kusumoto@chsun1.uchicago.edu (Bob Kusumoto) (02/21/91)
Since I haven't heard anything about the previous CFD and never saw a
followup CFV for a desqview group, I'd like to announce a call for
discussion over a desqview group.
Basically, this group should be able to discuss the Desqview program and
user problems using Desqview, or additional programs that help desqview,
namely QEMM and QRAM. Currently, questions about problems with Desqview,
QEMM, and QRAM are spread accross a number of different news groups,
ranging from comp.sys.ibm.pc groups and comp.so.msdos groups, to some other
groups like comp.protocols groups. A central newsgroup to discuss problems
using either the DV, QEMM, or QRAM programs and upcoming information about
new releases such as Desqview/X would help users a lot.
This group should be unmoderated.
A few questions that should be answered before a call to votes:
a) whether such a group should be created.
b) what the group should really be called.
c) if the charter should be limited even more.
A) Should this group be created?
Considering the number of messages that I've seen about QEMM problems or
help with getting some program to work under desqview, a group like this
should exist. In addition, there's some interest in the upcoming
release of Desqview/X and I'm sure many people would like to know more
about the program and hear from people who've gotten it to work. These
kinds of discussions would benefit from a central newsgroup to post to.
B) What should the group be called?
C) What should the scope of the group be?
I'm partial to comp.os.msdos.dv, although it can probably fall under
a couple other names depending on the scope of the group.
We could call it comp.windows.dv or something similar and limit the
topics to the Desqview program and Desqview386 (DV+QEMM) or DV+QRAM.
A spin off group might be created, comp.windows.x.dv to talk about
Desqview/X. comp.os.msdos.dv seems like a good name if people needed
help with specific problems that aren't limited strictly to the
desqview program (maybe comp.os.msdos.qd, but I don't like the idea of
attaching a commercial company (Quarterdeck) to a newsgroup name).
The choice of names would in some ways, limit the scope of the discussion
in the group.
any thoughts? (followups to news.groups)
Bob
--
Bob Kusumoto | I just come from the land of
Internet: kusumoto@chsun1.uchicago.edu | the sun/ from a war that must
Bitnet: kusumoto%chsun1@uchicago[.bitnet] | be won in the name of truth.
UUCP: ...!{oddjob,gargoyle}!chsun1!kusumoto | - New Order, "Love Vigilantes"
--
(setq mail '("tale@rpi.edu" "uupsi!rpi!tale" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))rja7m@spot.cs.Virginia.EDU (Ran Atkinson) (02/22/91)
"comp.os.msdos.dv" is far too cryptic a name. The name needs to be immediately obvious to naive first-time USENET users. "comp.windows.dv" is similarly too cryptic. Something like one of these would be better: comp.os.desqview (it has an API and fits nicely here) comp.windows.desqview The name in the proposal needs to be clear and less cryptic. Desqview is itself as much of an OS as MSDOS is, so it might fit better as its own node under comp.os.*