gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) (06/14/90)
I think that it would be a good idea to start a few new Amiga newsgroups. How about comp.sys.amiga.comm (communications things: Ethernet, TCP, DNET, NFS, etc) comp.sys.amiga.os ( OS topics, Multitasking, scheduling algorithms, etc) comp.sys.amiga.graphics (you get the idea) This would help ease the load of reading since comp.sys.amiga seems to be a catch all right now. Thanks, Ralph gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu gilgalad@zip.eecs.umich.edu gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu Ralph_Seguin@ub.cc.umich.edu gilgalad@sparky.eecs.umich.edu USER6TUN@UMICHUB.BITNET Ralph Seguin | In order to get infinitely many monkeys to type 565 South Zeeb Rd. | something that actually makes sense, you need to Ann Arbor, MI 48103 | have infinitely many monkey editors as well. (313) 662-1506
UH2@psuvm.psu.edu (Lee Sailer) (06/14/90)
In article <2633@zipeecs.umich.edu>, gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) says: > >I think that it would be a good idea to start a few new Amiga newsgroups. >How about > >comp.sys.amiga.comm (communications things: Ethernet, TCP, DNET, NFS, etc) >comp.sys.amiga.os ( OS topics, Multitasking, scheduling algorithms, etc) >comp.sys.amiga.graphics (you get the idea) > Here's a good strategy for creating new groups. Try to identify some topic that is intensely interesting to the people who contribute to it, yet uninteresting to many others. Split that topic out as a new group. Personally, though I agree that c.s.a gets a lot of traffic, I don't see any topic that I would categorically skip. I don't read c.s.a.hardware, though, or c.s.a.games. Those subgroups worked good for me. lee
martens@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens) (06/16/90)
In article <2633@zipeecs.umich.edu> gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) writes: >I think that it would be a good idea to start a few new Amiga newsgroups. >How about >comp.sys.amiga.comm (communications things: Ethernet, TCP, DNET, NFS, etc) >comp.sys.amiga.os ( OS topics, Multitasking, scheduling algorithms, etc) >comp.sys.amiga.graphics (you get the idea) I'm not sure the OS group would bleed that much off, or even be well defined in the mind of Joe User. Maybe the graphics group should be called "video" or somesuch. >This would help ease the load of reading since comp.sys.amiga seems to >be a catch all right now. Another thing that would be nice would be if people would start actually using comp.sys.amiga.games. There's still a lot of game stuff cluttering comp.sys.amiga. -=- -- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu) Chemlawn, trademark, suburban distributor of toxic chemicals.