Attempt at choking the dead horse (comp.sys.att.3b1)
Jan Isley
jan at bagend.uucp
Fri Dec 7 17:17:24 AEST 1990
dwn at swbatl.sbc.com (David Neill-OKCy Mktg 405-278-4007) writes:
>I'm still unclear on the advantage of placing the 3b1 group under
>the .att. group. If the group ends up comp.sys.3b1 then there's
>no problem with compatibility with the future re-organization of
>comp.sys.att, right? I really do believe the Convergent and Motorola
>owners will find the group, regardless of it's location, but how do
>we settle this group-name thing before a call for votes?
There are 2 ways to settle it.
1. declare that there is a majority in favor of comp.sys.3b1 and call a
vote for it. There is some evidence that this position is justifiable.
2. do a "multi-way" vote that allows for voting for the name as well as the
group itself.
I have sent a call for votes to Eliot. It is #2, by the way. I think it
is the only fair way to do it.
Jan
--
The good and the bad thing about drugs | home jan at bagend 404-434-1335
drugs is that they wear off. -Elliston | known_universe!gatech!bagend!jan
More information about the Comp.sys.att
mailing list