From: jliddle@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Jean Liddle) Subject: Re: A proposal for organizing comp.os.linux. [NEW-CHANNELS] Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 23:37:05 GMT
I have been dilligently trying to avoid this, but felt I had to respond to
this post.
In article <1992Dec13.204007.17189@reed.edu> nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writ
es:
>
>However, if a few of the louder voices on comp.os.linux really wanted
>to, we could still split comp.os.linux this week. Instead of splitting
>it according to the normal Usenet voting procedures, split it into the
>alt groups. Alt groups don't require a vote - a week's discussion on
>alt.config seems to be sufficient.
>
>There are some good reasons not to do this. For one thing, it's fairly
>sleazy.
This is a very *B A D* idea. It is inappropriate to circumvent usenet
policies because we disagree with the results. Such a move would be
very detrimental to the whole climate of the linux community, and would
be very asocial to boot.
Now please, please, lets keep the bandwidth clean of this stuff 'till
next May or so.
Jean.
BTW - I have been reading c.o.s (formerly a.o.s) since April. I missed
the call for votes, as probably did others. Such is life. I am speaking
as one who probably would have voted for a split, and will do so next time
this comes up. Nevertheless, it is time for those of us who disagree with
the results of the last vote to take our lumps gracefully and shut-up.
-- Jean Liddle Computer Science, Illinois State University e-mail: jliddle@ilstu.edu ============================================