Re: Proposed group addition

[Roy Miller <millers@inetnebr.com>]

agentwd40 wrote:

> The mac people might want to spin-off some products.
> I don't belive there is enough traffic to warrant an additional
> pre-macintosh group.
>
> If I were to rename apple2,
> My vote goes to
> comp.sys.apple.the-woz-era

If you open up an early Mac, and if my memory is accurate, that includes the
Plus, you will find the signatures of the Mac team on the inside back cover of
the machine. There you will find "Woz".

Roy

>
> or
> comp.sys.apple.pre-macintosh
>
> and I would rename the mac groups to
> comp.sys.apple.post-apple2
>
> Kevin
>
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:34:40 -0500, Brian Hyer <bmhyer@ameritech.net>
> wrote:
>
> >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