From: wirzeniu@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Lars Wirzenius) Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.linux split Date: 21 Sep 1992 20:24:13 GMT
krej@electrum.kth.se (Kristian Ejvind) writes:
>> 100 msg a day is not practical to read through 2400. I'm not interested
>>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.
I read almost all my news (about 130 groups) via a 2400 bps modem (with
MNP5, but it doesn't make _that_ big a difference). I do not find it
inpractical, but that might be because I use a well-designed newsreader,
trn, not something only marginally better than
``cat /usr/spool/news/comp/os/linux/*'' to read news. After I tried
trn for the first time, I suddendly realized that I wouldn't ever want
to read news with rn, nn, or anu-news ever again. (That is a personal
opinion, if you use one of the mentioned newsreaders and are happy with
it, good for you. I do not mind in the least that other people disagree
with me on this issue, as long as I can use whatever program I want.)
However, I could well be persuaded to think that an announcements group
could be a good idea. I don't seem to be able to make up my mind (I
almost posted an RFD for it a few weeks ago already, but then I decided
that I didn't like it enough).
harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp) writes:
>I've seen some FIDO and mailing list people oppose the split. What
>exactly is the problem here?
The following is based on what I have read here, not on personal
experience:
The Fidonet people will have extreme trouble if they have to create new
gateways. Each gateway (or rather, the corresponding Fido group) will
need a dedicated moderator, and it will also be difficult to get most of
the Fidonet community to accept new groups. (Some parts of the Fidonet
seem to be very reluctant to creating new groups: during the two years
or so which I read the Finnish part of Fidonet, I can't remember any new
groups being created.)
The mailing-list people need somebody to start and administer new
mailing-lists, which it not necessarily a trivial task.
Doing the split will require a lot of work from already burdened
volunteers or else it will cut away a large segment of the Linux user
community.
>BTW, anyone want comp.os.linux.advocacy? ;)
No. Rational discussion can go to comp.os.linux, irrational flaming and
ignorant comparisons of systems we can do without.