🚀 go-pugleaf

jdb@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook) writes:

> What's the difference between the following?
> 
> comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer

   This is for questions regarding IBM PC's and clones. Not all IBM-PC's
   run MS-DOS. 

> comp.os.msdos.programmer

   This is for MS-DOS programmers. There is more to MS-DOS than C. And
   MS-DOS can run on other than IBM PC's.

> alt.msdos.programmer

   This is an alt group and nobody cares.  :-)
 
> Also, who decides how these groups are organized?  

   The net as a whole, through a discussion/voting process. There is a
considerable amount of discussion from many people that goes into
setting up groups. Except for the alt groups. 

> There seems to be a lot
> of mismanagement in the design/maintenance of the boards.  

   Thank you for enlightening us. By the way, they are not "boards",
they are newsgroups. Do you realize just how many people you are
accusing of mismanagement? I recommend you NOT say things like this in
the news.* groups. On second thought, please go to news.groups and say
this. Things have been pretty quiet lately, and a good flame war there
would be refreshing. Better yet, use terms like "D00D", and sign your
message with the name BIFF. Run your message through UUENCODE a dozen 
times or so, and everyone will love you.

> For example,
> wouldn't it be more intelligent to have:
> 
> comp.lang.c.k&r
> comp.lang.c.ansi
> comp.lang.c.misc
> comp.lang.c.borland
> comp.lang.c.microsoft

   Now, tell us all which group we post to when there is a question
about TurboC's adherence to the ANSI standard. Or comparisons between
TurboC and MSC. If you say "two newsgroups", you shoot yourself in the
foot. Now tell us that there is enough traffic in each catagory to
warrant having 5 newsgroups. Where does the UNIX C programmer go to ask
questions, and why should he be segregated from the MS-DOS programmer?
Before you answer that, keep in mind that UNIX forms a large percentage
of this net, perhaps larger than the MS-DOS contingent.

   You should reflect on your usage of the term "intelligent". Consider
it carefully, and then tell us why you think we are less intelligent
than you. 

> etc. instead of misc unrelated postings on comp.os.unix.programmer, etc.
> etc. etc.

   MS-DOS questions should not be posted to c.o.u.p. However, it is
quite appropriate to ask C related questions in c.o.u.p, as some of the
problems are directly related to the C LIBRARIES, which can be different
on MS-DOS and UNIX systems. 

> Just wondering.  I'm new to all this, so please don't flame me too badly.

   Perhaps you should ask your site admin how USEnet works, instead of
deciding that the structure is not intelligent and we are all
mismanaging the "boards". Better yet, tell HIM you think HE is
mismanaging USEnet (yes, he is part of the problem). Find out how
much of an anarchy USEnet is, and how much compromise there is just to
continue existance, and THEN come tell us how badly we are managing
things.

   If you want to see how the group creation process works, subscribe to
news.groups. If you want to know how it is supposed to work, get the
intro to USEnet documents.

   Jeez, I wish site admins would force their charges to read the intro
information about USEnet before letting them post. At least this one
didn't refer to the USEnet as "buggered boards".