Article View: comp.os.os2
Article #354Re: Status of OS/2 Binaries group proposal
From: Cliff Frost
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1990 01:10
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1990 01:10
22 lines
1552 bytes
1552 bytes
In article <9001171412.AA16066@edison.CHO.GE.COM> rja <rja@edison.cho.ge.com> writes: >There have been a number of people supporting the creation of >comp.binaries.os2 to handle OS/2 binaries. Many people support >the separation of the binaries from the discussion group. > >Alas, no one has volunteered to be a moderator for the proposed >binaries group. Until someone (preferably with direct Internet >access) is willing to volunteer to be the moderator, no further >progress towards creating a binaries group can be made. > Huh? No one moderates the binaries that are put into comp.os.os2, why do we HAVE to have a moderator for a binaries group? The main idea of creating a group for binaries is to separate out that traffic. I agree a moderator would be very nice, but why is it mandatory? This is kind of like throwing the baby out with the bathwater... If there are some "rules" about comp.binaries, I suggest someone start a comp.os.os2.binaries or comp.os.os2.caveat-emptor.binaries... Cliff Frost
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1990Jan18.011000.6038@agate.berkeley.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!cliffReferences:
<9001171412.AA16066@edison.CHO.GE.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!cliff From: cliff@violet.berkeley.edu (Cliff Frost) Newsgroups: comp.os.os2 Subject: Re: Status of OS/2 Binaries group proposal Message-ID: <1990Jan18.011000.6038@agate.berkeley.edu> Date: 18 Jan 90 01:10:00 GMT References: <9001171412.AA16066@edison.CHO.GE.COM> Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator;;;;ZU44) Organization: University of California, Berkeley Lines: 22