Re: BD: comp.binaries.apple2.d

[anthony@seas.smu.edu (Richard Anthony)]

In article <e7k9VB3w164w@jwt.UUCP> bbs-bdoherty@jwt.UUCP writes:
>From the last message that I saw on c.b.a2 this morning, I think that
>there is another way to stop the posting of non-binary messages to
>c.b.a2. 
>
>>I didn't see a discussion group so I am posting here.  Can anyone
>>suggest a comm package that would be good for a novice user of an
>>Apple IIgs?  They have a Zoom modem and are not very computer
>>literate.
>
>This person looked for a discussion group, but couldn't find a
>DISCUSSION group that is specifically for c.b.a2.  I believe that
>this would be a good thing, to create a comp.binaries.apple2.d.
>
>The good things that would become of this would include:
>
>	o Less traffic on c.s.a2 of people requesting reposts,
>	posting problems, or asking for help.
>
>	o Better organization of c.b.a2 in that (theoretically)
>	people would stop posting messages containing ONLY text to
>	c.b.a2. 
>
>	o Easier to find information or help about a certain program
>	that has been posted than wading through the load of messages
>	on c.s.a2.
>
>Although, this also might not work.  In other binaries groups with
>discussion groups, like alt.binaries.sounds.misc, most of the
>discussion takes place in the .d group but some still stays in the
>binaries group.  This would also mean one more group to read for
>readers of many groups.  However, I feel the pros outweigh the cons
>so it is worth a try.
>
>Does anyone else believe the same way I do?  If so speak up!  Tell
>us why you think this would work or why it wouldn't work.  Tell me
>if this has already been tried before!  (I'm pretty sure it hasn't)
>If the readers of c.s.a2 think that this is worth trying, mail me.
>If enough people think the same way I do about this I will go to
>news.newgroups to figure out how to do a proposal and RFD.  <grin>
>
>InterNET: bbs-bdoherty@jwt.uucp               |   FidoNET: sysop@1:363/152
>          jwt!bbs-bdoherty@peora.sdc.ccur.com | FutureNET: #109@#3
>          ...!peora!jwt!bbs-bdoherty          |   ProLine: bdoherty@pro-magic



WEll a .d group might be a good idea.  As many might recall Jawaid was willing
to moderate the binaries, but it was voted down.  Personally I think Moderation
would be better than a .d group.  If you look at any of the other groups
that have .d's, non 'uuencoded' posts still pop up on the groups.  I think
a request for moderation can be brought up again in a few months, I'm not sure
but I am sure someone can post when a revote can be brought up



Jim C