lemke@radius.com (Steve Lemke) (04/25/91)
nates@sporobolus.NREL.ColoState.EDU (Nate Sammons) writes: > Since there are over a hundred messages per day going through good 'ol >comp.sys.next what about splitting it into several sub-groups like >comp.sys.next.prog and comp.sys.next.misc or something like that... Geez, I'm glad I found your messages in ALL THE OTHER TRAFFIC in comp.sys.next today. I was just about to use good old Pnews to post a NEW message of my own suggesting the very same thing!! Then I saw your message. Not that this should have any other implications :-) but... I suggest following what the comp.sys.mac group did - split into several subgroups. We could create the following groups: comp.sys.next.announce Important notices for NeXT users. (Moderated) comp.sys.next.apps Discussions of NeXT applications. comp.sys.next.comm Discussion of NeXT communications. comp.sys.next.hardware NeXT hardware issues & discussions. comp.sys.next.misc General discussions about the NeXT. comp.sys.next.programmer Discussion by people programming the NeXT. comp.sys.next.system Discussions of NeXT system software. comp.sys.next.wanted Postings of "I want XYZ for my NeXT." Perhaps a better name could be suggested for "comp.sys.next.system", but I think it should stay in the "comp.sys.next" hierarchy rather than be shoved off to something like "comp.unix.next" (just as "comp.sys.mac.system" was not called "comp.os.mac"). I have never created a group before, and don't know what the proper procedures etc. are for discussion and voting, but I move that this be taken as the beginning of a discussion, and perhaps we should also start cross-posting to news.groups? Does someone with newsgroup creation experience want to take over the discussion from here? -- ----- Steve Lemke, KC6QDT - Software Engineering, Radius Inc., San Jose ----- ----- Reply to: lemke@radius.com -- U.C. Santa Barbara ECE Class of '89 ----- ----- "I'm not a UNIX wizard, but I play the Postmaster at radius.com." -----
peter@taronga.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/29/91)
How about comp.sys.next.advocacy to get the risc-versus-cisc and
next-versus-sparcstation flame wars out of comp.sys.amiga.advocacy?
--
(peter@taronga.hackercorp.com)
`-_-'
'U`xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (04/30/91)
> peter@taronga.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > How about comp.sys.next.advocacy to get the risc-versus-cisc and > next-versus-sparcstation flame wars out of comp.sys.amiga.advocacy? No particular reason one end of that cross-posted flame war can't stay in c.s.a.advocacy where it belongs, but I'll bet the NeXT folks would _love_ to have a c.s.n.advocacy to get it out of their main reading material, like we have. [ You mean you actually _read_ c.s.a.advocacy, Peter? ;-) ] Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
peter@taronga.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/30/91)
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > > peter@taronga.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > > How about comp.sys.next.advocacy to get the risc-versus-cisc and > > next-versus-sparcstation flame wars out of comp.sys.amiga.advocacy? > No particular reason one end of that cross-posted flame war can't stay > in c.s.a.advocacy where it belongs, Kent, because you didn't bother creating a group for discussing the Amiga's future, OS concerns, etc... there are actual discussions in c.s.a.advocacy. There is no reason to keep either end of a RISC versus CISC or other NeXT versus whatever war in an Amiga group. > [ You mean you actually _read_ c.s.a.advocacy, Peter? ;-) ] Yes. I really do. When I get time. Which these days is mostly devoted to trying to convince certain people that shooting themselves in the foot is a very bad idea. -- (peter@taronga.hackercorp.com) `-_-' 'U`
sss10@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Grouchy Smurf) (05/01/91)
In article <1991Apr30.064449.18530@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >> peter@taronga.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > >> How about comp.sys.next.advocacy to get the risc-versus-cisc and >> next-versus-sparcstation flame wars out of comp.sys.amiga.advocacy? > >No particular reason one end of that cross-posted flame war can't stay >in c.s.a.advocacy where it belongs, but I'll bet the NeXT folks would >_love_ to have a c.s.n.advocacy to get it out of their main reading >material, like we have. argh! no no no no no! the Next vs. any_computer_other_than_amiga doesnt belong here no matter how that thread got here. make a csn.advocacy group so those stupid flames/arguments/threads could go in another group. I dont mind the Next comparisions with the amiga but im NOT interested in RISC vs CISC that always come up when Next is mentioned. >[ You mean you actually _read_ c.s.a.advocacy, Peter? ;-) ] > >Kent, the man from xanth. ><xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> This is a test sig under construction
alex@bilver.uucp (Alex Matulich) (05/03/91)
sss10@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Grouchy Smurf) writes: >argh! no no no no no! the Next vs. any_computer_other_than_amiga doesnt belong >here no matter how that thread got here. make a csn.advocacy group so those >stupid flames/arguments/threads could go in another group. I dont mind the Next >comparisions with the amiga but im NOT interested in RISC vs CISC that always >come up when Next is mentioned. Why not? This happens to be the only newsgroup in existence dedicated to, and encouraging, computer wars. I don't mind seeing non-Amiga comparisons here. To me, this newsgroup is educational and fun. It's a lot more enjoyable, IMHO, to learn about other systems in a forum like this, than in the newsgroups dedicated to those systems, because _here_ you have people bent on "educating" others, while other newsgroups already assume a familiarity with the particular computer being discussed. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> wrote: >>[ You mean you actually _read_ c.s.a.advocacy, Peter? ;-) ] Well, *I* do, for the reasons I outlined above. This is becoming one of my favorite newsgroups. -- _ |__ Alex Matulich /(+__> Unicorn Research Corp, 4621 N Landmark Dr, Orlando, FL 32817 //| \ UUCP: alex@bilver.uucp <or> ...uunet!tarpit!bilver!alex ///__) bitnet: IN%"bilver!alex@uunet.uu.net"
rblewitt@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (Richard Blewitt) (05/06/91)
In article <1991May3.144852.7933@bilver.uucp> alex@bilver.uucp (Alex Matulich) writes: >Why not? This happens to be the only newsgroup in existence dedicated to, >and encouraging, computer wars. I don't mind seeing non-Amiga comparisons >here. To me, this newsgroup is educational and fun. It's a lot more BZZZT WRONG! alt.religion.computers is for those other computer wars, and it has been around longer than this group. A.R.C is the place to read about why AIX sucks. C.S.A.A is the place to read why everything besides the Amiga sucks, and to bitch about the Amiga not being even more superior. Rick _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________.sig____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ The generic .sig Rick Blewitt rblewitt@ucsd.edu
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (05/06/91)
In article <1991May3.144852.7933@bilver.uucp> alex@bilver.uucp (Alex Matulich) writes: > Why not? This happens to be the only newsgroup in existence dedicated to, > and encouraging, computer wars. How about alt.religion.computers? If you want generic computer wars, that's the place. This place is for Amiga wars and Amiga futures stuff. (time for comp.sys.misc.advocacy, I think) -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
sss10@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Homicidal Lunatic) (05/07/91)
In article <1991May3.144852.7933@bilver.uucp> alex@bilver.uucp (Alex Matulich) writes: >sss10@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Grouchy Smurf) writes: >>argh! no no no no no! the Next vs. any_computer_other_than_amiga doesnt belong >>here no matter how that thread got here. make a csn.advocacy group so those >>stupid flames/arguments/threads could go in another group. I dont mind the Next >>comparisions with the amiga but im NOT interested in RISC vs CISC that always >>come up when Next is mentioned. > >Why not? This happens to be the only newsgroup in existence dedicated to, >and encouraging, computer wars. I don't mind seeing non-Amiga comparisons >here. To me, this newsgroup is educational and fun. It's a lot more >enjoyable, IMHO, to learn about other systems in a forum like this, than >in the newsgroups dedicated to those systems, because _here_ you have people >bent on "educating" others, while other newsgroups already assume a >familiarity with the particular computer being discussed. If you are going to have computer wars in this group, the amiga should be one of the competators. If mike melling <sp?> wants to see Next vs. Mac // or vs. sparc, then make a next.advocacy group or Mac.advocacy since those comparisons have little to do with the amiga per se. I wouldnt mind seeing them, just not here. In CSnext.advocacy, yes. Not here. I want to see Amiga comparisons.t 3fg > ><xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> wrote: >>>[ You mean you actually _read_ c.s.a.advocacy, Peter? ;-) ] > >Well, *I* do, for the reasons I outlined above. This is becoming one of >my favorite newsgroups. > >-- > _ |__ Alex Matulich > /(+__> Unicorn Research Corp, 4621 N Landmark Dr, Orlando, FL 32817 >//| \ UUCP: alex@bilver.uucp <or> ...uunet!tarpit!bilver!alex >///__) bitnet: IN%"bilver!alex@uunet.uu.net" **********************************PiRho**************************************** "All power comes from the barrel of a gun" // sss10@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu \\ // Amiga makes it possible \X/
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (05/08/91)
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > alex@bilver.uucp (Alex Matulich) writes: >> Why not? This happens to be the only newsgroup in existence dedicated >> to, and encouraging, computer wars. Actually not. c.s.a.advocacy is dedicated to removing existing computer wars from the mainstream c.s.a.* groups, and it does that very well, with some 80% or more of that traffic successfully diverted. People are starting to _voluntarily_ divert emotion laden conversations to c.s.a.advocacy, whick exceeds my fondest dreams for the group. > How about alt.religion.computers? Didn't work, while it existed the flamage still covered c.s.a.* like a rug. People want to flame about the Amiga where they know Amiga users are listening. > If you want generic computer wars, that's the place. This place is for > Amiga wars and Amiga futures stuff. True, modulo the fact that most of those wars have a group for another computer on the other side, so that we get spates of NeXt versus Amiga, Atari versus Amiga, and IBM-PC clone versus Amiga. All those are OK, but NeXt versus Sun versus DecStation wars are not welcome unless AmigaUX gets in a few shots too. (time for comp.sys.misc.advocacy, I think) Won't work, for the same reason alt.religion.computers didn't. You need an audience guarantee to filter the traffic into the group, and that means you need the (micro) computer name in the newgroup name. It is probably long overdue for comp.sys.{any_brand}.advocacy, though, as I'm sure the other groups would like the effect as much as the Amiga groups do; low flame mainline newsgroups are a wonderful benefit. /// 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, COMPLETED comp.sys.amiga grand reorganization.
jbell@gara.une.oz.au (Khyron) (05/08/91)
From article <1991May7.192731.5241@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>, by xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan): > > peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >> alex@bilver.uucp (Alex Matulich) writes: > > /// 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? like IBM just face it amiga are the best -- jbell@gara.une.oz.au | Justin Bell Uni of New England | 2 Gill St -Armidale | Moonbi NSW 2353 | AUSTRALIA
barry@pico.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) (05/08/91)
In article <6294@gara.une.oz.au> jbell@gara.une.oz.au (Khyron) writes: > > just face it amiga are the best > Yes, Amiga are the best...just keep repeating that to yourself, as often as needed. BUT do it in an _Amiga_ newsgroup! Please edit out the comp.sys.next in the header. c.s.next is not the place for the ``Amiga is better than NeXT'' secret to be told---we unfortunate NeXT users are not ready to deal with this cruel fact. -- Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet)
peter@taronga.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (05/10/91)
barry@pico.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) writes: > Yes, Amiga are the best...just keep repeating that to yourself, > as often as needed. BUT do it in an _Amiga_ newsgroup! Be glad to. Tell the folks from comp.sys.next to quit flaming in comp.sys.amiga.advocacy. This is getting to be a prime case of "blame the victim". -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' Taronga Park BBS +1 713 568 0480 2400/n/8/1 Taronga Park. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"