catto@vivaldi.ecn.purdue.edu (Erin S Catto) (05/22/91)
comp.sys.splitdebate Yeah, Yeah, Yeah Zoom->
HCLIMER%UTCVM.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (Harold Climer) (05/23/91)
On Wed, 22 May 1991 19:35 CST you said: >Subject: The Split >Message-ID: <1991May22.024357.8308@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> >From: catto@vivaldi.ecn.purdue.edu (Erin S Catto) >Date: 22 May 91 02:43:57 GMT > > comp.sys.splitdebate > > > Yeah ! > Yeah ! > Yeah ! ZOOM ! I agree;this is getting old and doesn't seem to be making much progress. If this is a debate it sure has little resemblance to what I participated in when I was on the Debating Team in High School. What we need is a judge to determine if the for 48 group proposal wins or loses. Voting didn't seem to solve the question the last time. Are there criteria as far as message traffic etc that have been used in the past to split up groups? If so,why not apply them to this problem. It seems to me that most of the suggestions so far have been based more on personal opinion than upon logical arguments. If this is not true (in anyones estimation) post your suggestions in a logial format. ie Suggestions for group name and your "logical" reason for this particular name. My logical reason for csh.hpcal is that contrary to some peoples opinions some of the HP calculators are related especially the 28 & the 48. Also many people still use older HP calculators even after the buy the new "HOT" ones. I still use my 41CV because of all the software I have for it. It is still eaiser to use it in some cases than to write my own for the 48. Harold Climer Physics Department U. Tennessee at Chattanooga C3P0 : " He does make mistakes ; from time to time"
akcs.jrchaffer@hpcvbbs.UUCP (J. Richard Chaffer) (05/23/91)
great. enuf already