Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 + RN 4.3; site inset.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!stc!inset!jr From: jr@inset.UUCP (Jim R Oldroyd) Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.unix Subject: Initial Response to Internat Message-ID: <763@inset.UUCP> Date: Sun, 27-Oct-85 00:25:45 EST Article-I.D.: inset.763 Posted: Sun Oct 27 00:25:45 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 29-Oct-85 04:39:47 EST Reply-To: jr@inset.UUCP (Jim R Oldroyd) Organization: The Instruction Set Ltd., London, UK. Lines: 37 Keywords: newgroup, internat Xref: watmath net.news.group:4047 net.unix:6061 Xpath: stc stc-a After posting a call for votes yesterday, I have now received 20 replys. WAIT - don't flame yet; read my comments on these few first: Every one of these responses is a YES vote for a net.??? group and only 1 would find a mod.??? acceptable. None want a sub-group of net.unix. HOWEVER: 25% of the votes make these two points: 1. The name `internat' is likely to be confused with `internEt'. I agree with this. `Intnl' has been suggested as an alternative. Please MAIL me your preference with your vote. 2. There is not yet a demonstrated volume of postings. I have two comments on this: a. There have been many postings in the States which did not make it back to Europe! This is (apparently) due to the fact that some of the long-haul routes take only a sub-set of the newsgroups. A new one must be added explicitly. This policy is under discussion on EUNET. b. There is a discussion in net.unix at the moment. Although I don't like the association with UNIX, it seems the best place at the moment. SO: please carry on mailing me your votes; please help get some serious discussion going; and desist from sending flames about the creation to the net - we have learnt the lesson and are doing it properly now. -- The views presented here are my own and not those of my sheep. -- ++ Jim R Oldroyd ++ jr@inset.co.uk ++ ..!mcvax!ukc!inset!jr