comp.sys.3b1?

[Randy Orrison]

In article <35841 at cup.portal.com> thad at cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes:
| The above, coupled with John's other anecdotes, presents a VERY compelling
| case to initiate inquiry into forming a comp.sys.unix-pc.* hierarchy.  I
| sincerely wish I could devote the time myself, but I've taken on so many
| other activities that I have no additional "free" time.  I would definitely
| vote "YES" if someone sends out a formal request to form the newsgroup.

I also agree that moving into the comp heirarchy is a good idea, though
I do prefer the name comp.sys.3b1.xxx, since we have enough people
confusing us with PCs running unix.  I'm not worried that anyone will
try to exclude discussions of 7300s, any more than we currently exclude
CT MiniFrames and our other cousins.

So, what groups do we want?

    comp.sys.3b1
    comp.sources.3b1

or

    comp.sys.3b1.general
    comp.sys.3b1.uucp
    comp.sys.3b1.bugs
    comp.sys.3b1.sources

The first set will probably be easier to pass, and there really isn't a
lot of traffic on the uucp and bugs groups.

How about it?  Anyone willing to read the guidelines and do this right?

    -randy
-- 
Randy Orrison			Chemical Computer Thinking Battery
uunet!microsoft!cctb!randy			 randy at cctb.wa.com
"Paradise is exactly like where you are right now,
					 only much, much, better."