Attempt at choking the dead horse (comp.sys.att.3b1)

[Jan Isley]

dwn at swbatl.sbc.com (David Neill-OKCy Mktg 405-278-4007) writes:

>I'm still unclear on the advantage of placing the 3b1 group under
>the .att. group.  If the group ends up comp.sys.3b1 then there's
>no problem with compatibility with the future re-organization of
>comp.sys.att, right?  I really do believe the Convergent and Motorola
>owners will find the group, regardless of it's location, but how do
>we settle this group-name thing before a call for votes?

There are 2 ways to settle it.

1. declare that there is a majority in favor of comp.sys.3b1 and call a
   vote for it.  There is some evidence that this position is justifiable.

2. do a "multi-way" vote that allows for voting for the name as well as the
   group itself.

I have sent a call for votes to Eliot.  It is #2, by the way.  I think it
is the only fair way to do it.

Jan
-- 
The good and the bad thing about drugs | home jan at bagend 404-434-1335
drugs is that they wear off. -Elliston | known_universe!gatech!bagend!jan