping programmers
comp.sys.amiga.hardware - hard disks, ECS ...
comp.sys.amiga.applications - commercial/PD/shareware ... how to use, where to
get, what's best, how do I do xxx with yyy
comp.sys.amiga.unix
comp.sys.amiga.emulators - Bridgeboard, Transformer, Atari1, AMAX
comp.sys.amiga.multimedia - maybe
comp.sys.amiga.forsale
= Richard J. Akerman | BitNet: Akerman@QUCdnAst * | =
= Incompetent Physics | INet: Akerman@Bill.Phy.QueensU.Ca * | "I will go =
= Grad Student | INet: Akerman@RadOpt.Phy.QueensU.Ca | mad!" =
= Queen's University | INet: Akerman@Iris1.Phy.QueensU.Ca | =
= Kingston, Ontario | INet: Akerman@QUCIS.QueensU.Ca | - Arthur Dent =
= Canada | * preferred | =xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/18/90)
jeff@fang.clearpoint.com (Jeffrey J. Griglack) writes: > I do not feel that c.s.a should be split at all. I only get 100 to 150 > articles a day now. Over the weekend (Friday morning to Monday morning) > I had only about 490 total. Now, it may be a little cumbersom to have to > wade through that many articles, but it is not all that bad. That is > what the k (kill in 'rn') is for. If c.s.a is the only group you read, that may not be a burden to you. For many of us, it is one of dozens, and 100 articles a day is a severe problem; thus the repeated (for years now) calls to subdivide the group. That's what we're about. Moreover, many who read this group, or want to read it, can only access it by mail. I helped one European BITNET user get hooked up to c.s.a, and he had to cancel his subscription in four days; the volume simply overwhelmed him. Arguments that "my newsreader makes this easy" do not apply to the net as a whole, and should not be considered, or raised, when trying to decide how to reorganize the c.s.a groups. Comp.sys.amiga is read on BITNET, vmsnet, and potentially any net that supports email access to USENet; we shouldn't use a parochial viewpoint of the universe as an extended VAX cluster running BSD 4.3 and rn when deciding whether or not group volume is a problem. > Every once in a while I find something of interest in a thread that I > would not normally follow. If those threads where shuffled off to other > to other groups I would never see them. I have to believe that I am like > many other readers in this reguard. I never read c.s.a.games. Well, that is a choice you make. If a great thread came up today in c.s.a.games, you'd miss it. Same with other groups; if you decide not to read comp.sys.amiga.drivel, and someone posts a message there showing how to quintuple the speed of your A1000 with $5 of parts and an hour's labor, you missed out. BUT, if the group is split, there is _nothing_ to prevent your site carrying, and you subscribing to, _all_ the subgroups, and still seeing all the same articles, just a little better organized. I think this is a bogus argument against reorganizing c.s.a, and I'd like not to see it raised again unless with some proof that it means anything. > Another reason why not to break up the group is indecision. How do you > know where your particular thread belongs? Does a discussion about word > processors belong in the general group of multimedia? If the word > processor can handle pictures, isn't that multimedia? That is the purpose of crossposting. About 1/20th of the articles posted to c.s.a are crossposted to another group, presumably because the poster thought the article was of both general and specific interest. This is a non-problem, also. > If it comes to a vote, I will vote 'no' unless someone can convince me > otherwise. Well, I tried, but every newsgroup proposal garners some negative votes, so follow your conscience. Just please consider that the proposals are for the good of the readership as a whole, not just of you in your narrow environment; an organization of the groups that makes them easy for you to read may not make it easy for people to read what you post; you have your hands on a two edged weapon. > I feel that splitting the group will just add to the confusion and will > probably not slow the traffic on c.s.a. Well, if I get my way, that is one thing I can guarantee, since with the introduction of c.s.a.misc, c.s.a will no longer exist as a place to post or read news. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/18/90)
md41@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Marcus Dolengo) writes: >So like when do the voting starts? Creation of new/replacement newsgroups is a very formal process, and involves the whole of USENet. There is a formal CALL FOR DISCUSSION (CFD) to the newsgroup news.announce.newgroups, a three week minimum discussion period, a formal CALL FOR VOTES to n.a.n, a three week minimum voting period, a VOTING RESULTS posting to n.a.n, a five day grace period for complaints, and then the moderator of n.a.n will send out news.control newgroup messages for the groups whose votes passed and rmgroup messages for the ones superseded. There are also moderator and other delays of up to six weeks built into the process. Patience, please. I've done this before, so has Peter da Silva. You're looking at mid-January at the earliest. If we have come to some warm fuzzy agreements here within the next couple of weeks, roughly around the first of the month I will draft and post to n.a.n for moderator approval the CFD for the changes. At that point, the discussion will shift from c.s.a to news.groups. When it does, please _don't_ say again everything "you" said here unless people outside the Amiga community start getting hostile and need a show of support. It would be best if the news.groups discussion were muted, which is why I started the process here. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle) (10/18/90)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: CALL FOR LOCAL DISCUSSION: Split the c.s.a group more?
Summary:
Expires:
References: <6802@sugar.hackercorp.com> <5764@munnari.oz.au> <6814@sugar.hackercorp.com> <963@qucis.queensu.CA>
Sender:
Reply-To: zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle)
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: U.C. Davis - Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Keywords: c.s.a, comp.sys.amiga
Ok. This is what I like:
comp.sys.amiga.misc
Use this to replace c.s.a itself. See below for comments about c.s.a.
comp.sys.amiga.games
As is, so I can ignore it most of the time.
comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Maybe called c.s.a.prog... Then again, maybe not.
comp.sys.amiga.hardware
As is, keep it the same.
comp.sys.amiga.app
For users of applications programs that don't fit into the other
categories.... Might possibly be split up more in the future if
some variety of software gets discussed too much.
comp.sys.amiga.trade
This should be misc.forsale.computer.amiga, but somehow I don't know
if that one would actually go through. It would be nice to divert the
for sale and wanted messages off of the main group. This way, it
would be easier when I actually am buying something to find it, too.
misc.forsale.computers is too general. It's not easy to find what you
are actually after, and not a whole lot of amigoids read it....
comp.sys.amiga.media
For video, graphics, music, sound--outside of programming issues. If
traffic in one or the other of these areas becomes to high, split up
more into c.s.a.m.graphics, c.s.a.m.music, etc., etc.
comp.sys.amiga.announce
As proposed. Give it a moderator to make sure that blatant
advertising & such isn't overdone. Followups redirected to either a
new c.s.a.announce.d or to a .app or .hardware.
comp.sys.amiga.review
As proposed. Put only formal written up reviews of products here to
evaluate pro & con. Have it moderated, just to keep people in line.
Followups could be redirected to the appropriate group (.app or
.hardware), or could have .review.d.
The above are a good idea. The next might be one.....
comp.sys.amiga.emulator
The amiga emulates a lot of other systems, and there seem to be a lot
of postings re this capability, but is it worth a whole newsgroup?
I'd say it's worth a vote to find out.
These are NOT good ideas:
comp.sys.amiga.unix
This should be comp...unix...amiga. And it shouldn't exist until Amiga
Unix is officially released (fragment). In fact, it probably will be
covered by a sysVr4 group.
comp.sys.amiga.education
comp.sys.amiga.graphics
comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
(others)
There's not enough traffic to justify these. They are all important,
certainly, but they should fit into the other groups well enough. If
the last two in the future make traffic, they can branch off of .media
(.media.multi?).
comp.sys.amiga.flame
comp.sys.amiga.flame.atmb
comp.sys.amiga.flame.intel
comp.sys.amiga.flame.next
comp.sys.amiga.flame.mac
comp.sys.amiga.flame.atari
Unfortunately, there does seem to be enough traffic to justify each of
these, but I do think that we don't need new groups. I wish instead
that people could just grow up a little bit more, and not get so
insecure about their (admittedly, wonderful) Amigas that they need to
pick on other brands.
comp.sys.amiga.futures
The situation is bad enough without a formal arena for rumor-mongering!
comp.sys.amiga.software
Too vague a name. C.s.a.app is much more appropriate.
More ideas:
Don't let people post to c.s.a itself. This will force people to THINK
before posting. Although it will probably wreak havok at first, it
will also help solve the problem of "Sorry about this post, but I
don't get c.s.a.foo". In this case, c.s.a.misc is essential.
Have regular lists go out of information. These would ideally go on
the now-unpostable (moderated?) c.s.a. As I mentioned earlier, they
could be introductions to the area and answers to common questions,
along with a little bit of local nettiquite info.
Set up our own net.police. God, I hate to say it, but they actually
might help. Just a couple of folks to (politely) e-mail people who cause
problems by breaking whatever rules.... On the other hand, I do like
anarchy, and police seem so... so....... stuffy and obnoxious. Right
now, rule breakers can be... well...... flamed. Which is worse?
Police would tell people that they are posting in the wrong group,
posting a Commonly Asked Question (answer included), posting a flame,
not cutting down the quoted text enough, or otherwise screwing up.
Police would have to be someone well-versed in e-mail addressing and
good manners.
I volunteer to moderate a group. If I don't do that, I volunteer to
maintain the list of commonly asked questions. I don't think I can
bring myself to volunteer for the net.police.
Final note: PLEASE vote to split the group. Even if you don't care,
vote in favor so the individual directories don't explode. Did
someone set an official date for the vote to start? Please start it
soon.
Dan Zerkle zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (916) 754-0240
Amiga... Because life is too short for boring computers.fredc@umriscb.tmc.edu (Fred Clauss) (10/18/90)
In article <Oct.12.15.25.03.1990.19780@pilot.njin.net>, limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: ] I think the reorganization should be: ] comp.sys.amiga.misc Replace comp.sys.amiga This might present problems to the neophyte, especially if comp.sys.amiga disappears altogether, although the elimination of comp.sys.amiga would probably reduce the crossposted "computer-wars" which appear from time to time. ] comp.sys.amiga.software.dev For programmers (replaces comp.sys.amiga.tech) I agree that comp.sys.amiga.tech is not a good name given the purpose it has been given. Again, this is a problem for neophytes, of which I am one. Following net.naming.conventions would result in this group being named comp.sys.amiga.programmer. While we do like to be different over here in csa, this type of convention should be followed. ] comp.sys.amiga.software For the users OK ] comp.sys.amiga.games Same as it is now Is this group new? I wondered what happened to all those annoying games postings. Good, a group *I* can ignore... ] comp.sys.amiga.hardware Same as it is now ] Considering that 19 posts should have been posted to ] comp.sys.amiga.hardware, this makes me think that c.s.a.hardware is ] either mis-named, or I don't understand it's purpose.:-) Assuming ] the former, maybe people need to know that it is for hardware ] developers AND users looking for recommendations AND users looking ] to fix hardware-related problems. Maybe we need .hardware.users ] and .hardware.developers so that people about to post to c.s.a will ] see that there are better choices. This problem is probably a "we don't get it here" or "we don't know about it" problem. I think the proper approach here is for someone to act as a guide to misdirected posters, GENTLY notifying them that their posts belong elsewhere (in e-mail). Posted "this doesn't belong here" flames generally do not work very well. Also, anyone who posts a followup should make sure that any subsequent followups get redirected to the proper newsgroup. ] Anyway... as I said before (in another post) the purpose of ] creating a new newsgroup is to make it so that readers can read ] FEWER articles. Following that philosophy, *I* should propose a ] newsgroup for something that *I* don't want to read. That would ] clear that entire class of articles out of comp.sys.amiga. ] Therefore, selfishly, since I don't read the "Emulations" I think ] we should create a newsgroup for those articles. ] I propose: ] "comp.sys.amiga.emulations: A place to discuss software and ] hardware emulation of other computers and operating systems ] including (but not limited to) Mac, IBM, Atari ST, C-64's ] microprocessors, etc." ] What do you think? Is the "emulations" topic just a fad? Definitely not! I do, however, think that some of the recent traffic will die down as A-Max attains better compatibility with hard drives and the A3000. In fact, due to Apple's goofy ROM policy, A-max traffic may approach zero. Anyway, I just don't think the normal traffic warrants a separate newsgroup (my bias is not the deciding factor, either, since I probably wouldn't read that newsgroup either. -- Fred Clauss INTERNET: fredc@isc.umr.edu (preferred) P.O. Box 815 or fredc@ee.umr.edu Rolla, MO 65401 BITNET: S081192@UMRVMA
swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (10/18/90)
In article <7842@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle) writes: [...with deletions as appropriate...] >Ok. This is what I like: >comp.sys.amiga.misc >comp.sys.amiga.games >comp.sys.amiga.programmer >comp.sys.amiga.hardware >comp.sys.amiga.app >comp.sys.amiga.trade >comp.sys.amiga.media >comp.sys.amiga.announce [moderated] >comp.sys.amiga.review [moderated] >comp.sys.amiga.emulator >These are NOT good ideas: > >comp.sys.amiga.unix >comp.sys.amiga.education >comp.sys.amiga.graphics >comp.sys.amiga.multimedia >comp.sys.amiga.flame >comp.sys.amiga.flame.atmb >comp.sys.amiga.flame.intel >comp.sys.amiga.flame.next >comp.sys.amiga.flame.mac >comp.sys.amiga.flame.atari >comp.sys.amiga.futures >comp.sys.amiga.software [...] >I volunteer to moderate a group. If I don't do that, I volunteer to >maintain the list of commonly asked questions. I don't think I can >bring myself to volunteer for the net.police. OK, some of these ideas I like, but some are just a matter of personal opinion. Ex: .app vs .software; .media vs .multimedia, etc. Devoting comp.sys.amiga to netiquette issues is a concept. But I think you will find that the trouble-makers are the very ones who will unsubscribe from this group. I *do* think that the final call for discussion should present a definite *total hierchy* for comp.sys.amiga for discussion. When we vote, it should be a package vote, not a line-item vote. It should be a package that includes all future groups in the comp.sys.amiga hierchy and their status. That way we will not wind up with a paradoxical situation of voting to change the usage of some groups but failing to vote for the creation of all the needed groups to fill the gaps. We need to get this rolling soon. Whoever started this discussion please chime in. People in news.groups are getting nervous because we have not posted our Call For Discussion in there yet. -- _. --Steve ._||__ DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own. Warren v\ *| ---------------------------------------------- V {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM
a186@mindlink.UUCP (Harvey Taylor) (10/19/90)
[ My $.02 for the line eater ]
I think we should leave c.s.a.games, c.s.a.hardware & c.s.a.tech
unchanged cause they ain't broke.
comp.sys.amiga.hardware [unchanged]
comp.sys.amiga.games [unchanged]
comp.sys.amiga.tech [unchanged]
rmgroup c.s.a and create
comp.sys.amiga.misc
comp.sys.amiga.applications
comp.sys.amiga.trade [or .swap or .sale]
comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
comp.sys.amiga.announce [moderated]
comp.sys.amiga.review [moderated]
comp.unix.amiga [ after it is released ;-)]
I don't think we need any more net.cops, official or not.
There is another aspect I would like to bring up. On MindLink,
Usenet appears as a regular BBS that just happens to have a message
counter in the hundreds of thousands. I think we are the victims of
some automated crossposting. I get the impression that some people's
messages are put into every c.s.a.#? group by some intermediate node.
I think I read somewhere this is done by a gate from the internet.
[eg. Not to pick on you, but Ralph Seguin, we get every one of your
messages in c.s.a.h, c.s.a & c.s.a.t. Is this by your design? Or is it
an intermediate gate as I surmise?]
If we do do the split, perhaps some care will have to be taken to
make such routing software cognizant of the appropriate groups? To have
a subset of messages copied into 7 or 10 groups would be ... difficult.
-harvey
"In order to become the master, the politician poses as the servant."
-de Gaulle
Harvey Taylor Meta Media Productions
uunet!van-bc!rsoft!mindlink!Harvey_Taylor
a186@mindlink.UUCPxanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/19/90)
bill@bilver.UUCP (Bill Vermillion) writes: > ben@servalan.uucp (Ben Mesander) writes: >>I suggest that we start a new group, comp.sys.amiga.newgroups, that we can >>move this thread about making new groups into. It'd lower the traffic in >>comp.sys.amiga by quite a bit. >> > >Discussions like this belong in news.groups, not in the system >hierarchy. I just came into this group to post the previous >message because I got new groups today that I don't beleive were >ever discussed in the news.groups section. This affects those of >us who administer systems, because we can't read all, but we do try >to keep up with the news sections to better adminster the machines. >I don't believe I saw the new group proposals in the voting list >that was posted last week, but I may be wrong. You didn't. We'll get there, Bill. This is a complex subject, and needs to be thrashed out among the interested parties for a while rather than being presented to the whole net in a state of disarray. I anticipate a CFD around 1 Nov 1990. I apologize to the net for the over-eager forger who tried to create the groups before the formal discussion had even begun. I guess a lot of folks out there don't understand that it is literally _impossible_ to force your personal choices on a consensual anarchy. Most sysadmins intercept and hand apply newgroup and rmgroup messages, and won't respect any for which no discussion and voting have occurred in the groups dedicated to such purposes, so forged control messages, while easy to do, and a nuisance, are also a waste of time, and only demonstrate immaturity to a wide audience. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
bill@bilver.UUCP (Bill Vermillion) (10/19/90)
In article <1990Oct17.185635.22710@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >BUT, if the group is split, there is _nothing_ to prevent your site >carrying, and you subscribing to, _all_ the subgroups, and still seeing >all the same articles, just a little better organized. I think this is a >bogus argument against reorganizing c.s.a, and I'd like not to see it >raised again unless with some proof that it means anything. I got an email from Kent in response to my original posting here. Let me again point out my stand (non-amiga user but have many on the system), if you split the c.s.a, I will carry all and have no problems. But without the split and as the volume grows, I just pull c.s.a limit on the machine with shorter expires. Ideal limit for a directory under Unix is just about 300 articles. I am running more than that, and the system performance shows. When the c.s.a group amount of messages got so large that it impacted system performance noticeably, I just put c.s.a on an expire that is 1/3 the amount of any other group. I don't have problems but c.s.a readers do. Don't be deluded by thinking you can handle everything in one group, and use your newsreader to help you through the quagmire. Try your hand at adminstering a system for awhile and you might see what I mean. It's not a space problem for me as I have 250 megs dedicated to the news section alone, but I can't keep many days available on line because of the huge directories it creates. My first indication of the problem was when the system mailed root a message saying "WARNING - HUGE DIRECTORY - comp/sys/amgia" (or words close to that effect. When the news software complains running an expire you KNOW you have a problem. -- Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill : bill@bilver.UUCP
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/19/90)
[This is being cross-posted to news.groups... because newsgroup-type
stuff should be.]
I retract my idea for c.s.a.emulate (because I agree that is is a
fad.)
I have found one person that is willing to be the moderator for
c.s.a.announce (should it be created).
I think there is a lot of concensus about:
comp.sys.amiga ---> comp.sys.amiga.misc
comp.sys.amiga.tech ---> comp.sys.amiga.programmer
create ---> comp.sys.amiga.announce
create ---> comp.sys.amiga.applications
(well, I'm not sure if there is good agreement on the last one. I'd
be interested in discussion.)
I don't have time to do the official call for discussion, call for
votes, vote collection, etc. Midterms start soon around here, and I
want to graduate on time :-) (this Spring). Is there anyone else
willing to do this?
Agenda of things to discuss:
1) Do we do the reorganization in one vote, or in many? (I think we
could rename the two groups in one all-or-nothing vote; and create the
new newsgroups in separate votes)?
2) Do we want to create comp.sys.amiga.applications? Should we create
a different name for that kind of group or do we want some other topic?
3) Do we want to appoint a net.sargent.at.arms?
Someone with the duty of sending people polite
email ("approved" form-letters only) saying things like (but more
polite than this) "Hi, I don't know if your post was placed in the
right newsgroup, but here is the official definitions for future
reference." or "Your post was inappropriate considering the charter of
the comp.sys.amiga.* groups... etc. etc." or "You're a goober, go
away." (The last one is optional)
What do you think?
-Tom
--
tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice
tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites"
tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -mepeter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/19/90)
In article <107306@convex.convex.com> swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) writes: > OK, some of these ideas I like, but some are just a matter of personal > opinion. Ex: .app vs .software; .media vs .multimedia, etc. How about ".applications" instead of ".app"? There's a comp.mail.multimedia, so a comp.sys.amiga.multimedia fits right in. > I *do* think that the final call for discussion should present a definite > *total hierchy* for comp.sys.amiga for discussion. When we vote, it should > be a package vote, not a line-item vote. It should be a package that > includes all future groups in the comp.sys.amiga hierchy and their status. No. A package vote... particularly an all-singing all-dancing all-things-to- all-people package like you've outlined above... will die. Too many new groups at once. Make it a line item vote and you'll avoid the "no vote on general principles" people. As to the structure of the new groups: Leave comp.sys.amiga.tech for now. Or rename it to .programmer. Don't try for .hardware.tech and .software.tech (or whatever). Stick to one level. If you've got sublevels in a group, it's probably not ready for splitting. My suggestions: comp.sys.amiga.users ( not questions or newusers or anything condescending ) comp.sys.amiga.programmer ( was comp.sys.amiga.tech ) comp.sys.amiga.applications comp.sys.amiga.multimedia comp.sys.amiga.rumors comp.sys.amiga.misc ( was comp.sys.amiga ) comp.sys.amiga.hardware ( unchanged ) comp.sys.amiga.games ( unchanged ) comp.sys.amiga.swapmeet ( .wanted and .forsale in one ) > That way we will not wind up with a paradoxical situation of voting to > change the usage of some groups but failing to vote for the creation > of all the needed groups to fill the gaps. If the number of groups involved is small, and the changes standalone, there won't be a problem. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (10/19/90)
bill@bilver.UUCP (Bill Vermillion) writes: >Discussions like this belong in news.groups, not in the system >hierarchy. Notice the subject line? call for ***LOCAL*** discussion. We are not proposing the groups yet. Kent Dolan merely wanted to start a discussion to see if it was even feasible to start an official discussion in news.groups. As of yet we havent even decided that we will try to split up c.s.a. much less which groups to try to split it into. This is a very preliminary discussion so far. -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
david@twg.com (David S. Herron) (10/20/90)
Kent, It is my considered opinion, as a former Usenet Backbone Member, that you have a good set of newsgroup proposals there. :-) Go for an official CFD, please.. -- <- David Herron, an MMDF & WIN/MHS guy, <david@twg.com> <- Formerly: David Herron -- NonResident E-Mail Hack <david@ms.uky.edu> <- <- Remember: On System V it's "tar xovf", not "tar xvf"!
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/20/90)
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: >[This is being cross-posted to news.groups... because newsgroup-type >stuff should be.] Wonderful. Now, while we still have no idea what we want to propose, you've called the whole damn net down on our heads with a half baked excerpt of the unformed proposal. I PUT "LOCAL DISCUSSION " IN THE THREAD TITLE FOR A REASON! Please, when you don't know what you're doing, don't do it. Now I've got to cross-post in turn, to try to repair the damage: NEWS.GROUPS: There is a preliminary discussion going on in comp.sys.amiga about partitioning the newsgroup, in response to many complaints from sysops having to expire the group in 1/3rd normal time to avoid breaking news software, from people who receive the group by email relay, and have no choice but to slog through it article by article, and from the general readership, many of whom are overwhelmed. To save exposing the whole net to an ungelled proposal in news.groups, the boring and not of general interest "should we really split the group, what groups should we make, and what should we name them" parts of the discussion is taking place locally in comp.sys.amiga until there is a coherent proposal to put forth, as per standard net practice. This has already spared you 160 KBytes of commentary; comp.sys.amiga has a _huge_ readership/postership. I'm in charge of the reorganization (per my promise a couple of months back while running the comp.sys.amiga.games vote), in the same sense in which Chip did the comp.unix reorganization. Anybody wants to flame me for the way I'm doing this, my mailbox is listed below; keep it off the net. I have scheduled a CFD to news.announce.newgroups (w/ a crosspost to news.groups) for 1 Nov 1990, at which point you are all welcome to stomp up and down on things to your hearts' content. Until then, a little peace and quiet while I get things in order would be much appreciated, as would just ignoring any hyperenthusiastic cross-posts, forged newgroup messages, and other newbie idiocy. Your cooperation will be delightfully accepted. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) (10/20/90)
I personally like the idea of "comp.sys.amiga.flame.marc.barrett" which would clean up c.s.a. IMMENSELY! :0 er :) -Joseph Hillenburg UUCP: ...iuvax!valnet!joseph ARPA: valnet!joseph@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu INET: joseph@valnet.UUCP
scot@amigash.UUCP (Scot L. Harris) (10/20/90)
Has anybody addressed the problem I saw when the games group was added?
Now the comp.sys.amiga group still gets about 400 to 600 messages a week
(and increasing....) but the games group also gets about 200 or so messages
or more a week. It would seem that by offically sanctioning a split the
over all number of messages have expanded dramaticly. If you split
the main group into a dozen or more sub groups are we going to see
200 to 300 messages in each group? Isn't this going to overwelm the net
at some point?
--
_
/// /_\ Scot L. Harris ...!tarpit!bilver!amigash!scot
\XX/ / \ M I G A Orlando, FL (407)273-1759
[Prodigy censor messages? Nah, they wouepeterso@houligan.encore.com (Eric Peterson) (10/20/90)
a186@mindlink.UUCP (Harvey Taylor) writes: | I think we should leave c.s.a.games, c.s.a.hardware & c.s.a.tech | unchanged cause they ain't broke. | | comp.sys.amiga.hardware [unchanged] | comp.sys.amiga.games [unchanged] | comp.sys.amiga.tech [unchanged] Keep the content of .tech the same, but change the name to .programmer. This will bring it in line with other .programmer groups including comp.sys.mac.p, comp.unix.p, etc. | rmgroup c.s.a and create comp.sys.amiga.misc Thoroughly agreed upon. Keeping comp.sys.amiga around is pointless. | comp.sys.amiga.applications Good group. I'd prefer .apps, as I think this is clear enough, but it's another group that's definitively needed under any name. | comp.sys.amiga.trade [or .swap or .sale] That's what misc.forsale.computers is for. If necessary, go with misc.forsale.computers.amiga, but I don't think this is important at this point. | comp.sys.amiga.multimedia Putting audio, video, and graphics discussions in here is a good idea for now, until the time when separate .audio, .video, and .graphics groups are needed. | comp.sys.amiga.announce [moderated] | comp.sys.amiga.review [moderated] Do we have moderators for these groups? | comp.unix.amiga [ after it is released ;-)] Agreed. Keep the Unix discussions in the Unix hierarchy. Talk about Amiga Unix will more closely match the discussions there than in the c.s.a hierarchy. We also *desperately* need a .futures group. Eric -- Eric Peterson <> epeterson@encore.com <> uunet!encore!epeterson Encore Computer Corp. * Ft. Lauderdale, Florida * (305) 587-2900 x 5208 Why did Constantinople get the works? Gung'f abobql'f ohfvarff ohg gur Ghexf.
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/21/90)
In article <8121@gollum.twg.com> david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: >Kent, > >It is my considered opinion, as a former Usenet Backbone Member, that >you have a good set of newsgroup proposals there. :-) > >Go for an official CFD, please.. Hey, Dave, thanks for the support! But see the revision (which may be better). Well, I have one unreserved note of support for the original, one for the revision, and everybody else wants to help cook! ;-) Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/21/90)
In article <3589@mindlink.UUCP> a186@mindlink.UUCP (Harvey Taylor) writes: > I don't think we need any more net.cops, official or not. Agreed. [Mailer gateway problems, then:] > If we do do the split, perhaps some care will have to be taken to > make such routing software cognizant of the appropriate groups? To have > a subset of messages copied into 7 or 10 groups would be ... difficult. This is already a problem coming back through the udel.edu amiga-relay mailserver; it is the equivalent of a "site" that only subscribes to c.s.a, so a fair fraction of the postings appropriate for one of the specialty groups but landing in c.s.a are ones coming through that bottleneck. I've had no success yet at establishing communications with the operator of the relay, to discuss the changes needed when c.s.a goes away. We may need to establish some heirarchy and say that cross-posted stuff going through mail forwarders only goes into the highest priority group, and subscribers to only c.s.a.drivel miss the .announce crosspostings to .drivel. Agreeing on such a heirarchy could be tricky! (_I_ think graphics is more important than music, but then I'm tone deaf and don't own a MIDI sequencer, so what do I know?) Comments, suggestions? Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/22/90)
In article <3409@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >bill@bilver.UUCP (Bill Vermillion) writes: >>Discussions like this belong in news.groups, not in the system >>hierarchy. > >Notice the subject line? call for ***LOCAL*** discussion. We are not proposing >the groups yet. Kent Dolan merely wanted to start a discussion to see if it >was even feasible to start an official discussion in news.groups. As of yet >we havent even decided that we will try to split up c.s.a. much less which >groups to try to split it into. This is a very preliminary discussion so far. So this is a meta discussion on whether or not a news.groups discussion should be held. Sounds like a typical news.groups discussion to me. Seriously, news.groups is here to take the noise of group plans out of the hierarchy (even if they are about thinking about splitting a group). If people are interested in a discussion about splitting the group they will subscribe to news.groups. Followups to news.groups. Pax, Keith
andrew@teslab.lab.OZ (Andrew Phillips) (10/22/90)
In article <1990Oct8.055618.27507@IRO.UMontreal.CA> martin@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Daniel Martin) writes: > Your proposed groups hierachy is interestig, but too numerous. I don't see how it could be TOO numerous. The more meaningful groups there are the better. By this I mean groups that are distinct enough to not have massive cross-posting and non-trivial enough to have an active readership. >... > c.s.a.classified ... Should be c.s.a.forsale and c.s.a.wanted in line with the names for other newsgroups. > c.s.a.media: (New) discussions regrouping sound, graphics, video, etc. This group will be much too big even now. Within a year or less I can see that it would need to be split into at least three groups (sound,midi,graphics,cad,video,multimedia,amigavision,...) > c.s.a.help: Good for messages like "DAVE: my mouse is broken" :-) To be consistent with other group names c.s.a.questions would be better. > c.s.a.unix: Will be useful soon. Can be put in c.s.a.help. This should really be comp.unix.amix (or whatever Amiga UNIX is called). This would correspond to groups like comp.unix.aux (for mac UNIX). The mac hierarchy (comp.sys.mac.*) was recently split, making 11 different groups. I think we could do with at least that number. I don't mean that we should try to outdo the mac groups just that they have a similar volume of news. Andrew. BTW Someone has already created c.s.a.(announce|multimedia|graphics|unix) here several days ago. -- Andrew Phillips (andrew@teslab.lab.oz.au) Phone +61 (Aust) 2 (Sydney) 289 8712
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (10/24/90)
In article <15300@cbmvax.commodore.com>, ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > So this is a meta discussion on whether or not a news.groups > discussion should be held. Sounds like a typical news.groups > discussion to me. I agree... it's time to take it to news.groups. I'm tired of reading an overloaded comp.sys.amiga trying to keep up with this discussion. The very reason the split is needed is a good reason to take it to news.groups. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U` peter@ferranti.com
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/25/90)
In article <scot.4180@amigash.UUCP> scot@amigash.UUCP (Scot L. Harris) writes: > Has anybody addressed the problem I saw when the games group was > added? Your perception of this problem is inaccurate. > Now the comp.sys.amiga group still gets about 400 to 600 messages a > week (and increasing....) but the games group also gets about 200 or > so messages or more a week. Zorch is _extremely_ well connected to c.s.a.games (it better be, I ran the vote to create the group), and with twelve days' postings on line, we have only 152 articles in c.s.a.games, or about 100 articles per week, not 200. > It would seem that by offically sanctioning a split the over all > number of messages have expanded dramaticly. Not really; the net as a whole is expanding dramatically, and the posting volume is tracking net growth pretty accurately. The 100 articles a week is about what we sucked out of c.s.a; it has grown despite that due to the overall growth of the net. > If you split the main group into a dozen or more sub groups are we > going to see 200 to 300 messages in each group? Postings don't arise by magic; people have to type them. With only 1/1000 of the readers actually posting to the group, there is every potential for explosive growth, yet it doesn't happen. I think it is safe to guess that the amount of time people who post are willing to spend typing articles is pretty well saturated; the advantage of doing a deep split is that by the time c.s.a.* newsgroups again get as big as c.s.a is now, the net will either have found a way to cope with larger volumes (optical storage, probably, the lines are fast enough already), or else collapsed despite anything c.s.a.* has to contribute. > Isn't this going to overwelm the net at some point? Not all by ourselves. We're a big group, but we're still under 3% of the whole. The net is busy exploring the means to support high growth rates; "we" have adopted gigabyte disks, which are now available at prices within reach of the well-to-do home hobbiest, Trailblazer technology that supports 19,200 baud transfer rates on phone lines nominally capable of 3000 or so, archive and news compression software, and so on. With fiber optic data rates and optical storage "jukeboxes" available at the commercial or lab levels, and soon on the way to the wider net, the physical storage and transfer capabilities for a larger net are well in hand. The missing component is an organization that will empower the user to cope with the larger volume. This newsgroup split is one part of that needed organization. Newer news reader technology, such as trn and nn are another part of the empowering of the USENet subscriber that needs doing. Improvements in dissemination of news software (there are still sites running Bnews 2.09, for heavens sake!) is needed , as are standards for mail addressing so that reliable email would take more posted answers to email and relieve the uninterested reader of the burden of plowing through what are essentially private conversations. Again, this split is part of the solution, not an increase in the problem, and for some sites and users, the need for the split has reached crisis levels. Your support is needed. /// It's Amiga /// for me: why Kent, the man from xanth. \\\/// settle for <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> \XX/ anything less? -- Convener, comp.sys.amiga grand reorganization.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/25/90)
In article <scot.4180@amigash.UUCP> scot@amigash.UUCP (Scot L. Harris) writes: > 200 to 300 messages in each group? Isn't this going to overwelm the net > at some point? Imminent Death of the Net Predicted. OK, I think we can move to news.groups now. All the standard forms have been observed... -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.