jimmy@uhunix1.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Jimmy Chan) (03/08/91)
Why are there two newsgroups for emulations? The original is comp.sys.amiga.emulations with a few hundred notes and then there is comp.sys.amiga.emulation (without the 's') that as of yet only had 2 notes. Is someone creating newsgroups just for laughs? Things like this could make some system administrators reluctant in establishing any further newsgroups later.
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (03/13/91)
jimmy@uhunix1.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Jimmy Chan) writes: > Why are there two newsgroups for emulations? The original is > comp.sys.amiga.emulations with a few hundred notes and then there is > comp.sys.amiga.emulation (without the 's') that as of yet only had 2 > notes. Is someone creating newsgroups just for laughs? Things like > this could make some system administrators reluctant in establishing > any further newsgroups later. Well, I hope folks don't take that attitude. Gene Spafford, one of the most respected people on the net, periodically publishes a file called "checkgroups" to one of the administrative newsgroups, identifying all the legitimate newsgroups on the net in the major hierarchies; he's really about the only person folks would trust to be the arbiter of which groups are legitimate. Well, after the reorganization, his checkgroups message had two typos in it for the new amiga groups; .emulation instead of .emulations, and .datacom instead of .datacomm. Apparently there are sysadmins out there who ignored the newgroup control messages that went out, and added what Gene's checkgroups file said, instead. If your site has .emulation or .datacom, show this note to your system administrator and ask for the errors to be corrected. Thanks. /// It's Amiga /// for me: why Kent, the man from xanth. \\\/// settle for <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> \XX/ anything less? -- Convener, COMPLETED comp.sys.amiga grand reorganization.