jeepcj2a@fluke.UUCP (Dale Chaudiere) (09/21/85)
To whom it may concern. There is a desire among readers of net.auto to split or add a new newsgroup to allow separation of technical discussions about automobiles (ie. how suspensions work, repair, etc.) from the driving or legal discussions related to, but not exclusively automobiles (ie. 55, good/bad driving habits, DWI, etc.). Below are people who expressed their opinion to me over the last week. net.driving or net.auto.tech are only two ideas, but regardless a another newsgroup is needed. net.driving ___________ Dale Chaudiere, FLUKE Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Automation Sys. Chris Meier, Honeywell SRC Mark Bernstein, Texas Computation Cen. kitten@NCAR Doug Williams, AT&T Bell Labs Russell Pierce, AT&T Valeris Polichar Terry J. Ligocki, Tektronix Robert Stack, University of New Mexico Tom Haapanen, University of Waterloo Cris Lewis Sean Rooney, University of Wisconsin Phil White, Tektronix Mary Shurtleff Jack Saltiel, Cambridge Digital Systems net.auto.tech _____________ Pat Vilbrandt, FLUKE Mike Graham, AT&T Technologies Henry Bibb, Georgia Tech Mark F. Flynn, University of WA Tim Drabik Don Chitwood, Tektronix chim@ncsu goldman@ittvax do not split net.auto _____________________ Mike Leibensperger Brian Jones
mberns@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Mark Bernstein) (09/24/85)
> ..........Below are people who expressed their opinion to > me over the last week. net.driving or net.auto.tech are only two ideas, but > regardless a another newsgroup is needed. > net.driving > ___________ > Dale Chaudiere, FLUKE > Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Automation Sys. > Chris Meier, Honeywell SRC > Mark Bernstein, Texas Computation Cen. > . > . > . > net.auto.tech > _____________ > Pat Vilbrandt, FLUKE > . > . > etc. Do we need to form "camps"? I'm fairly new to the net (reading for a few months now) and perhaps not as familiar with protocol as I should be. What is the significance of finding one's name on one or another of the lists above? This may not be an important issue, but I'm not sure. My support for the idea of splitting net.auto came about actually because I, too, had become tired of reading the polemics about "driving" (insurance, DWI, radar detectors, social security numbers on licenses, etc.) interspersed among the technical discussions, and thought it might be a good idea to have the "driving" topics in another group for those who are interested. Or conversely, I suppose, (and maybe this is where the confusion arose) create a new group solely for technical discussions. Whichever. If I'm not mistaken, I seem to recall that the original impetus for this idea (article titled something like "... Time to leave this group..") was in a similar spirit. I'd much prefer to focus my attention on the "net.auto.tech" topic(s) and *not* have to wade through the material which would go into "net.driving". Hence, for the record, I think I'd rather be "included" (if that is what this is about, and if this is necessary for some reason) in the net.auto.tech group in lists such as the above. Perhaps others who have indicated their interest in this idea feel similarly, and all this could be sorted out. Or perhaps none of this list business matters in any real sense, and I'm making a big deal out of nothing. Please, no flames if that's the case - I'm really not at all sure. Mark Bernstein (UT Austin, Speech Communication)