🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <6895@spool.cs.wisc.edu> zeiden@ai.cs.wisc.edu (Matthew Zeidenberg) writes:
<I like reading this group, but it has too much traffic. It is hard
<to read the stuff of interest between all the messages asking for
<advice on what hard disk and/or computer to buy. Therefore
<I propose that it be split into about 10 groups. Here is a 
<suggested list, off the top of my head.
<
<	comp.sys.mac.disks
<	comp.sys.mac.memory
<	comp.sys.mac.utilities
<	comp.sys.mac.wordp-and-DTP
<	comp.sys.mac.graphics
<	comp.sys.mac.for-sale
<	comp.sys.mac.misc
<	comp.sys.mac.questions
<	comp.sys.mac.DAs-and-INITS 
<	comp.sys.macII
<
<I don't know how to do this, but one method might be to
<take a vote on whether to split the group, and, if that
<passes, vote on how many groups to split it into, and
<then have people vote for n subgroups out of m>n proposed
<subgroups. I don't know enough about how USENET is run
<to know whether this is feasible.
<
To a non programmer, it seems like there is a fair amount of "how to 
program" stuff. That might make a good category, but sometimes the 
people who know how to program also help out end users, so I'd hate to
lose their advice.

Perhaps a hardware category could include for-sale and disks (what to
buy?)

To some extent I agree that there is a lot of traffic (202 articles this
Monday am because I didn't come in to work all weekend). On the other
hand, specialization means loss of advice when problems are not related
to one aspect of the software and hardware. 

Maybe more careful thought about the subject and a good summary would
help to bypass articles quicker. Personally, I at least scan everything
and would prefer a general group. Usually you can tell in a few lines
whether you want to continue.

Shirley Kehr