remove comp.unix.xenix.misc? (Informal)

Bill Vermillion bill at bilver.uucp
Sun Dec 16 03:09:31 AEST 1990

In article <1990Dec14.022355.16430 at> dma at (Dave Armbrust) writes:
->In article <27770 at> yarvin-norman at (Norman Yarvin) writes:
->>dma at (Dave Armbrust) writes:

->>>Once the guidelines are exstablished for removal of groups I
->>>will issue a call to remove comp.unix.xenix.misc unless I hear
->>>from at least 25 people that want this group.
->I am not interested in any 'revenge politics'.  I only posted the above
->to see if there are any proponents left for the comp.unix.xenix.misc
->group.  If there is a call to remove this groups it should not be
->made by me.  Some people may think I am pro-SCO and accuse me of a
->communistic plot to remove any group that does not have sco in it's name! :-)
->  why I have not received any mail.  (I will cross post this article.) ]
->If there is anyone out there that would like to keep this group I would
->be interested in hearing from you.  dma at or just respond
->to this postings.
->The reason I said that I think comp.unix.xenix.misc should be removed
->is that there is very little posting here and what there is seems
->to be misdirected.  The charter for this group states:

Dave - if you will look at what happens when the other groups have been
split, you will see why removing comp.unix.xenix.misc is wrong.

The group that should be removed is comp.unix.xenix and leave us with only
comp.unix.xenix.misc and comp.unix.xenix.sco.   That way you have two
separate camps to take care of the non-SCO xenix people, and you won't wind
up with nearly as much crossposting.

This is the way virtually all other group re-originizations have gone.  You
alias the top group to misc for x number of months, then remove the top
group.  See for an example.

Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill
                      : bill at bilver.UUCP

More information about the Comp.unix.xenix.misc mailing list