pnakada@oracle.com (Paul Nakada) (12/08/89)
In article <37089@apple.Apple.COM> farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) writes: Path: oracle!apple!farrier From: farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Date: 7 Dec 89 18:21:47 GMT References: <37045@apple.Apple.COM> <PNAKADA.89Dec6161004@pnakada.oracle.com> Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA Lines: 30 In article <PNAKADA.89Dec6161004@pnakada.oracle.com> pnakada@oracle.com (Paul Nakada) writes: >I think I have to object... there is precedence set in this matter, >with >comp.sys.mac >comp.sys.mac.hardware >comp.sys.mac.programmer I don't see the precedence here. What I do see is an over done group hierarchy. >The USENET is set up in a hierarchy which would be upset with the >creation of comp.tech.apple... Please is a vote is taken, first >change comp.sys.apple to comp.sys.apple2 and then create >comp.sys.apple2.tech or preferably comp.sys.apple2.programmer (as was >done with the comp.sys.mac groups) Just because the Macintosh people did something one way, does not mean that the Apple II people must follow suit. The name comp.tech.apple2 is short and concise. -- +---------------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Cary Farrier | Internet : farrier@apple.com | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Cary, I've cross posted this discussion to news.groups. I'm pretty sure that discussions like this should involve people from all newsgroups. I must heartily state that I am all for the creation of a new technical newsgroup. I must disagree with you when you call the mac newgroups, "an overdone group hierarchy." I would much rather have an overdone group hierarchy, than none at all. What you suggest is grouping the discussion first by its technical nature and then by its particular hardware platform, while most groups which need additional focus, add on to the platform grouping. comp.sys.amiga.tech rec.autos.tech The argument could be made that the comp.binaries groups follow your particular hierarchy, with the platform as the last grouping. This is true, but I think that the precedence set by other groups and the fact that the comp.tech branch does not exist yet is enough reason to go with comp.sys.apple.tech or comp.sys.apple2.tech Again, I stress that I wan tthe new group created, but I also want to try to avoid adding to what many people call the USENET anarchy. -Paul Nakada pnakada@oracle.com