peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) (11/06/87)
I was initially opposed to splitting comp.sys.amiga. However it IS the highest traffic group on the net. It would certainly look better on the regular traffic reports if it were split (I'm sure the mac groups would beat it if they were counted together, so this isn't just a pr campaign). Suggestions: comp.sys.amiga.misc and comp.sys.amiga.guru I like this one just because of the name of the wizard group. comp.sys.amiga.500, cmp.sys.amiga.1000, and comp.sys.amiga.2000 Often suggested. I think it stinks. comp.sources.amiga and comp.sources.amiga.d This would pull all the "bug in shell 2.05" stuff out of comp.sys.amiga. Probably the best solution. (The .d group would of course be unmoderated, and would serve the purpose of .bugs, .d, and .requests). comp.sys.amiga and comp.sys.amiga.newprod In the same vein as the above. Perhaps part of the problem is that stuff is being put in comp.sys.amiga that belongs in other groups? (no, I don't think so either) comp.sys.amiga.flames While popular, would undoubtedly be useless. comp.sys.peter.da.silva Has been suggested. Perhaps it should be changed to comp.sys.mike.meyers. (:->, in case you don't know) -- -- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter -- Disclaimer: These U aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.
urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj) (11/09/87)
Peter da Silva wants to split comp.sys.amiga and is already plotting and choosing names for the new subgroups. O.k. then I propose comp.sys.amiga1 and comp.sys.amiga2. People would be requested to post alternately to each of the two groups in order to achieve a balance in the volume of material in each group. Alternately we could suggest to the high fluff volume experts to cross post to the other groups, thus raising their volumes so that the volume and S/N ratio of comp.sys.amiga would look better in the eyes of the gods. I suggest a concerted action team composed of Peter, Paul, and Mike for implementing the second approach. By the way thats Peter da Silva, Pauls Dolan and Higginsbottom, and Mike Meyer. Cheers to you all Rostyk
mwm@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike (My watch has windows) Meyer) (11/09/87)
In article <995@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes:
<I was initially opposed to splitting comp.sys.amiga. However it IS the highest
<traffic group on the net. It would certainly look better on the regular traffic
<reports if it were split (I'm sure the mac groups would beat it if they were
<counted together, so this isn't just a pr campaign).
Good luck. I don't think it's gonna split, though.
< comp.sys.amiga.500, cmp.sys.amiga.1000, and comp.sys.amiga.2000
<
< Often suggested. I think it stinks.
I like it a lot more than I used to. Then again, I wasn't seeing
people with pure-500 and pure-2000 problems then. My kill file now
throws out a non-trivial number of such postings (and it's still
missing some).
< comp.sys.peter.da.silva
<
< Has been suggested. Perhaps it should be changed to
< comp.sys.mike.meyers. (:->, in case you don't know)
Hmm. Who is mike meyers, and what has he done to cause such a
suggestion?
I think the best suggestion (which you didn't pick up) was:
comp.sys.amiga.hardware, comp.sys.amiga.software
This allows the A500 and A2000 to be split off later if it seems
apropriate.
<mike
--
The sun is shining slowly. Mike Meyer
The birds are flying so low. mwm@berkeley.edu
Honey, you're my one and only. ucbvax!mwm
So pay me what you owe me. mwm@ucbjade.BITNETrichard@gryphon.UUCP (11/09/87)
In article <995@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: > >Suggestions: > > comp.sys.amiga.misc and comp.sys.amiga.guru > comp.sys.amiga.500, cmp.sys.amiga.1000, and comp.sys.amiga.2000 > comp.sources.amiga and comp.sources.amiga.d > comp.sys.amiga and comp.sys.amiga.newprod > comp.sys.amiga.flames > comp.sys.peter.da.silva Sorry, don't like any of 'em. How 'bout: Comp.sys.amiga.general Comp.sys.amiga.programming Comp.sys.amiga.products We've tried this here on a local BBS (PNET) and it work rather well. >-- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter -- Richard J. Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the keys in my ignition..."
dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) (11/09/87)
The only possible split would be non-guru/guru, but frankly I'm against the whole idea. -Matt
childs@cadnetix.UUCP (David Childs) (11/10/87)
Here are my views on a split up. Maybe something like this:
comp.sys.amiga.misc
guru
hardware
software
languages
and maybe a few more if anyone can think of some.
David Childs childs@cadnetix.UUCP 303 444-8075gbs@utgpu.UUCP (11/11/87)
I for n say no. Although I am sometimes forced to realise that my
proficiancy with 'n' and 'k' are rare on the net (when I read sf-lovers!)
I can't see a really good reason to try to separate stuff out of this
group. Most of the articles I skip are not because I never wanted to see
them, but rather because I feel that the point has been belaboured enough
already. I'd frankly rather read one news group than two or three, especially
as I forsee much cross-posting, and discussions starting in one group and
ending up in the other. As so often happens here, a new product announcment
yields a technical conversation on the merits, uses, methodology..of the
technology involved (or flames). Will these gradually evolving conversations
suddenly switch groups, or will they begin to cross post, and then eventually
move completely. I see the second as a common occurance; thus during the
intermediate stage, double the volume on that topic - as each comment
must be pushed twice accross the net.
Are we worried about the effecient use of bandwidth (after all, *someone*
pays somewhere, or our groups P.R. image ? Ultimatly, if someone sees
a marked increase in >TOTAL AMIGA TRAFFIC< we will suffer a worse fate
(like moderation - gasp!).
From a personal perspective, in a busy work week 400-600 messages can
pile up on me here, the bottom 200 or so of which I've lost. I can
easily see 2 amiga groups generating 400 messages each a week (eventually)
but I can't see this one group generating 800. 800 sounds (is) like a lot
and people will cut back (I love the net, a perfect example that anarchy
is feasable when people recognise enlightened common goal self interests)
But, to return to the point, 2 groups with 400 each won't look like that
much more. Net result (no pun intended) more traffic, higher costs, and
its not like we'll be reaching a different or wider audience.
--
Gideon Sheps
I am not a number ... ...I am a free variable !
///
UUCP: {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!utgpu!gbs \\\///
BITNET: gbs@utorgpu INTERNET: gbs@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu \\\/klm@munsell.UUCP (11/12/87)
In article <8711092045.AA23128@cory.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes: > > The only possible split would be non-guru/guru, but frankly I'm >against the whole idea. > > -Matt Do you mean Guru the noun, or Guru the verb? :-) Really, though, all of the good tech stuff that comes through here is so intertwined with everything else that I don't see a reasonable splitting point. Let's face it, the Amiga is one hell of a complex machine. Unless you're doing things at the most rudimentary levels (programming simple stuff in BASIC), you're going to have to get at least somewhat familiar with the machine. Hey, this isn't Unix. It's better! And worse! Our traffic level would drop sharply if all of us, myself included, would just stop our whining in encyclopedic volumes. It would also help if people used the {sources,binaries} groups. The Cron program posted here recently, while *very* much appreciated, was probably larger than what the author considered 'small.' (I was just thinking about an analog to cron the other day, and voila! here it is. Now I won't have to take time from my other project to write it. Thanks!) 500, 1000, 2000 makes no difference. A lot of software runs the same on all of them. Let's make our peace with each other and get back to doing some creative stuff. With all of the flaming going on here, we've overlooked the important things, like, when is Leo going to post another fun, display hack? Hey Leo, how about Flameroids? :-) (Hemmorhoids? Naw, too sick. :-) Stop the flaming and our traffic level will drop. Split up comp.sys.amiga? Just say "NO!" -- Kevin McBride, the guy in the brace // | Your mind is totally controlled Condition improved, but still // | It has been stuffed into my mold no skiing in sight. (:^[) \\ // Amiga | And you will do as you are told {encore,adelie}!munsell!klm \X/ Rules! | until the rights to you are sold
richc@vaxwaller.UUCP (Rich Commins) (11/12/87)
I suggest we create only this new group:
comp.sys.CBM-bashing
Half of all the traffic on this net recently has been destructive
criticism of CBM and has no place here!
--
--
Rich Commins (415)939-2400 \ /\
Varian Instruments, 2700 Mitchell Drive, Walnut Creek, CA 94598 \/--\
{ptsfa,lll-crg,zehntel,dual,amd,fortune,ista,rtech,csi,normac}varian!richcrichard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (11/13/87)
In article <1089@cadnetix.UUCP> childs@cadnetix.UUCP (David Childs) writes: > > >Here are my views on a split up. Maybe something like this: >comp.sys.amiga.misc > guru > hardware > software > languages >and maybe a few more if anyone can think of some. Nahh, too many. Misc and guru is the best delineation of the lot, but whose gonna read just one or tother ? Hardware and software doesn't make much sense either as all hardware has software aspects to it. Software and languages seems a bit nebulous as well. Nobody has comments on: .general (or misc if you prefer) .programming .products ??? >David Childs -- Richard J. Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the keys in my ignition..."
bilbo@pnet02.cts.com (Bill Daggett) (11/15/87)
Rich,
Do you think "bashing CBM" is really destructive? I mean if it wasn't done
would CBM be getting "the message" about their products? Or would we be
sending them a false message? I know there is a taste factor to consider
always - but I think Commodore can take our shots. Computers and products
that are talked up and down are "popular".
Bill Daggett -- a.k.a.
*Bilbo Baggins* Recombinant Hobbit
* Sometimes The Dragon Wins! *
INTERNET: bilbo@pnet02.CTS.COM
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd!crash, ihnp4!scgvaxd }!gryphon!pnet02!bilbo
WHAT?:richc@vaxwaller.UUCP (Rich Commins) (11/17/87)
In article <2294@gryphon.CTS.COM>, bilbo@pnet02.cts.com (Bill Daggett) writes: > Rich, > > Do you think "bashing CBM" is really destructive? I mean if it wasn't done > would CBM be getting "the message" about their products? Or would we be ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I think bashing CBM is destructive. The message got across after the first dozen or so. The repeats and negative comments WERE destructive. I agree that feedback is necessary, but lets keep it on an UP beat and we'll all win BIG. -- -- Rich Commins (415)939-2400 \ /\ Varian Instruments, 2700 Mitchell Drive, Walnut Creek, CA 94598 \/--\ {ptsfa,lll-crg,zehntel,dual,amd,fortune,ista,rtech,csi,normac}varian!richc
sk2x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sun Kun Kim) (10/24/90)
Well, I think we only need to have one more group called
comp.sys.amiga.gripes and it would just solve everyone's problems. It
is not so much of a problem that people talk about unix and multimedia.
It would just be a waste. I mean, just how many messages do you see
that are dealing with all those topics that we are considering?? If you
think it was a pain to look at the messages now, I think splitting the
group will cause MORE problems than solving. If I recall correctly,
more than 50% of the messages are flames to people(most notably Mark
Barrett as well as anti-MB's) and flames to Commodore about NOT doing
their jobs. I don't think I am the first to suggest this because I've
seen some other posts that support the current configurations of the
comp.sys.amiga.
One thing that I would like to remind people about is that there is a
thing called E-mail for your personal gripes and flames. I don't want
to see your sarcastic remarks about other people's opinions. If you
have a differing oppinion, post but leave name-callings and negligeble
errors to email. Also, if someone makes a mistake(or a mistake in your
opinion), lets NOT ALL post corrections to the posts. Most recently,
we've seen the discussion of the signetics 68070. I see the error in
both parties. The person that called the original poster a liar(or
something along the line) could have e-mailed him telling him of his
mistake(or what he preceived as one). And other people who flamed that
person for being ignorant could have used the email system as well
explaining that there was a 68070. Now, the original poster made a
'mistake' of NOT saying who made the chip. If I see 68xxx, I would
assume it to be from Motorola and we know that such a chip does NOT
exist. So, was 30 posts for that justified to tell him that you know
more than the other? NO.
What I suggest you doing is e-mailing the person with the apparent error
and tell him to make a correction. If you have a differing opinion,
post it, but NO name callings. It is just so immature thing to do. How
old are we guys?
If we keep the above things in perspective, I believe we can keep
comp.sys.amiga a reasonably reliable source for Amiga information. When
I first started reading comp.sys.amiga, it was civilized and it wasn't
chaotic as it is getting nowadays. It was always informative about the
Amiga and I learned alot from reading various posts. I cannot say this
anymore since there are so many gripes about anything.
My suggestion to all you people who whine about Commodore to stop and do
something about it. Writing flames to Commodore here won't do you
didly. You can start writing to the company directly and tell them how
you feel. You might actually get some response back from Commodore.
Just don't whine and
not do anything about it. We all know how great Amigas are and what
needs to be done to improve the machine even more.
There, I feel MUCH better. So I am voting NO for the splitting of the
comp.sys.amiga. We just need to watch what we do and get that level of
respectability back into this news group.
Any comments are welcome. E-mail your comments and I will post the
responses if there are enough interest.
Sun...
**********************************************************************
Carnegie Mellon University sk2x+@andrew.cmu.edu
(C)1990, Totally Cool People Society of America.
a non-profit organization formed to protect the lives of the innocent
against weird, barbaric, and grotesque UNCool(C) people in the world.
"Anything I say or do could be used against YOU" - Yours Truly.
Publisher of the Totally Cool People Society's bi-weekly Top Ten List.
**********************************************************************
(Sig file v.2.2a)epeterso@houligan.encore.com (Eric Peterson) (10/24/90)
sk2x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sun Kun Kim) writes: | Well, I think we only need to have one more group called | comp.sys.amiga.gripes and it would just solve everyone's problems. | [ ... ] I mean, just how many messages do you see | that are dealing with all those topics that we are considering?? Quite a few. Enough to make the splitting of the group a necessity. | If you | think it was a pain to look at the messages now, I think splitting the | group will cause MORE problems than solving. Quite untrue. There is a good amount of Usenet evidence that the split will make comp.sys.amiga a much more readable and useable hierarchy. Take a look at comp.sys.mac before and after its split. Look at comp.unix now that its reorg is complete. Look at how the quality of postings to the groups has remained high and how articles have been posted to the appropriate groups. | If I recall correctly, | more than 50% of the messages are flames to people(most notably Mark | Barrett as well as anti-MB's) and flames to Commodore about NOT doing | their jobs. First, there are mechanisms that can be used to handle such postings. They're called "kill files". And I'm sure that CMU has at least one decent news reader that supports such things. Second, even though the postings may not be the most productive in the world, there is apparently a desire amongst people to talk about Commodore's handling of the Amiga. So, let's siphon off these postings into a new newsgroup (called comp.sys.amiga.futures) and you're set. You'll never have to read postings from whiners or flamers ever again. Oh, I forgot -- you don't want to split comp.sys.amiga. | Also, if someone makes a mistake(or a mistake in your | opinion), lets NOT ALL post corrections to the posts. Agreed. E-mail is the appropriate response. And E-mail is also the appropriate response to postings in the wrong news group. | If we keep the above things in perspective, I believe we can keep | comp.sys.amiga a reasonably reliable source for Amiga information. I doubt that. As it currently stands, comp.sys.amiga is too huge for the average reader to keep up with. Even if you did get rid of the grips, you'd end up with something like comp.unix.wizards -- a group with lots of useful information hidden amongst all sorts of topics that you have absolutely no interest in. And although more modern news readers such as Gnus, Nn, and Xrn make it much easier to sift out the good stuff from the bad, they still don't make it worthwhile. | When | I first started reading comp.sys.amiga, it was civilized and it wasn't | chaotic as it is getting nowadays. It was always informative about the | Amiga and I learned alot from reading various posts. I cannot say this | anymore since there are so many gripes about anything. So how is maintaining the status quo (which is what will happen if the group is not reorganized) going to turn comp.sys.amiga into a useful group again? | My suggestion to all you people who whine about Commodore to stop and do | something about it. Writing flames to Commodore here won't do you | didly. You can start writing to the company directly and tell them how | you feel. You might actually get some response back from Commodore. Agreed. But no matter what you say or do, there are probably always going to be those who will rant and rave about Commodore in some comp.sys.amiga group. So why not give them their own place to do it where those who aren't interested can easily ignore them? | There, I feel MUCH better. So I am voting NO for the splitting of the | comp.sys.amiga. We just need to watch what we do and get that level of | respectability back into this news group. Reorganization is the only thing that will give respectability back to this news group. Eric [ c.s.a.announce, .apps, .comm, .emulation, .futures, .games, .hardware, .misc, .multimedia, .programmer, and comp.unix.amiga Supporter ] -- 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.
poirier@ellerbe.rtp.dg.com (Charles Poirier) (10/25/90)
In article <kb9EXfu00Uh_02149o@andrew.cmu.edu> sk2x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sun Kun Kim) writes: >Well, I think we only need to have one more group called >comp.sys.amiga.gripes and it would just solve everyone's problems. If people used it. But they wouldn't. Flamers (and, to a lesser extent, mere gripers) usually want the widest possible audience. One man's gripe is another man's earth-shaking crusade of righteousness. > It is not so much of a problem that people talk about unix and multimedia. Right, normally one waits until there is a specific need to split off excessive traffic. There is not *currently* a need for these two you have singled out. But with Amigavision currently hitting the mailboxes, and Amiga Unix (by some accounts) just around the corner, the imminent need for these groups is predictable. And since such a major reorg is under consideration anyway, it seems sensible to toss these in now and save trouble later. >It would just be a waste. I mean, just how many messages do you see >that are dealing with all those topics that we are considering?? If you >think it was a pain to look at the messages now, I think splitting the >group will cause MORE problems than solving. The total traffic will increase, true. But the amount of traffic that you can unsubscribe to will more than make up for it. The major problems as I see them are 1) people can't stay current on the main group, and 2) the huge directory used to store the main group is becoming impossible to manage, and its size is slowing down access to every file therein. Splitting will help both problems. >If I recall correctly, >more than 50% of the messages are flames to people (most notably Mark >Barrett as well as anti-MB's) Most of which would fall nicely into c.s.a.compare. >and flames to Commodore about NOT doing their jobs. Ditto, and/or into c.s.a.misc, and there are fewer of these. >One thing that I would like to remind people about is that there is a >thing called E-mail for your personal gripes and flames. Yes. This is a good admonition. It shows up in every newsgroup about once a week, though, and it does no good. There is lots of flamage, there always has been, and there always will be. Since (as I have claimed) it also does no good to try to seat the flamage at the back of the bus, the best we can do is try to compartmentalize the non-flamage into specific interest groups. This way, one can turn off the c.s.a.misc and/or c.s.a.compare functions, when the flamage starts to pile up, and still find useful news. With the current setup, most people (I expect) feel they would miss too much by turning off the "main" group. > Sun... Cheers, Charles Poirier poirier@dg-rtp.dg.com