comp.sys.3b1.*?

[Neal P. Murphy]

thad at cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes:

...
>>The moderator should only ensure that the article posted is of the right sort,
>>he should not be expected to check the code for viruses, track down bugs, or
>>even ensure that the stuff compiles.  So the delays shouldn't be too bad.

>Fine.  If, say, 1 or 2 day turnaround (with possible co-moderators) can be
>assured, I'm sure we can live with that.

>And Bob's comments re: people's interpretation of "UNIX PC" and "PC" do seem
>to reflect the present state-of-affairs.  Sigh.
...
>I don't feel strongly about the name, so let's go with:

>	comp.sys.3b1, and
>	comp.sources.3b1

>I'm sure many of us read OTHER newsgroups, so it's easy to direct someone to
>"our" newsgroup if we see messages elsewhere asking about the systems.

>Let's see if we can get a vote started BEFORE the upcoming holidays.  Don't
>want to see the 3-week period encompassing the period around December 25
>because that would complicate receiving everyone's votes.

This I agree with. The sources group should be moderated for the reasons
specified in one or two other recent postings. The name should not have AT&T
or PC in it because:
 1) MOT and CT marketed similar machines and shouldn't be left out,
 2) It is *not* a PC, and
 3) We have a separate newsgroup now; we should remain separate, yet be part of
    a main hierarchy so that we can achieve wider, more reliable distribution.

If there is documented proof that some systems have trouble with groups that
begin with a digit, I would settle for .u3b1. As I recall though, those
systems only had trouble with a root group starting with a digit (e.g.,
3b1.sources and 3b1.general would likely choke some systems.) Let's vote!

NPN