From: drew@hamlet.cs.colorado.edu (Drew Eckhardt) Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.linux split Date: 21 Sep 1992 14:27:40 GMT
In article <KREJ.92Sep21115054@erbiumx.electrum.kth.se> krej@electrum.kth.se (Kristian Ejvind) writes:
> <splits deleted>
>Please.
>
> 100 msg a day is not practical to read through 2400. I'm not interested
Who actually reads every article? With a non-threaded news reader,
the worst you'll do is see 100 title lines, that's four screens,
at most 8000 characters or ~30 seconds on a 2400 bps modem.
With a threaded reader like TRN, kill all the subjects
you don't like, and concentrate on the threads that interest
you - even less.
>in X, I'm not interested in changes on gcc every week, or patches for
>programs and the kernel every day. I just want to keep informed on the status
>of linux and for this just comp.os.linux.announcements would be enough.
>
How is this different from what you can do now, with the propper use of
your news reader?
- Getting groups carried on other nets, through gateways, is
often an arduous task. Many people read comp.os.linux
through fidonet, there's no guarantee that they'll
be able to get all of the comp.os.linux.* groups.
- We already have all of the necessary sub groups :
comp.os.linux for Linux specific questions, anouncements
of ports, etc.
comp.unix.questions for new user questions.
comp.unix.admin for administration issues.
etc.
Having Linux-specific comp.unix groups accomplishes nothing,
and means you're drawing from a smaller base of people than
the real comp.unix groups.
-- Microsoft is responsible for propogating the evils it calls DOS and Windows, IBM for AIX (appropriately called Aches by those having to administer it), but marketing's sins don't come close to those of legal departments. Boycott AT&T for their absurd anti-BSDI lawsuit.