Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!teknowledge-vaxc!sri-unix!hplabs!hpda!hpcupt1!hpirs!jrg
From: jrg@hpirs.HP.COM (Jeff Glasson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: comp.binaries.cbm and comp.sources.cbm (and maybe alt.whatever)
Message-ID: <4620006@hpirs.HP.COM>
Date: 11 Jul 88 17:12:40 GMT
References: <7377@j.cc.purdue.edu>
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Lines: 28

Here are my thoughts on the alternatives:

>     1) We can create the groups in the alternate hierarchy.
> 
That's always a solution, however, there has even been yelling in the alt.*
groups about randomly created newsgroups.  And there is the problem of
limited distribution.

>     2) We can wait and vote again later.
> 
Judging by the vote, it may indeed make a difference.  But what about now?
> 
>     4) Use comp.sys.cbm.
> 
> 	   Needless to say, the net-gods would be furious if we started posting
>        huge binaries to comp.sys.cbm.
*** MILD FLAME ON ***
I say let's use comp.sys.cbm.  If enough people yell and scream about
putting binaries here, they'll give us the binaries group we asked for.
At least it will show that there really is a need for a CBM binaries group.
Besides, comp.sys.cbm isn't archived at most sites while I believe that the
com.binaries.* groups are more widely archived.
*** MILD FLAME OFF ***

Jeff Glasson
Hewlett-Packard Information Software Division
UUCP: {ucbvax,hplabs}!hpda!jrg
Internet: jrg%hpirs@hplabs.HP.COM