sonia@fricker.uucp (Sonia Fricker Brock) (06/06/89)
June 28th, 18:15
Unix Unanimous meeting
UofT FLIS
140 St George St, Rm 212 (St. George, south of Bloor)
[come early to get a seat!]
Discussion topic suggestions are welcome. Please mail to the list
(unix-unanimous@moore) or post to can.usrgroup.
A Word from our Founder:-
For those who are still unfamiliar with Unix Unanimous -- UU can be thought
of as a live version of Usenet. Bring your questions and problems, and lay
them at the feet of real and imagined experts. The format closely emulates
the informal anarchy of the Net. It's free, wild, and all are welcome.
It is customary to follow the sirocco of pure reason with liquid and solid
sustenance at a nearby restaurant (The Greek Place).
--
-----------------------------------------------------
sonia@fricker
!uunet!attcan!telly!moore!fricker!sonia
!uunet!mnetor!becker!fricker!soniaMartin Loeffler <eisen@contact.uucp> (06/06/89)
... > For those who are still unfamiliar with Unix Unanimous -- UU can be thought > of as a live version of Usenet. ... ... > sonia@fricker It's not *that* bad! Well, talk.bizzare might be close...
morrison@grads.cs.ubc.ca (Rick Morrison) (06/08/89)
In article <248aab57@fricker.uucp> Sonia Fricker Brock <sonia@fricker.uucp> writes about an upcoming meeting of Unix Unanimous: > > June 28th, 18:15 > Unix Unanimous meeting > UofT FLIS > 140 St George St, Rm 212 (St. George, south of Bloor) > [come early to get a seat!] [Stuff about the UU group deleted] >sonia@fricker >!uunet!attcan!telly!moore!fricker!sonia >!uunet!mnetor!becker!fricker!sonia Now, I have been subscribing (reading would be too generous) to this group since its inception. I have yet to discern any reason why anything that appears here would be of any interest to anyone outside of an apparently small clique of readers in Toronto and near vicinity. I suggest that rather that than wasting network resources, nation-wide, on the sort of idle chatter that predominates here, that this group be converted to 1 (or more) regional mailing lists. ------------------------------ Rick Morrison | {alberta,uw-beaver,uunet}! | ubc-vision!ubc-csgrads!morrison Dept. of Computer Science| morrison@cs.ubc.ca Univ. of British Columbia| morrison%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1W5 | morrison@ubc.csnet (ubc-csgrads=128.189.97.20) (604) 228-4327 P.S. I won't be able to make it to the Greek Palace.
soley@moegate.UUCP (Norman S. Soley) (06/08/89)
In article <2176@ubc-cs.UUCP> morrison@grads.cs.ubc.ca (Rick Morrison) writes: > >Now, I have been subscribing (reading would be too generous) to this >group since its inception. I have yet to discern any reason why anything >that appears here would be of any interest to anyone outside of an >apparently small clique of readers in Toronto and near vicinity. > >I suggest that rather that than wasting network resources, nation-wide, >on the sort of idle chatter that predominates here, that this group be >converted to 1 (or more) regional mailing lists. Here! Here! I've never understood why we needed this group in the first place, I refused to newgroup it when I was on ontenv, somehow it slipped through the cracks here. The argument runs something like this: We already have comp.org.usrgroup, and the ability to limit distrubution to can so we don't need it for /usr/group/cdn We already have ont.events for meeting announcements for UU and /usr/group/cdn so we don't need it for that. UU has a mailing list for their internal chatter so we don't need it for that. The traffic in {can,ont,tor}.general is low enough that if there is actually something to be discussed publicly about either of these organizations there's plenty of room for it. So, what do we need can.usrgroup for? OK, I'm about to 'rmgroup -d local can.usrgroup' anybody care to talk me out of it? -- Norman Soley - The Communications Guy - Ontario Ministry of the Environment soley@moegate.UUCP or if you roll your own: uunet!attcan!ncrcan!moegate!soley The Minister speaks for the Ministry, I speak for myself. Got that! Good. Stay smart, go cool, be happy, it's the only way to get what you want
chk@dciem.dciem.dnd.ca (C. Harald Koch) (06/08/89)
In article <2176@ubc-cs.UUCP> morrison@grads.cs.ubc.ca (Rick Morrison) writes: >I suggest that rather that than wasting network resources, nation-wide, >on the sort of idle chatter that predominates here, that this group be >converted to 1 (or more) regional mailing lists. The voice of dissent grows stronger... :-) -- Grandpa Charnock's Law: | C. Harald Koch NTT Systems, Inc., Toronto, Ontario You never really learn | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (long-term address) to swear until you learn | chk@zorac.dciem.dnd.ca (my current job) to drive. | chk@chkent.UUCP (my AMIGA at home)
lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg) (06/09/89)
It seems like the traffic in can.usrgroup can be split into two
catagories:
1) General Unix questions, and
2) UU stuff that only relates to the Toronto area.
I have yet to see any traffic related to /usr/group/cdn (other than
my own flames :-) .
Perhaps we should rmgroup can.usrgroup and create can.unix?
Of course, I'm all for keeping this group if it's used for its
intended purpose.
--
Lyndon Nerenberg / Computing Services / Athabasca University
{alberta,decwrl,ncc}!atha!lyndon || lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA
Trying to manage programmers is like trying to herd cats!bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) (06/09/89)
In article <372@moegate.UUCP> soley@moegate.UUCP (Norman S. Soley) writes: > [...] >OK, I'm about to 'rmgroup -d local can.usrgroup' anybody care to talk me out of >it? Nope. Go ahead. No Chinese Tanks here 8^)... Me, I like can.usrgroup just fine, so I'll keep receiving it & passing it along. If any of you "moegate" or "ontenv" folks want to continue to get this newsgroup you better see if your sysop is democratic & accedes to your wishes - otherwise complain in "can.general" or something so we can have a good roast 8^)... Cheers, -- __ Bruce Becker Toronto, Ont. w \cc/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `/v/-e BitNet: BECKER@HUMBER.BITNET _< >_ "Like, um, it *was* Jimi, I am so sure" - Lily of the Valley Girls
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) (06/09/89)
In article <1808@dciem.dciem.dnd.ca> chk@dretor.dciem.dnd.ca (C. Harald Koch) writes: |In article <2176@ubc-cs.UUCP> morrison@grads.cs.ubc.ca (Rick Morrison) writes: |>I suggest that rather that than wasting network resources, nation-wide, |>on the sort of idle chatter that predominates here, that this group be |>converted to 1 (or more) regional mailing lists. | |The voice of dissent grows stronger... :-) Who cares what people outside of T.O. thinks about can.usrgroup anyway! hahahahaheeheehohohak kaff kak hak*gghh -- __ Bruce Becker Toronto, Ont. w \cc/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `/v/-e BitNet: BECKER@HUMBER.BITNET _< >_ "Like, um, it *was* Jimi, I am so sure" - Lily of the Valley Girls
woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) (06/09/89)
This discussion is driving me up the friggin' wall! Haven't you people got anything better to do? If you don't want to read the content, and you've nothing better to contribute, buzz off! [ 1/2 :-) ] In article <608@aurora.AthabascaU.CA> lyndon@auvax.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: > It seems like the traffic in can.usrgroup can be split into two > catagories: > > 1) General Unix questions, and > 2) UU stuff that only relates to the Toronto area. In actual fact the traffic is split into two categories: 1. Those messages gatewayed from unix-unanimous@moore.uucp by the unix-unanimous mailing list injector at tmsoft. 2. Those messages posted to the newsgroup directly (like this one) > I have yet to see any traffic related to /usr/group/cdn (other than > my own flames :-) . Constructive critisim is more than welcome! > Perhaps we should rmgroup can.usrgroup and create can.unix? What good would that do? Then we'd be having interesting discussions about unix that the rest of the world would want to join in on, and so why not discuss those things in comp.unix.questions. The point of discussing them on a local mailing list was so people could get answers from people they knew, or had at least seen before. The reason the group was created with can distribution, rather than ont or tor was to show the rest of the nation what we were doing, encourage participation, and perhaps help others do similar things. The non-Toronto faction isn't the only group that feels wronged.... some people here feel it was wrong to start spilling what had been more intimate communications out to an unknown audience. I'm one of the ones sitting the fence, which means I like the status quo. Anyway, I don't think any of us are juvenile enough to fight rmgroup/newgoup wars. :-) > Of course, I'm all for keeping this group if it's used for its > intended purpose. IT IS BEING USED FOR ITS INTENDED PURPOSE! -- Greg A. Woods woods@{{utgpu,eci386,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP,gpu.utcs.UToronto.CA,utorgpu.BITNET} +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] Toronto, Ontario CANADA
mason@tmsoft.uucp (Dave Mason) (06/09/89)
> 1) General Unix questions, and > 2) UU stuff that only relates to the Toronto area. I have changed the program that injects the unix-unanimous mailing list into this group so that the default will be 'ont'. If anyone on the list wants their message to get wider distribution, they can simply add: Distribution: can to the headers of their message. If anyone is greatly offended by this, mail me. (Or if anyone thinks it should be changed to tor, mail me too.) I think there has been SOME useful discussion related to /usr/group/cdn that has taken place in this group, if only hanging out dirty laundry between Lyndon and myself! I should also point out that unix-unanimous IS part of /usr/group/cdn, though admittedly a relatively small (though certainly vocal!), local to Toronto, part. With a new board to be elected to /usr/group/cdn next week, I continue to hope that it will become (or evolve into) a truly national organization, for which can.usrgroup seems like a useful sounding board. As for comp.org.usrgroup with can distribution, /usr/group is currently trying to change its name to UniForum or some such, and I don't see that there's really much in common between /u/g/c & /u/g. Lyndon suggests changing the name to can.unix. Interestingly, /u/g/c is also considering a name change. Some board members (notably those employed by multinationals) are keen to see us continue to mimic the U.S. (oops, I mean WORLD, of course, but they're the same aren't they? :-) organization and call ourselves 'Uniforum Canada' or some such. Some others of us have suggested 'Unix Canada'. So we're ahead of you already Lyndon :-) ../Dave Quote of the day: "I want to stay on the board so I can have more fun!" - anon
acton@grads.cs.ubc.ca (Donald Acton) (06/10/89)
In article <579@becker.UUCP> bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) writes: } Who cares what people outside of T.O. } thinks about can.usrgroup anyway! I thought that Rick's original point was who cares what T.O thinks! But, more seriously, I think that if this news group is to serve a more useful purpose its mandate must be clearly defined. As Rick Morrison pointed out most postings seem to be idle chit-chat or announcements of events in the T.O area, hardly stuff that warrants a national newsgroup. Perhaps at the next "meeting" a discussion of this newsgroup and its purpose would be in order. Maybe through discussions of this topic here or at the meeting a way can be found to make this a useful group. Otherwise I think it should be given the death sentence. Donald Acton
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) (06/10/89)
In article <1989Jun9.152104.18526@tmsoft.uucp> mason@tmsoft.UUCP (Dave Mason) writes: |> 1) General Unix questions, and |> 2) UU stuff that only relates to the Toronto area. | |I have changed the program that injects the unix-unanimous mailing list |into this group so that the default will be 'ont'. If anyone on the |list wants their message to get wider distribution, they can simply add: | Distribution: can |to the headers of their message. If anyone is greatly offended by |this, mail me. (Or if anyone thinks it should be changed to tor, mail |me too.) Dave, I think you should not do this unless it has been subject to public (i.e., here) discussion and generally agreed to... -- __ Bruce Becker Toronto, Ont. w \cc/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `/v/-e BitNet: BECKER@HUMBER.BITNET _< >_ "Like, um, it *was* Jimi, I am so sure" - Lily of the Valley Girls
uucp@tmsoft.uucp (Now THATs a Daemon) (06/10/89)
While I agree that the UU mailing list probably shoudn't be gatewayed to can.usrgroup, I think can.usrgroup should be left around in case some national discussion does come up. I don't think we should rely on comp.org.usrgroup with a can distribution for a couple of reasons: 1) Users are notoriously bad at using distributions 2) A lot of people might not notice a "canadian" posting in comp.org.usrgroup. (i.e. the Subject: may not be clear, or, for example, this machine keeps ut,tor,ont,can articles longer than everything except news.announce.newusers articles). -- Brian Glendenning - Radio astronomy, University of Toronto brian@radio.astro.utoronto.ca uunet!utai!radio!brian glendenn@utorphys.bitnet