drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Michael E. Drues) (11/18/89)
Now I am relatively new to UseNet and to c.s.a but I was wondering... I am a big Amiga fan but I'm not really into games that much. So, to save me (and I guess several others) some time, would it be possible (feasable) to set up something like comp.sys.amiga.games ? That way, people with game hints, questions, etc. could post them there and those of us who aren't as interested in games can scan that group *after* we finish reading .amiga and .tech (if time remains). How do you all feel about this. Am I way off base or is there something to this idea? I would be happy to collect your opinions/suggestions and post the results. I would prefer, however, that if we wanted to do something like this, that some UseNet guru (or atleast someone who knows more about it than I do), take on the job of setting it up. These are only my thoughts on the subject, how about you? Mike +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Michael Drues | | \X/ Internet: drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu | | Bitnet: v2.med@isumvs.bitnet | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
840445m@aucs.uucp (Alan McKay) (11/20/89)
I'm all for it. I wouldn't read it so it would cut down on all the traffic that I would have to cut through. Lets try it out for a while. -- + Alan W. McKay + VOICE: (902) 542-1565 + + Acadia University + "Courage my friend, it is not yet too late + + WOLFVILLE, N.S. + to make the world a better place." + + 840445m@AcadiaU.CA + - Tommy Douglas +
gheff@hubcap.clemson.edu (Gary R Heffelfinger) (11/21/89)
From article <1989Nov20.122645.8367@aucs.uucp>, by 840445m@aucs.uucp (Alan McKay): > I'm all for it. I wouldn't read it so it would cut down on all the traffic > that I would have to cut through. Lets try it out for a while. Pppthhhht! How about if we don't play up the Amiga -> games connection. The association is already bad enough. This would only make it more visible to the usenet community. Yech. Gary -- Gary R Heffelfinger ------ gheff@hubcap.clemson.edu Clemson University - Info. Systems Development >>>>> Unrepentant Amiga addict. Just say "yes." <<<<<<
cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (11/21/89)
In article <1982@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu writes: > ... So, to save me (and I guess several others) some time, would it be > possible (feasable) to set up something like comp.sys.amiga.games ? It would be possible but not feasable. Basically, the psychology of people posting to the net is that there's is the most important question of all (and by definition it is in their view of the world) so it needs the widest possible audience, hence it will get posted to either both c.s.amiga and c.s.amiga.games, or at worst all three groups. Maybe we should get these folks listening to rec.games.video or something since that tends to just get nintendo stuff and the change would be welcome. Personally, I like the idea myself. I just think you will have a hard time enforcing it. If you want to start a new group movement, post a message to news.groups suggesting the group and it's charter, cross post it to c.s.a and start collecting Yes and No votes. Do that for a month to see what the results are like. Report on the results, and if they are sufficiently positive you can create the group and have a good chance of getting it propogated throughout the net. Note that it takes about a year for the group to actually exist on all systems. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "If it didn't have bones in it, it wouldn't be crunchy now would it?!"
jvance@ics.uci.edu (Joachim Patrick Vance) (11/21/89)
In article <1982@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu writes: >I am a big Amiga fan but I'm not really into games that much. So, to >save me (and I guess several others) some time, would it be possible >(feasable) to set up something like comp.sys.amiga.games ? >That way, people with game hints, questions, etc. could post them there >and those of us who aren't as interested in games can scan that group >*after* we finish reading .amiga and .tech (if time remains). > This is *exactly* what rec.games.misc is for. As it stands now: rec.games.video For discussions and game hints of arcade, pinball and home system (Nintendo, Sega, etc) games. rec.games.misc For discussions and game hints of computer games and other stuff (what stuff I don't know) It seems that this is there to serve exactly the purpose you suggest. It probably should be set up like: rec.games.arcade, rec.games.video, and rec.games.computer but then you can't win them all. -- Joachim ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What do my .sig and UCI have in common? | | jvance%bonnie@ics.uci.edu | - - - - - - - - - | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ They're both Under Construction Indefinately.|
martens@bowling.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens) (11/22/89)
In article <1989Nov20.203141.10603@paris.ics.uci.edu> Joachim Patrick Vance <jvance@ics.uci.edu> writes: >In article <1982@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu writes: >>I am a big Amiga fan but I'm not really into games that much. So, to >>save me (and I guess several others) some time, would it be possible >>(feasable) to set up something like comp.sys.amiga.games ? > This is *exactly* what rec.games.misc is for. As it stands now: > rec.games.video For discussions and game hints of arcade, pinball > and home system (Nintendo, Sega, etc) games. > rec.games.misc For discussions and game hints of computer games > and other stuff (what stuff I don't know) Maybe, but it doesn't seem to work this way. People post game stuff to comp.sys.amiga anyway. Maybe, if comp.sys.amiga.games doesn't fly we should push for rec.games.amiga. -=- -- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu) With the 11/89 issue, the Communications of the ACM has finally become 100% devoid of computer science.
jvance@ics.uci.edu (Joachim Patrick Vance) (11/22/89)
In article <74216@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Jeff Martens <martens@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: >In article <1989Nov20.203141.10603@paris.ics.uci.edu> Joachim Patrick Vance <jvance@ics.uci.edu> writes: > >> This is *exactly* what rec.games.misc is for. As it stands now: > >> rec.games.video For discussions and game hints of arcade, pinball >> and home system (Nintendo, Sega, etc) games. > >> rec.games.misc For discussions and game hints of computer games >> and other stuff (what stuff I don't know) > >Maybe, but it doesn't seem to work this way. People post game stuff >to comp.sys.amiga anyway. Maybe, if comp.sys.amiga.games doesn't fly >we should push for rec.games.amiga. >-=- >-- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu) > Then maybe these people need a little nudge in the right direction. I have seen lots of amiga games posting on rec.games.misc. And it seems set up for the purpose of something like the proposed comp.sys.amiga.games. I don't think that comp.sys.amiga.games is a bad idea, it just seems a waste of net bandwidth to have two newsgroups when one would suffice (especially since one already exists). If everyone who wanted to post about amiga games did so at rec.games.misc then our problem would be solved. -- Joachim ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What do my .sig and UCI have in common? | | jvance%bonnie@ics.uci.edu | - - - - - - - - - | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ They're both Under Construction Indefinately.|
mitchell@janus.Berkeley.EDU (Evan Mitchell) (11/23/89)
In article <1989Nov21.113250.12142@paris.ics.uci.edu> Joachim Patrick Vance <jvance@ics.uci.edu> writes: > Then maybe these people need a little nudge in the right direction. >I have seen lots of amiga games posting on rec.games.misc. And it seems >set up for the purpose of something like the proposed comp.sys.amiga.games. >I don't think that comp.sys.amiga.games is a bad idea, it just seems >a waste of net bandwidth to have two newsgroups when one would suffice >(especially since one already exists). If everyone who wanted to post >about amiga games did so at rec.games.misc then our problem would be solved. > > Not necessarily. This is one of the few newsgroups that I read everything that's posted. Most of the stuff in rec.games.misc is about MS-Dos junk. I post stuff about Amiga arcade games in rec.games.video from time to time, simply because I believe that is where they should be posted. Do you really think Dungeon Master and Hybris should be discussed in the same group? I think anything that concerns the Amiga (including product anouncements, games, etc.) should be in this group. However, don't be afraid to post in rec.games. misc, or rec.games.video, after all, like it or not, the Amiga is one of the best games machines around... > >-- >Joachim -Evan _______________________________________________________________________________ | Evan Jay Mitchell EECS/ERL Industrial Liaison Program | | mitchell@janus.berkeley.edu University of California at Berkeley | | Phone: (415) 643-6687 | | "Think, it ain't illegal...yet!" - George Clinton | |_____________________________________________________________________________|
liberato@drivax.UUCP (Jimmy Liberato) (11/23/89)
mitchell@janus.Berkeley.EDU (Evan Mitchell) writes: >In article <1989Nov21.113250.12142@paris.ics.uci.edu> Joachim Patrick Vance <jvance@ics.uci.edu> writes: >>... >>I don't think that comp.sys.amiga.games is a bad idea, it just seems >>a waste of net bandwidth to have two newsgroups when one would suffice >>(especially since one already exists). If everyone who wanted to post >>about amiga games did so at rec.games.misc then our problem would be solved. >> >Not necessarily. This is one of the few newsgroups that I read everything >that's posted. Most of the stuff in rec.games.misc is about MS-Dos junk. >... >I think anything that concerns the Amiga (including product anouncements, games, >etc.) should be in this group... I favor Evan's position. Though I hardly ever play games, the amount of game related discussion here does not seem overwhelming. The games I do get are ones that receive high ratings on the net. I think Amiga/AmigaTech is an appropriate split. I would also want to accomodate those who have no interest in how to get past the troll dripping saliva on the 27th level of Victory in Valhala. What about including GAME as a keyword or part of the subject heading so that a kill file can be constructed. Instructions to that effect could be put in the monthly posting. This kind of thing has been hashed around before but if game discussion is becoming bothersome to many here I would be happy to make that small accomodation. By the way, are most of you abandoning rn in favor of nn? If you want to decrease the amount of time spent reading news or increase the number of news groups you can follow, it is a must. Bug your system administrator! -- Jimmy Liberato ...!amdahl!drivax!liberato
wicks@umbc3.UMBC.EDU (Mr. Tony Wicks ) (12/02/89)
In article <1982@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu writes: >Now I am relatively new to UseNet and to c.s.a but I was wondering... > >I am a big Amiga fan but I'm not really into games that much. So, to >save me (and I guess several others) some time, would it be possible >(feasable) to set up something like comp.sys.amiga.games ? >That way, people with game hints, questions, etc. could post them there >and those of us who aren't as interested in games can scan that group >*after* we finish reading .amiga and .tech (if time remains). > ...some stuff deleted... > >Mike > >+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ >| // Michael Drues | >| \X/ Internet: drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu | >| Bitnet: v2.med@isumvs.bitnet | >+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ filler: Sometimes you need to put extra junk in just to get the news past the censors I agree 100%. I only get to check out the news once or twice a week, and usually end-up with a backlog of over 800 messages to read. I setup my kill file to blow away "For Sale" and "Virus" stuff , but many people leave these words out of ther subject lines. Moving the spoilers, helpers, and teasers :^) will certainly help my perceived s/n ratio. ============================================================================== Tony Wicks (A1000, 1MB StarboardII, Supra 20MB HD, SupraModem) wicks@mst1.bal.mmc.com (Martin Marietta - Baltimore Aero & Naval Systems) wicks@umbc3.umbc.edu BIX: awicks no .sig, no .plan, no .product no polka. ==============================================================================
pelletier@grove.UUCP (Brian Pelletier) (12/02/89)
>Joachim Patrick Vance <jvance@ics.uci.edu> writes: > >I have seen lots of amiga games posting on rec.games.misc. And it seems >set up for the purpose of something like the proposed comp.sys.amiga.games. >I don't think that comp.sys.amiga.games is a bad idea, it just seems >a waste of net bandwidth to have two newsgroups when one would suffice >(especially since one already exists). If everyone who wanted to post >about amiga games did so at rec.games.misc then our problem would be solved. No, *your* problem would be solved. I rather like the occasional game-related info that comes through this newsgroup. I use my 1000 mostly for reading News and doing term papers, but I also like to play a game once in a while. The Amiga is a wonderfully versatile machine, and it seems that a general newsgroup like this should be open to questions of *all* categories that might interest people using Amigas. I'm not interested in MIDI or Tek terminal emulation, but I wouldn't ask people who are to use another forum to discuss these Amiga- related issues. Game threads seem to be a rather small percentage of the comp.sys.amiga traffic anyhow. There's always the 'n' key to skip the articles if you're personally not interested. But to ask an Amiga owner to wade through hundreds of Nintendo and IBM PC oriented messages to get an occasional message about an Amiga game seems sort of perverse to me. Just my two cents... -Brian -- +=========================================================================+ | Brian Pelletier Disclaimer: These are MY opinions, not SKY's.| | Sky Computer (work) **** Amiga! (home) | | UUCP: brian@sky.com -or- pelletier@grove.UUCP | | Moo! | +=========================================================================+
doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt) (12/03/89)
In article <2577@umbc3.UMBC.EDU> wicks@umbc3.umbc.edu.UMBC.EDU (Mr. Tony Wicks (MMA)) writes: >In article <1982@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu writes: >>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ >>| // Michael Drues | >>| \X/ Internet: drues@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu | >>| Bitnet: v2.med@isumvs.bitnet | >>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ > >filler: Sometimes you need to put extra junk in just to get the news > past the censors > The whole reason for the censors is to try to discourage you from including quote so much unnecessary junk from messages. If you had deleted all the lines shown above, which is just so much garbage in a reply, then you probably wouldn't have needed any filler at all. >Moving the spoilers, helpers, and teasers :^) will certainly help my >perceived s/n ratio. And so would more careful, considerate editing of your replies. Sorry for the mini-flame, but the content of your message was just so ironic that I couldn't resist. Doug -- Doug Merritt {pyramid,apple}!xdos!doug Member, Crusaders for a Better Tomorrow Professional Wildeyed Visionary
icsu7039@caesar.cs.montana.edu (Spannring) (12/05/89)
I think it would be a great idea to cut down quantity of postings on
this group. I don't even have time to look through the subject lines to
decide what to read.
A few solutions
1) Get the game stuff posted on rec.games.misc
2) Make a new group comp.sys.amiga.games and get
the games stuff posted there.
3) Have people put 'GAME:' in the subject line.
Then ones that don't want to read about games
could have a kill file to delete games.
The first two solutions are plagued with the problem of convincing
people to post to the right group. The second has the problem of convincing
people to follow an even more arbitrary convention.
I personally prefer the rec.games.misc solution and I think a few
good old fashioned flames could convince people to post there.
--
====================================================================
Six of one, 110 (base 2) of | Craig Spannring
another. | icsu7039@caesar.cs.montana.edu
----------------------------------|--------------------------------martens@dinghy.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens) (12/05/89)
In article <2637@caesar.cs.montana.edu> icsu7039@caesar.cs.montana.edu (Spannring) writes: > I think it would be a great idea to cut down quantity of postings on >this group. I don't even have time to look through the subject lines to >decide what to read. > A few solutions > 1) Get the game stuff posted on rec.games.misc > 2) Make a new group comp.sys.amiga.games and get > the games stuff posted there. > 3) Have people put 'GAME:' in the subject line. > Then ones that don't want to read about games > could have a kill file to delete games. The problem with (1) is that people just interested in Amiga games would have to wade through what I'd guess is a lot of unrelated stuff. The problem with (3) is that people won't do it. For example, there was a plea on rec.sport.football to have people put (College) in subject lines if it wasn't pro, but the people actually unlazy enough to do this are in the minority. So, I lean strongly towards (2). A common response from people (justifiably) worried about the Amiga's image is that it would reinforce the misconception that the Amiga is just a game machine. I don't believe this is so: anyone believing this would just have to look at the net stats on the two newsgroups and notice that the nongame one has higher traffic. Why break them up? I, for one, don't play many games on my Amiga -- a good came can easily blow a month, a bad one a week or two. I have nothing against games, and if they help sell Amigas, great! But, I usually read news on a sluggish Sun 3 (X11, ya know), and cutting down the number of articles greatly speeds the processing of my kill file. And, without games, my kill file itself would be smaller and I wouldn't be adding to it all the time. In other words, it really would save me time. -=- -- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu) Expect a severe winter -- I saw a trailer full of snowmobiles heading south on US 23.
arxt@tank.uchicago.edu (patrick palmer) (12/05/89)
In article <2637@caesar.cs.montana.edu> icsu7039@caesar.cs.montana.edu (Spannring) writes: > I think it would be a great idea to cut down quantity of postings on >this group. I don't even have time to look through the subject lines to >decide what to read. > > A few solutions ... > I personally prefer the rec.games.misc solution and I think a few >good old fashioned flames could convince people to post there. I think if you look at the titles of articles in comp.sys.amiga, games make up a fairly small fraction. The largest class of articles are protracted discussions of sometimes arcane topics - like ST/Amiga today. I do not play games at all, but I have kids who do. Therefore, if a game appears a number of times in an article title, I look at a few of the articles. I have bought a number of games that I first heard of on Usenet, and susequently noticed that they were very popular among people on Usenet. Therefore, I find the postings here valuable. On the issue of net volume: my solution is to redirect a lot more discussion to email. This requires some arbritray judgements - and some patience with deciphering email paths, admittedly. Pat Palmer (email: ppalmer@oddjob.uchicago)
cknight@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (King Claudius) (12/05/89)
What about having a comp.sys.amiga.hardware?
-----------------------
about 85-95% of the material I see here on c.s.a has
been about this hard-drive or that...or request for
recommendations on accelerator cards and such.
--
cknight@polyslo.calpoly.edu ---King Claudius---swan@jolnet.ORPK.IL.US (Joel Swan) (12/05/89)
I agree that the mere use of the word "game" is not totally helpful to the AMiga's image at this point in time. However, it would be a nice relief to my "n" and "k" keys to bypass all the "games" postings. (Not that I don't like games. I just don't have the time nor will to wade through them). So.... how about a compromise. What would you think of an alternative name without the "games" stigma? For instance: rec.amiga.entertainment or comp.sys.amiga.fun or comp.sys.amiga.entertain or an appropriate "non-stigmatized" name. I could sleep soundly at night with this alternative. Joel Swan
gheff@hubcap.clemson.edu (Gary R Heffelfinger) (12/05/89)
From article <2637@caesar.cs.montana.edu>, by icsu7039@caesar.cs.montana.edu (Spannring): > > > I think it would be a great idea to cut down quantity of postings on > this group. I don't even have time to look through the subject lines to > decide what to read. [Some solutions deleted for brevity's sake.] > I personally prefer the rec.games.misc solution and I think a few > good old fashioned flames could convince people to post there. There is more than enough heat in this group and others. Browbeating Amiga gamers into going somewhere else thus making them 2nd class Amiga users is wrong. If you want technical information, go to c.s.a.t. If you want general Amiga information, (Amiga games are included in this category IMO) go to c.s.a. If we must do something, I vote for putting "GAME:" in the subject line. -Gary -- Gary R Heffelfinger ------ gheff@hubcap.clemson.edu Clemson University - Info. Systems Development >>>>> Unrepentant Amiga addict. Just say "yes." <<<<<<
victor@dean.Berkeley.EDU (Victor Brueggemann) (12/06/89)
[Line eater fodder -- so that's why they call 'em line feeds...] In article <2637@caesar.cs.montana.edu> icsu7039@caesar.cs.montana.edu (Spannring) writes: > A few solutions > 1) Get the game stuff posted on rec.games.misc > 2) Make a new group comp.sys.amiga.games and get > the games stuff posted there. > 3) Have people put 'GAME:' in the subject line. > Then ones that don't want to read about games > could have a kill file to delete games. 4) Move all of the comp.sys.amiga.games 'to be or not to be' discussions to anywhere else...that would cut down a VERY signifigant volume here. 5) Have someone do a monthly posting on the use of the KILL file.
stephen@hpdml93.HP.COM (Stephen Holmstead) (12/07/89)
Gary R Heffelfinger writes: >If you want technical information, go to c.s.a.t. If >you want general Amiga information, (Amiga games are included in this >category IMO) go to c.s.a. If we must do something, I vote for putting >"GAME:" in the subject line. I have been following this discussion closely to see how it was swaying and I think it is time to jump in. According to an article in news.lists on Nov 22, 1989 by newsstats@uunet.UU.NET, there have been 968 new articles posted to comp.sys.amiga in the last 2 weeks!! These articles involve just over 1.1 Megabytes of data!! That is insane!! Is there *ANYONE* who can read > 1 Mb of articles EVERY TWO WEEKS?!?!? That sounds like a full-time job. BTW, comp.sys.amiga has consistently had the highest traffic of all of the comp.sys.* for many months now. What I am saying is that if there is any way to decrease the load on comp.sys.amiga, then I am all for it. I would prefer a comp.sys.amiga.games and maybe even a comp.sys.amiga.hardware. I don't think by adding these groups will give the Amiga a bad name. I see it as "the Amiga is *SO* popular that it has to have 3 (or more) comp.sys news groups". I keep hearing people say, "please respond via e-mail--I don't have enough time to keep up with all the notes". By putting "GAME:" in the title isn't going to help. Lets make some *HELPFUL* improvements. I vote for YES for comp.sys.amiga.games. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Stephen Holmstead Hewlett Packard Disk Mechanism Division ...!hplabs!hpdmlge!stephen // stephen@hpdmlge.boi.hp.com \X/ Amiga Forever!
steve@ntmtka.mn.org (Steve Wahl) (12/07/89)
My vote is No for new group, Yes for GAME: in subject. Others have presented
the arguments, so I'm going to try and make the usenet headers take most
of this article's bandwidth.
->steve
--
Steve Wahl
Northern Telecom, Inc. (612) 932-8079
S-100, 9701 Data Park steve@ntmtka.mn.org
Minnetonka, MN 55343 {rosevax,bungia}!ntmtka!stevestephen%hpdml93.hp.com@cunyvm.cuny.edu (12/15/89)
Gary R Heffelfinger writes: >If you want technical information, go to c.s.a.t. If >you want general Amiga information, (Amiga games are included in this >category IMO) go to c.s.a. If we must do something, I vote for putting >"GAME:" in the subject line. I have been following this discussion closely to see how it was swaying and I think it is time to jump in. According to an article in news.lists on Nov 22, 1989 by newsstats@uunet.UU.NET, there have been 968 new articles posted to comp.sys.amiga in the last 2 weeks!! These articles involve just over 1.1 Megabytes of data!! That is insane!! Is there *ANYONE* who can read > 1 Mb of articles EVERY TWO WEEKS?!?!? That sounds like a full-time job. BTW, comp.sys.amiga has consistently had the highest traffic of all of the comp.sys.* for many months now. What I am saying is that if there is any way to decrease the load on comp.sys.amiga, then I am all for it. I would prefer a comp.sys.amiga.games and maybe even a comp.sys.amiga.hardware. I don't think by adding these groups will give the Amiga a bad name. I see it as "the Amiga is *SO* popular that it has to have 3 (or more) comp.sys news groups". I keep hearing people say, "please respond via e-mail--I don't have enough time to keep up with all the notes". By putting "GAME:" in the title isn't going to help. Lets make some *HELPFUL* improvements. I vote for YES for comp.sys.amiga.games. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Stephen Holmstead Hewlett Packard Disk Mechanism Division ...!hplabs!hpdmlge!stephen // stephen@hpdmlge.boi.hp.com \X/ Amiga Forever!
poirier@dg-rtp.dg.com (Charles Poirier) (12/16/89)
In article <2299@jolnet.ORPK.IL.US> swan@jolnet.UUCP (Joel Swan) writes: >However, it would be a nice >relief to my "n" and "k" keys to bypass all the "games" postings. I just don't understand. The percentage of c-s-a postings dealing with games is tiny. I could just as easily start whining about all the hard drive traffic: several times the gaming traffic, I'd estimate. But I won't. We can't be constantly picking nits about minuscule subtopics that someone or other wishes would go away. I vote *no* on a separate amiga.games group. Charles Poirier
EJANDERS@MTUS5.BITNET (Ernie Anderson) (12/18/89)
As an aside to what Mr. Poirier(sp?) said, and all this c.s.a.games noise, I recommend a comp.sys.amiga.hd (harddrive) group. There are LOTS of postings to c.s.a and c.s.a.t about harddrives, but unless you are lucky enough to have one it probably isn't very much good to you. This is very necessary information, however, and shouldn't be quieted or anything. Normally, I just skip over these message, but it does slow down my mail readings. If we do decide to split up c.s.a, I think that this is a valid subgroup. Ernie Anderson EJANDERS@MTUS5.BITNET
a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) (12/18/89)
In article <89351.121643EJANDERS@MTUS5.BITNET> EJANDERS@MTUS5.BITNET (Ernie Anderson) writes: >As an aside to what Mr. Poirier(sp?) said, and all this c.s.a.games noise, >I recommend a comp.sys.amiga.hd (harddrive) group. There are LOTS of >postings to c.s.a and c.s.a.t about harddrives, but unless you are lucky >enough to have one it probably isn't very much good to you. This is very >necessary information, however, and shouldn't be quieted or anything. >Normally, I just skip over these message, but it does slow down my mail >readings. If we do decide to split up c.s.a, I think that this is a valid >subgroup. Hear, hear! Even those of us who have hard disks might not be having any problems, and aren't interested in endless mountlists, discussions of the merits of various drive/controller combinations, etc. I like to read general hardware stuff, but hard disk messages make up the bulk of the material I skip. I can't think of a better way of splitting up an admittedly hard-to-split group. >Ernie Anderson >EJANDERS@MTUS5.BITNET Charlie_Gibbs@mindlink.UUCP I'm trying to find the stationery department but they keep moving it.