jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) (05/11/91)
Remember the vote, folks?
Per the vote, next week there will be another round of newgroup
control messages for comp.sys.3b1 and comp.sources.3b1, followed
by rmgroup control messages for the unix-pc groups.
--
Jan Isley jan@bagend {known universe}!gatech!bagend!jan (404)434-1335bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (05/12/91)
In article <1991May10.194046.19312@bagend.uucp> jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) writes: |Remember the vote, folks? | |Per the vote, next week there will be another round of newgroup |control messages for comp.sys.3b1 and comp.sources.3b1, followed |by rmgroup control messages for the unix-pc groups. I've decided not to rmgroup these, in case there's still folks who for some reason wish to use them, for whatever reasons they might have... Cheers, -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M.
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (05/14/91)
In article <53168@rphroy.UUCP> tkacik@hobbes.cs.gmr.com (Tom Tkacik CS/50) writes: |In article <100166@becker.UUCP>, bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: ||> In article <1991May10.194046.19312@bagend.uucp> jan@bagend.uucp (Jan |Isley) writes: ||> |Remember the vote, folks? ||> | ||> |Per the vote, next week there will be another round of newgroup ||> |control messages for comp.sys.3b1 and comp.sources.3b1, followed ||> |by rmgroup control messages for the unix-pc groups. ||> ||> I've decided not to rmgroup these, in ||> case there's still folks who for some ||> reason wish to use them, for whatever ||> reasons they might have... | |I think that is mistake. The only reason for using them is to talk about |the unix-pc. Since that is now done with comp.*.3b1, there is no reason to |keep the groups. The only use they will get is the occasional pc unix |question. They probably will not get their questions answered, as there will |be few people reading those groups. There are already groups for that, |and keeping the unix-pc groups will only confuse those new readers. Nevertheless, I've decided that I don't have the right to interfere with any of those uses, as inefficient as it may be viewed by anyone not using them... -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M.
jon@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Jon Gefaell) (05/15/91)
In article <100419@becker.UUCP> bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: >In article <53168@rphroy.UUCP> tkacik@hobbes.cs.gmr.com (Tom Tkacik CS/50) writes: >|In article <100166@becker.UUCP>, bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: >||> In article <1991May10.194046.19312@bagend.uucp> jan@bagend.uucp (Jan >|Isley) writes: >||> |Remember the vote, folks? >||> | >||> |Per the vote, next week there will be another round of newgroup >||> |control messages for comp.sys.3b1 and comp.sources.3b1, followed >||> |by rmgroup control messages for the unix-pc groups. >||> >||> I've decided not to rmgroup these, in >||> case there's still folks who for some >||> reason wish to use them, for whatever >||> reasons they might have... >| >|I think that is mistake. The only reason for using them is to talk about >|the unix-pc. Since that is now done with comp.*.3b1, there is no reason to >|keep the groups. The only use they will get is the occasional pc unix >|question. They probably will not get their questions answered, as there will >|be few people reading those groups. There are already groups for that, >|and keeping the unix-pc groups will only confuse those new readers. > > > Nevertheless, I've decided that I don't > have the right to interfere with any of > those uses, as inefficient as it may be > viewed by anyone not using them... > > >-- > ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario >a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu > `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb > _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M. I don't understand where this attitude is coming from... There was a VOTE and in keeping with that FORMAL vote, the old groups need to be removed. It is counterproductive to the goals and intents of the users of these groups that you, Mr. Becker, unilateraly decide (for no apparently good reason, by your admission) to throw a spanner in the work. RMGROUP THEM Please. Thank you. *sheesh* -- ____ Mr. Jeffersons Academical Village. \ / #include <std.disclaimer.h> Flames to: hostmaster@Virginia.EDU \/ Terrestrial Coordinates: 38 04 06N / 79 03 53W Sic Semper Tyrannis
john@chance.UUCP (John R. MacMillan) (05/16/91)
|I don't understand where this attitude is coming from... There was a VOTE |and in keeping with that FORMAL vote, the old groups need to be removed. | |It is counterproductive to the goals and intents of the users of these |groups that you, Mr. Becker, unilateraly decide (for no apparently good |reason, by your admission) to throw a spanner in the work. RMGROUP THEM | |Please. | |Thank you. *sheesh* I hate to sound like a shit-disturber, but don't forget, in spite of voting guidelines and all that, Usenet is essentially an anarchy, and if Bruce doesn't want to honour the rmgroup, well, so what? That's his prerogative as a sysadmin, and it doesn't ``throw a spanner in the works'', unless a lot of people feel like he does, in which case the group might as well be kept around for those people. For my part, albeit with some sadness and feelings of nostalgia, I will probably rmgroup the _first_ ``alternate'' Usenet hierarchy. So long, unix-pc. It's been fun.
clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) (05/17/91)
In article <1991May16.053820.26650@chance.UUCP> john@chance.UUCP (John R. MacMillan) writes: ||I don't understand where this attitude is coming from... There was a VOTE ||and in keeping with that FORMAL vote, the old groups need to be removed. ||It is counterproductive to the goals and intents of the users of these ||groups that you, Mr. Becker, unilateraly decide (for no apparently good ||reason, by your admission) to throw a spanner in the work. RMGROUP THEM ||Please. |I hate to sound like a shit-disturber, but don't forget, in spite of |voting guidelines and all that, Usenet is essentially an anarchy, and |if Bruce doesn't want to honour the rmgroup, well, so what? That's |his prerogative as a sysadmin, and it doesn't ``throw a spanner in the |works'', unless a lot of people feel like he does, in which case the |group might as well be kept around for those people. Normally, you're right - after all, who cares whether Bruce has an extra empty directory and active file entry. On the other hand, Bruce is the guy who keeps newgrouping alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork. -- Chris Lewis, Phone: (613) 832-0541, Domain: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca UUCP: ...!cunews!latour!ecicrl!clewis; Ferret Mailing List: ferret-request@eci386; Psroff (not Adobe Transcript) enquiries: psroff-request@eci386 or Canada 416-832-0541. Psroff 3.0 in c.s.u soon!
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (05/17/91)
In article <1991May15.145918.13958@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> jon@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Jon Gefaell) writes: |In article <100419@becker.UUCP> bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: |> |> Nevertheless, I've decided that I don't |> have the right to interfere with any of |> those uses, as inefficient as it may be |> viewed by anyone not using them... |> |> |>-- |> ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario |>a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu |> `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb |> _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M. | | |I don't understand where this attitude is coming from... There was a VOTE |and in keeping with that FORMAL vote, the old groups need to be removed. | |It is counterproductive to the goals and intents of the users of these |groups that you, Mr. Becker, unilateraly decide (for no apparently good |reason, by your admission) to throw a spanner in the work. RMGROUP THEM | |Please. FORMAL votes apply ONLY to the "big 7", i.e. "comp, misc, news, rec, sci, soc, talk". "unix-pc" isn't part of the formal UseNet, it's just using the same facilities, just like "biz, bionet, vmsnet, alt, gnu, ...". There was substantial difference of opinion among the members of "unix-pc" as to its eventual demise - I'm merely providing for the (admittedly minority) concerns of those who felt that it should remain. Also I suppose that if the "Unix-on-a-PC" crowd started using it, the eventual outcome might be to the common good, since it might lead to a lessening dependence on the evil drug msdos 8^)... -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M.
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (05/17/91)
In article <1504@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes: | |Normally, you're right - after all, who cares whether Bruce has an extra |empty directory and active file entry. On the other hand, Bruce is the |guy who keeps newgrouping alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork. ...another dumb remark from chris the spiky, sigh... I'm not going to repeat why my concerns here are very different to what happens in "alt" - that discussion doesn't belong in this forum. -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M.
scott@skypod.uucp (Scott Campbell) (05/18/91)
In article <1991May16.053820.26650@chance.UUCP> john@chance.UUCP (John R. MacMillan) writes: >|I don't understand where this attitude is coming from... There was a VOTE >|and in keeping with that FORMAL vote, the old groups need to be removed. > >I hate to sound like a shit-disturber, but don't forget, in spite of >voting guidelines and all that, Usenet is essentially an anarchy, and >if Bruce doesn't want to honour the rmgroup, well, so what? That's >his prerogative as a sysadmin, and it doesn't ``throw a spanner in the >works'', unless a lot of people feel like he does, in which case the >group might as well be kept around for those people. > >For my part, albeit with some sadness and feelings of nostalgia, I >will probably rmgroup the _first_ ``alternate'' Usenet hierarchy. So >long, unix-pc. It's been fun. In case anyone forgot, the rules for "formal votes" only count for the mainstream groups, not alternative groups like unix-pc. The vote to CREATE comp.sys.3b1 was valid but not the vote to REMOVE unix-pc.* just my US$0.16 worth... scott ps. I'm not deleting the group. -- Scott J.M. Campbell scott@skypod.uucp Skypod Communications Inc. ..!gatech!dscatl!daysinns!skypod!scott 1001 Bay Street, Suite 1210 ..!uunet!utai!lsuc!becker!skypod!scott Toronto, Ont. (416) 924-4059 ..!epas.utoronto.ca!nyama!skypod!scott
clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) (05/19/91)
In article <101136@becker.UUCP> bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: >In article <1504@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes: >|Normally, you're right - after all, who cares whether Bruce has an extra >|empty directory and active file entry. On the other hand, Bruce is the >|guy who keeps newgrouping alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork. > ...another dumb remark from chris the spiky, sigh... Gee, I don't know why you're getting all offensive Bruce, I just stated a simple fact without any personal opinion. (Spiky? spiky? Like wow, nobody's ever called me *that* before! I wonder what the hell it means?) But since you bring it up, let's be *perfectly* clear, *are* you going to newgroup the unix-pc groups if someone rmgroups them? No beating around the bush - what are you going to do? [If voting doesn't apply to unix-pc groups and you seem to be threatening to newgroup them after they were voted down, why did you rmgroup can.english where voting doesn't apply either? You're not very consistent] -- Chris Lewis, Phone: (613) 832-0541, Domain: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca UUCP: ...!cunews!latour!ecicrl!clewis; Ferret Mailing List: ferret-request@eci386; Psroff (not Adobe Transcript) enquiries: psroff-request@eci386 or Canada 416-832-0541. Psroff 3.0 in c.s.u soon!
dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com (DoN Nichols) (05/20/91)
In article <1991May18.124144.3192@skypod.uucp> scott@skypod.uucp (Scott Campbell) writes: >In article <1991May16.053820.26650@chance.UUCP> john@chance.UUCP (John R. MacMillan) writes: >>|I don't understand where this attitude is coming from... There was a VOTE [ ... ] >In case anyone forgot, the rules for "formal votes" only count for the >mainstream groups, not alternative groups like unix-pc. The vote to >CREATE comp.sys.3b1 was valid but not the vote to REMOVE unix-pc.* > >just my US$0.16 worth... > >scott > >ps. I'm not deleting the group. I have already unaliased the unix-pc.* groups on my machine. (I feed nobody.) I would request that those who keep unix-pc.* around to please also unalias it, especially those sites running B-news. I have no objection to those who so desire keeping it around, but I would rather not have systems shoehorning "unix on a pc" artilces from there (where I can read or ignore as I desire) into the comp.sys.3b1 group. where I cannot see any reason for the mistaken posting to occur. Since I am a leaf node, I'll probably keep the groups in my active file for a while to see if there IS any traffic once the aliasing stops muddying the waters, but there will be no POSTINGS in those groups from this site. Please, let us not start a flame war over something like this. Thanks DoN. -- Donald Nichols (DoN.) | Voice (Days): (703) 664-1585 D&D Data | Voice (Eves): (703) 938-4564 Disclaimer: from here - None | Email: <dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com> --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
jgo@mcgp1.UUCP (John Opalko, N7KBT) (05/21/91)
In article <1991May16.053820.26650@chance.UUCP> john@chance.UUCP (John R. MacMillan) writes: |>It is counterproductive to the goals and intents of the users of these |>groups that you, Mr. Becker, unilateraly decide (for no apparently good |>reason, by your admission) to throw a spanner in the work. RMGROUP THEM | |I hate to sound like a shit-disturber, but don't forget, in spite of |voting guidelines and all that, Usenet is essentially an anarchy, and |if Bruce doesn't want to honour the rmgroup, well, so what? That's |his prerogative as a sysadmin, and it doesn't ``throw a spanner in the |works'', unless a lot of people feel like he does, in which case the |group might as well be kept around for those people. Mr. Becker is free to keep whatever groups he wishes on his machine. I just hope he doesn't reply to every rmgroup message with a newgroup, as he is (in)famous for doing in the alt hierarchy. The rmgroup will be honored, and the groups aliased, here and on n7kbt. John Opalko jgo@mcgp1.uucp (work) john@n7kbt.wa.com (home)
dts@quad.sialis.com (David Sandberg) (05/21/91)
In article <5025@mcgp1.UUCP> jgo@mcgp1.UUCP (John Opalko) writes: >The rmgroup will be honored, and the groups aliased, here and on n7kbt. You meant "unaliased", I hope? -- \*=- David Sandberg, dts@quad.sialis.com ,=, ,=, -=*\ \*=- "like words whispered by waking ghosts | |uadric `=,ystems -=*\ \*=- that in my ears muttered" - Torhthelm `=\ `=' -=*\