🚀 go-pugleaf

Andrew Toppan (elmer@wpi.edu) wrote:
: I'll bet you didn't expect to see me here......

   I did :-).

: The misc. won't be accessible argument won't work.
: misc.transport.urban-transit is *better* distributed than rec.railroad
: is!  And the misc group is a lot newer than the rec one--it isn't
: fully propagated yet.  (I've said this in news.groups before.....).

   I haven't read it, but I will trust what you say.

   However, my survey says otherwise, and I do think that actually asking 
people about what they have is much more reliable than claims of the type 
that you may be referencing.

   As I stated, no one said that they didn't have rec.railroad (those who 
have news), but many people said they didn't have misc. groups and some 
said that they would not be able to get misc. groups.

   How do we address that problem?  Shouldn't that be done before a split?

: So misc.transport.rail.* would probalby be better propagated than
: rec.rail. But this isn't news.groups, so I guess I should say something about
: the listserv....

: Since the listowner (him) and the rec.railroad RfD proponent (me) both
: think that bit.listserv.railroad is better for the Railroad List let's
: not further discuss putting Railroad in with rec.railroad.  

    Never a serious proposal :-).

** ------------------------------------------------------------------ **
**                 Geert K. Marien : geert@PANIX.COM                  **
**   ListOwner: AIRLINE, NODEINFO, RAILROAD, STAMPS, The INDIA List   **
**    (All contents are my own opinions - unless otherwise stated)    **
** ------------------------------------------------------------------ **