🚀 go-pugleaf

Organization: IntelliGenetics, Inc., Mountain View, Calif. USA

In the referenced article, sob@watson.bcm.tmc.edu (Stan Barber) writes:
> Some eight months ago, I as moderator of comp.sys.masscomp proposed in
> news.groups and comp.sys.masscomp to change the name to comp.sys.concurrent.
> This was to reflect that masscomp no longer exists as such since it merged
> with concurrent.
>
> I received many responses saying to do it and don't bother with a vote since
> it is a name change, not a new group.
>
> At that time, I did send out rmgroup and newgroup to make that happen. For
> some reason, the distribution mechanism failed and some parts of the country
> did not get the change. I received mail from folks asking me if the newsgroup
> was dead, etc. So, I decided to try the rmgroup/newgroup again.

Thanks for the clarification.  The rmgroup message was shown as from
"bcm!usenet", which didn't ring a bell at all, so we tossed it,
figuring it was just some local site that messed up and leaked a
control message.  It might be useful to announce changes like this to
news.announce.newgroups (which many/most site admins read, I think).

I did notice that the mailpath backbone sites do know seem to know
about the new name yet, or at least the ones I checked (ames.arc.nasa.gov
and ucbvax.berkeley.edu).  So people trying to post to c.s.concurrent
are probably out of luck until this gets coordinated.  (I assume there
is a mailing list of sites that act as mailpath backbones.)

--
Michael C. Berch
mcb@presto.ig.com / uunet!presto.ig.com!mcb / ames!bionet!mcb