Re: AACP - Apple-to-Apple Copy

["Bill Buckels" <bbuckels@mts.net>]

"Nick Westgate" <nick.westgate@gmail.com> wrote:
>D Finnigan <dog_...@macgui.com> wrote:
>> (Note that I've posted to 3 groups, but follow-ups should go to 
>> csa2.comm)

>Comm topics are regularly discussed in csa2.

So is everything including child abuse. Linux issues and MacIntosh issues 
seem to creep into here as well... and of course ebay auctions.

>These groups should really be RFD'd, or at least ignored:

>comp.sys.apple2.comm
>comp.sys.apple2.usergroups
>comp.sys.apple2.gno

For RFD you can also add comp.sys.apple, comp.os.mac, alt.comp.os.mac, 
alt.sys.mac, comp.os.mac and many more if you wish.

>20-something subscribers for each in Google Groups, compared to 
>400-something for csa2.

I don't much care for google groups and prefer using Outlook Express as my 
news reader. It is entirely possible (but unlikely) that the type of person 
who likes to use google groups also doesn't like to bother with sub 
groups,,, but a more relevant point is that non-barney-googlers may also be 
subscribed to those RFD suggestions of yours so the numbers may be greater.

Also even alt.comp.cygwin sees no posts despite its newness and relevance so 
maybe usenet itself will eventually be an RFD target.

I then put it to you...

1. is it better to consolidate all posts into one general group or
2. keep things of a like kind in their own place or
3. will it matter in the end?
4. all of the above?

Bill

PS - If someone calls me a clown again for suggesting that the appropriate 
subgroups be used
they will also be called a clown.

http://www.grudge-match.com/History/TOC8.shtml