Re: Proposed group addition

["Tom Zuchowski" <tzuchow@attglobal.net>]

I don't see the "massive" traffic in this group such a burden that we need
to siphon half of it off to another group. All this new group would do is
dilute the thin traffic here already.

This new group would get LOTS of Apple II-related posts, and people would
continue to post Lisa and Mac questions to this apple2 group. I just don't
get the point.

While you're at it, maybe you need to start a "copyright-infringement"
newsgroup, too. Those threads are much more of an off-topic burden here than
the occasional Lisa or Apple /// message!

Tom Z


"Brian Hyer" <bmhyer@ameritech.net> wrote in message
B8059250.4B30%bmhyer@ameritech.net">news:B8059250.4B30%bmhyer@ameritech.net...
> OK, then. Let's have a little vote-a-thon amongst ourselves. The questions
> before the readership are as follows:
>
> 1. In your opinion only, does the current traffic on Usenet support the
> creation of a non-Macintosh, non-Apple-II newsgroup within the comp.sys.*
> hierarchy?
>
> 2. Would you subscribe to such a group and use it? If the majority of
people
> for whom the group would be a benefit won't use such a group regularly,
it's
> a waste of resources to try and get it created. There's a lot of work
> involved in creating a high-level Usenet group.
>
> 3. What is your proposed name for such a group? So far I've seen:
>
> comp.sys.apple.discontinued
> comp.sys.apple.legacy
> comp.sys.apple.non-macintosh (my own contribution)
>
> Like one? Hate one? Got an idea of your own? Let's hear it.
>
> 4. Any comments/thoughts on the whole process? Let's hear those too.
> Constructive criticisms will be cheerfully accepted; flames will be just
as
> cheerfully tossed in the rubbish and set ablaze, while dancing on a
burning
> effigy of the potential flamer and sticking voodoo pins in it... <grin>
>
> -----
>
> Since I started this, I'll finish it. To minimize traffic on Usenet,
e-mail
> your replies to bmhyer at ameritech dot net. I'll actually keep track of
> them for... let's say two weeks? Long enough to get an idea of
response?...
> and post the summary of responses on this newsgroup November 15, 2001.
>
> Brian
>