Xref: utzoo comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:518 news.groups:4823 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!gatech!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!bbn!humming!simcha From: simcha@humming.UUCP (Simcha Lerner) Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d,news.groups Subject: Re: bin.net Message-ID: <230@humming.UUCP> Date: 5 Jul 88 23:28:40 GMT References: <6062@megaron.arizona.edu> <11440@steinmetz.ge.com> Reply-To: simcha@humming.UUCP (Simcha Lerner) Followup-To: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d,news.groups Organization: Kurzweil A.I. Waltham, Mass. Lines: 31 Regarding creating a new bin distribution: In article <11440@steinmetz.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: > > I hate to see the net fragmented so... I guess that's one way of >killing it >-- > bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) > {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen I agree! If the backbone sites don't want to carry binaries, they ALREADY have the ability to kill them off individually. Let's not start up a whole bunch of little subnets - either a news group is acceptable to those who pay the bills (and acceptability criteria may include both content and volume restrictions) or it isn't. If the backbone sites serve notice that binaries are to be shut down, then (and only then) would it make sense to look into forming an alternate net. And if we do get shut down, let's hook in under the alts distribution, and NOT start YAASD (yet another alts distribution system)! Simcha Lerner ...(harvard | talcott)!humming!simcha as always, my opinions are my own...(does my boss really check to see if I post a disclaimer?)