From: wirzeniu@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Lars Wirzenius) Subject: Re: Splitting the comp.os.linux group Date: 14 Jul 1992 09:44:48 GMT
qs101@cl.cam.ac.uk (Quentin Stafford-Fraser) writes:
>I think almost everyone is - There have been several postings to this
>effect, with slight variations on the names of suggested groups, and I
>have seen no dissenters. Any split would be an improvement - let's get
>on with it. Who do we need to persuade to actually get the thing done?
It is a common fallacy to assume that silence means agreement. There is
no way to deduce anything from silence. For example, I haven't said
anything about comp.os.linux splitting because I assumed that the
subject would die on its own.
As to the high volume of comp.os.linux, I have the feeling that some of
it is due to people asking FAQs and not RTFMing enough: too many of the
questions asked are either answered in the FAQ, or in other
documentation. (I should do a little survey to get exact numbers, but
this is the feeling I get while reading comp.os.linux.) But on the other
hand, the quality of documentation is not always very high.
My opinion on splitting comp.os.linux is similar to that of Linus': the
traffic isn't large enough to support a large number of groups (about 70
messages per day is pretty much for one newsgroup, but not very much if
divided among four or five). As Linux matures and stabilizes, there
should be less need for Linux-specific questions, since the
documentation should be able to catch up and improve.
If you don't agree, but all means try to get it split up. The
instructions can be found in news.answers. It won't be all that fast,
though, it takes a three months discussion if I remember correctly, plus
a voting period.