Re: Proposed group addition

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Aaron Heiss writes ...
> 
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Brian Hyer wrote:
> 
 ....

> No offence meant: I just don't think that a catch-all group would be worth
> the effort, and I suspect that the Newton people might get insulted if we
> included them without asking on comp.sys.newton.misc or someplace like
> that as well.  Really, I think that the solution is to create a
> comp.sys.mac.legacy group, and let the Lisa questions go there and the
> Apple /// stuff go here.  If we get bowled over with traffic, we can spawn
> a new group for the A3 stuff, but I doubt that that would happen (nice
> though it would be!).
> 
> As for renaming an existing group, I disapprove.  I like my csa2!
> 
> I hope that others feel as I do.  A comp.sys.mac.legacy group would be a
> good thing indeed.
> 
 ....

     Perhaps. There would be no problem getting links from our FAQs to such a
group (or any group working with oldie Macs).  However, I wonder if it is
proper for Csa2 people to initiate a vote to add a group to the comp.sys.mac
hierarchy. Seems like that should be discussed some place like
comp.sys.mac.system.


> I like my csa2!

     So do I. One way to promote Csa2 is to have active groups.

     The comp.sys.apple2.comm group is nearly dead. Just from the point of
view of service to users, it should probably be scrapped because any Apple II
communications question posted there will be unnoticed by most of those who
might supply an answer.

     Renaming the group to comp.sys.apple2.othersys would provide a place for
Apple III, oldie Mac, Lisa, and assorted other non-Apple2 old Apple stuff
owners to interact and get help. As part of Csa2, the group would be more
likely to attract input from persons who actually own the older machines and
know something about them.

     It would cost Csa2 nothing to have the group renamed. In fact, it would
be a plus. And getting a comp.sys.*.* group renamed should be easier than
trying to create a new group.



Rubywand