🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <468k9b$q1p@mack.rt66.com>
Manuel Veloso <veloso@rt66.com> writes:

> In article <4651ao$jc6@lll-winken.llnl.gov> Sam Trenholme,
> set@oryx.llnl.gov writes:
> >
> >*If* the traffic gets heavy there, we should split... later.
> >
> >I mean, I think a separate usenet newsgroup for every single 
> >employee over at Be would be rather excessive.
> 
> I'd agree. Planning for the future is great, but at this stage
> of the game it'd be nice for everyone to put all the posts
> about the BeBox in one group, if just for cross-pollination
> reasons. If the c.s.be newsgroup gets a bit too crowded, we
> can split it later.
> 
> Basically, why make a decision now when it can be made later,
> when more info is available? It's not like this is mission-
> critical.

yeah, so when is this group going to be made?  Has anyone put in a CFV
yet?

c.s.powerpc has well over 50% BeBox posts...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
"More and faster...  Here we come...                    Michael Plump
 White and trashy and incredibly dumb!"           mplump@teleport.com
      --KMFDM: "More & Faster"      <http://www.teleport.com/~mplump>
---------------------------------------------------------------------