jbuck@epicen.UUCP (Joe Buck) (10/31/85)
There are several rough spots in the conversion. First off, Glacier is still
(as of Oct. 30) gatewaying fa.info-vax, and uw-beaver is still gatewaying
fa.laser-lovers. Is there going to be a war? I hope not.
Second, is it too late to do anything about the names? Normally, net.news.flame,
I mean net.news.group, is used to discuss whether a name is appropriate.
The rule on moderated groups seems to be that certain people can create them
with no discussion. As a result of this, Erik was all ready to gateway a
group that discusses Gould bugs into mod.computers.gould (I can see why:
sun-spots, gouldbugs, laser-lovers, those arpa guys are real cute). I'm
willing to give up my earlier proposal which was just to change "fa" to "mod".
But:
Why "mod.computers.macintosh" when we already have "net.micro.mac" and
"net.sources.mac"? It's not consistent, and "mac" is hardly misleading
when following "computers".
To keep the debate manageable, we may as well accept the proposed structure,
so I'll only propose three minor changes, which have the effect of reducing the
three longest names (well, mod.protocols.appletalk is too long also, but I
don't have a good alternate).
mod.computers.mac
net.announce.arpa
mod.laser-printers (a laser printer isn't a computer)
How about it, Gene and Erik?
Finally, Erik, I must correct you about Usenix meetings never starting
groups. Remember the failed mod.general experiment this summer? No less
a net wizard than Mark Horton quoted the Portland meeting as authority to remove
net.general and replace it with mod.general. It might even have been done,
if it weren't for the stink it raised. Still, the lesson is clear. This
type of meeting is a bad way to start a group. I'd still like net.internat,
if some name could be found that people could agree on (40 characters
max).
--
Joe Buck | Entropic Processing, Inc.
UUCP: {ucbvax,ihnp4}!dual!epicen!jbuck | 10011 N. Foothill Blvd.
ARPA: dual!epicen!jbuck@BERKELEY.ARPA | Cupertino, CA 95014joel@gould9.UUCP (Joel West) (11/02/85)
In article <254@epicen.UUCP>, jbuck@epicen.UUCP (Joe Buck) writes: > Second, is it too late to do anything about the names? It's never too late. Or it shouldn't be. > Normally, net.news.flame, > I mean net.news.group, is used to discuss whether a name is appropriate. > The rule on moderated groups seems to be that certain people can create them > with no discussion. Agreed. > Why "mod.computers.macintosh" when we already have "net.micro.mac" and > "net.sources.mac"? It's not consistent, and "mac" is hardly misleading > when following "computers". YES YES YES YES YES > To keep the debate manageable, we may as well accept the proposed structure, > so I'll only propose three minor changes, which have the effect of reducing the > three longest names (well, mod.protocols.appletalk is too long also, but I > don't have a good alternate). > > mod.computers.mac > net.announce.arpa > mod.laser-printers (a laser printer isn't a computer) YES. I vote yes on these three proposals. Let's see what other votes there are.. Joel West CACI, Inc. Federal {cbosgd,ihnp4,pyramid,sdcsvax,ucla-cs} !gould9!joel {sun!suntan,decvax!sdcsvax} gould9!joel@nosc.ARPA
benn@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Thomas a Coxus) (11/05/85)
[] About the posting of the above name, suggesting mod.laser-printers, mod.comp.mac and mod.whatever-the-third-one-was, I vote 'YES.'