peraino@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Bob Peraino) (02/15/91)
I really don't think we should have a .hack type newsgroup. I can
see a comp.sys.hp.calcs due to the amount of traffic, but I wouldn't
want to see it broken up any more than that. I don't want to have to
go to two or three different newsgroups just to get information
on what should really be one subject. IMHO, there really isn't THAT
much hack type stuff out there to warrant this anyway; we're not
exactly overrunning the newsgroup.
Let's face it. If a .hack type newsgroup spins off, you KNOW you're
going to read both, anyway. And if I were a poster, I'd have to decide
where it should go. Suppose I find some out some neat undocumented thing.
Gee, do I post this to 'hacks' or the regular newsgroup? I'd probably
post it to both, in this case. Food for thought.
peraino@gmuvax.gmu.edursholmes@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Rich Holmes) (02/16/91)
In article <3476@gmuvax2.gmu.edu> peraino@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Bob Peraino) writes: >IMHO, there really isn't THAT >much hack type stuff out there to warrant this anyway; we're not >exactly overrunning the newsgroup. Depends on what you mean by hack stuff, and there are large fluctuations, but my guesstimate is about 50% of the 48SX postings. (Less during the frenzies of postings re: equation card offer and re: upgrading revisions A to D, but those presumably were (are) atypical times.) > Let's face it. If a .hack type newsgroup spins off, you KNOW you're >going to read both, anyway. YOU will. I probably won't. Please speak for yourself. -- - Rich Holmes rich@suhep.bitnet or rich@suhep.phy.syr.edu Syracuse U. Physics Dept. or if you must: rsholmes@rodan.acs.syr.edu "I don't lie. I'm cultivating a reputation for honesty so I can blow it when something big comes along. This ain't it." -- Steven Brust, Phoenix
mcgrant@elaine25.stanford.edu (Michael Grant) (02/16/91)
Has there been an official call for discussion yet (as defined in the Usenet guidelines)? If there hasn't been, then all of this discussion is relatively useless, because there has to be about 20-30 days AFTER the official call for discussion is made before a vote can be held. THAT should be the time for discussion, especially at this volume. So, could someone with more resources than I (and that includes time) PLEASE read the guidelines for forming a new newsgroup, and pose an official Call for Discussion in news.announce.whatever-it-needs-to-be (and here too, of course)? Michael C. Grant
mamos@uafhp.uark.edu (Mark _E_ Amos) (02/16/91)
SOME sort of division must occur, and bickering about the best way to do it
will get us nowhere -why don't we just separate hp stuf first and THEN worry
about yet more subgroups. The readers are too varied to get an IDEAL
configuration, but what we need now is a VIABLE solution so the rest of the
handhelds don't get permanently turned off (if not already...). Handhelds
as a genre of computers are going to do nothing less than explode in the
very near future, and IMHO we or whoever is really in charge of this area
should seriously get on the stick and resolve this "irritation" before it
becomes a real problem.
BTW, I own and love a 48, but anyone "loyal" to one brand or type of computer
nowadays without keeping interest and/or knowledge with others is only
limiting themselves, as the golden age of information and computers IS upon
us, and "loyalty" in the strict sense can be translated into "tunnelvision",
IMHO.
main()
{
null(flames);
}
==============================================================================
Mark _E_ Amos | University of Arkansas Computer Science Engineering
mamos@uafhp.uark.edu |
mea1@engr.uark.edu | (emphasise the Computer Engineering please)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Man's mind, when stretched to a new idea, never goes back to its original
dimension." -Oliver Wendell Holmes
==============================================================================bgribble@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Bill Gribble) (02/16/91)
In article <mamos.666690552@uafhp> mamos@uafhp.uark.edu (Mark _E_ Amos) writes: > > SOME sort of division must occur, and bickering about the best way to do it > will get us nowhere -why don't we just separate hp stuf first and THEN worry > about yet more subgroups. 1.) the conclusion that a division needs to happen is FAR from foregone. At this point I can say for certain that I would vote no on any split that's been proposed; they all seem too frivolous. Not to say that I wouldn't change my mind were a better idea to come up. 2.) What makes you think that, even if there is a split, it has to be the HP people who leave? I've been reading this newsgroup for well over a year, not nearly long enough to have been around when it formed but long enough to see that, if the HP users didn't form the group as an HP forum, they certainly have squatter's rights by now. As has been said before, the non-HP volume on this group is too low to merit its own newsgroup, but if you want it that badly form your own newsgroup rather than kicking the HP users out. Sorry if I offend anyone, but this discussion has gone on too long. An idea: I'll conduct an informal straw poll. Send me mail with the subject line "HP Split" and your vote in the body - nothing specific, just a 'yes' if you're for the idea of the split or a 'no' if you want to maintain status quo. Feel free to include comments, with the knowledge that I may post them in my summary. ***************************************************************************** ** Bill Gribble Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA ** ** bgribble@jarthur.claremont.edu Never heard of it? You're stupid. ** *****************************************************************************
bdahlen@zephyr.cair.du.edu (Robert L. Dahlen - U. of Denver USA=) (02/21/91)
In article <10850@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> bgribble@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Bill Gribble) writes: >In article <mamos.666690552@uafhp> mamos@uafhp.uark.edu (Mark _E_ Amos) writes: >> >> SOME sort of division must occur, and bickering about the best way to do it >> will get us nowhere -why don't we just separate hp stuf first and THEN worry >> about yet more subgroups. > >2.) What makes you think that, even if there is a split, it has to be the > HP people who leave? I've been reading this newsgroup for well over > a year, not nearly long enough to have been around when it formed but > long enough to see that, if the HP users didn't form the group as an > HP forum, they certainly have squatter's rights by now. As has been > said before, the non-HP volume on this group is too low to merit > its own newsgroup, but if you want it that badly form your own > newsgroup rather than kicking the HP users out. > >** Bill Gribble Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA ** >** bgribble@jarthur.claremont.edu Never heard of it? You're stupid. ** ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ nice... If it's a HP group then it should be named that. There WAS a group for Non-HP, it was called .handhelds -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert L. Dahlen - Director, Information Systems & Technology University of Denver - Denver, Colorado 80208 (303) 871-4385 INTERNET:bdahlen@du.edu BITNET:bdahlen@ducair