Re: Possible reorganisation of comp.sys.apple2 hierarchy

[lgarde@scorch.apana.org.au (Leon Garde)]

psonnek@pro-algonquin.cts.com (Patrick Sonnek) writes:


|I vote for a new hierarchy, at least a split between the GS and the older
|]['s.  More splits could even be bennificial.


No, I say three and only three new groups.
Well four actually
comp.sys.apple2
comp.sys.apple2.announce
comp.sys.apple2.8bit
comp.sys.apple2.gs
comp.sys.apple2.emulator


announce is important. too many new things are lost in the noise,
which retards development and morale.

apple2 for general stuff, drive problems, software sites etc.
anything which is general and not specific to the gs.
8bit for anything which doesnt have anything to do with a gs, and 
would get lost in the noise on the apple2 group.
eg. difference between 6502 and 65c02  type questions.
gs anything to do with gs's
eg. what was that hypercard call again ?
emulator .....  there is an alt.* group, I've heard.
    the problem is that alt is not 'official', so to get 
    the same distribution of comp.sys.apple2, it needs to be moved to
    comp.*. I think that the emulator side has suffered, as I've seen
    many posts asking about it, but no answers.
    If you think about it, having emulators may increase the sale
    of the software etc. Really, people can buy ibm's now,
    but simply cant understand how to program them.
    running an emulator could be there way to 1. have windows and
    newere games but 2. get into a programming environment they can
    get the feel of.
    eg write a simple buzzer loop (2000: lda c030 2003: jsr 2000 )


I think that there would be no need for 'programmer' groups under that
heirarchy, and programmer groups would require more subdivisions
ie hyperc, orca, gno, 8bit assmebler, 16bit assembler, p8, systemx , 
prodos, etc. Too many small groups there.