Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site druxy.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!ihnp4!drutx!druxy!bees From: bees@druxy.UUCP (DavisRB) Newsgroups: net.micro,net.micro.apple Subject: Re: Who needs another newsgroup? Message-ID: <1044@druxy.UUCP> Date: Sun, 18-Mar-84 15:25:56 EST Article-I.D.: druxy.1044 Posted: Sun Mar 18 15:25:56 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 20-Mar-84 00:31:29 EST References: <235@pucc-i> Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver Lines: 24 When groups like net.wobegon and net.suicide exist, it is hard to understand objections to a reasonable sub-group. Even if there are <10 articles a week, the split is useful. There is an extreme division between old Apples and Apple 32s. It is frustrating and time-wasting for those of either persuasion to have to wade through articles of the opposite persuasion. You can't always tell from the title which persuasion the article follows, and many people don't know or don't want to put "(for Macintosh)" in their title. Some of us can only afford to read news on weekends, or for a few minutes during the week. Any time saving division helps. For instance, I would like to read net.unix-wizards more often, but it seems to be 75% BSD related. I have little interest and no expertise with BSD, and would welcome two subgroups here. I assert that if the Apple 32 line were produced by a new company, that a net.micro.whatever group would have been started immediately. I also predict that traffic about the 32s will grow exponentially as the Macintosh orders start coming in. Few people have their Macs yet, because the factory has been gearing up. Is it really that big of a deal to give birth to a new sub-group? Ray Davis druxy!bees