On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, Egan Ford wrote:
They've all disappeared. There is the comp.sys.tandy but too many have left, and indeed, I've seen people ask questions and the usual answer is "go here...". There is/was a mailing list for the CoCo, and that had been gated to Usenet, but that also dried up. One or both of them, there was a deliberate mass migration at a very specific point, ignoring those of us who had no interest in other forum spaces.On 6/1/12 9:31 AM, Michael Black wrote:On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, A2CPM wrote:Hi, y'all! Interested in the 6809 CPU? Then you should join the Apple6809 group I started. Email me privately for an invitation...So balkanize things even more? A tiny subset ever used the 6809 in the Apple II, so they should go to some special place? Meanwhile, it segregates people from the rest of the 6809 users, which are far more numerous than those that had one in the Apple. The specifics of a 6809 in an Apple II are relatively short, a burden (if that) to pass over, while once there, the experience is the same as the people using Flex or OS-9 (which in turn seems to be determined by which board you could scrounge up at this point). MichaelWhere do the 6809ers hang out? There are many in the coco communities, but I have not seen any others.
My point is that finding where traffic is may be more important than yet another unique space. Any Apple specific details come from "where can I get a Stellation board?" and whatever the other one was (I can't remember, one was just a 6809 on a board that took over the Apple II like the Z80 card, and the other had a 6809 and RAM, like the fancier Z80 card, one, I think the simpler one, ran Flex, the other could run Microware OS-9 that was 'unix-like" and multitasking/multiuser), and how to get them running. ONce that's occurred, it's about using the card, which would generally mean using one of the two 6809 operating systems, which should already be well handled by whatever is out there.
Other issues impact on the decline of newsgroups, but I've also seen instances of someone setting up a highly specific "yahoo group" for one very specific element of a larger field, and that does take that traffic away from the more general newsgroup. But the loss is greater than the loss of just those specific topic messages, the general newsgroup loses those people often, they don't participate in the larger group. And in one case I'm very much thinking of, a few years later the yahoo group is ocmpletely dead.
Michael > c.s.m6809 is pretty much dead.
The Yahoo groups setup by Willi can hold files whereas c.s.apple2 cannot and is a bit easier to manage than asimov or "the secret email account".I am unsure why Yahoo groups need an invitation. Perhaps to limit spam? I am not sure how long Yahoo (and their groups) will last.