c.u.wizards vs. c.u.internals

[David Wright]

In article <18530 at rpp386.cactus.org> jfh at rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
#In article <34639 at eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> pjg at acsu.buffalo.edu (Paul Graham) writes:
#>Based upon the mishmash arriving at my site some peope are aliasing
#>comp.unix.wizards to comp.unix.internals ... is anyone doing the opposite?  
#
#How about people who've un-aliased the group after being convinced
#the name change really was a bad idea?

Count me for one.   I didn't bother with the original vote as I thought the
real UNIX wizards on the net could quite well look after themselves, and
when the result came out I followed it like a good news admin should
(though I hadn't removed c.u.wizards).   But it now seems clear we've made
a collective mistake.   Quite apart from the legal arguement (which I don't
buy - but I'm not a lawyer), the sort of things discussed in c.u.wizards
cover far more than just 'internals'.  In fact on my recent reading of the
group there's very little about the internals of UNIX, if that means kernal
stuff, and still under half if you include the file system etc.

The only solution, I think, is another vote.  Who will do a formal CALL?
Pending the result, lets leave both groups in place, with no aliasing.

BTW, I've cross-posted this to c.u.wizards.  If you see it in c.u.internals
its been aliased.

Regards,          "None shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity"
        David Wright             STL, London Road, Harlow, Essex  CM17 9NA, UK
dww at stl.stc.co.uk  <or> ...uunet!mcsun!ukc!stl!dww  <or> PSI%234237100122::DWW
<or> /g=David/s=Wright/org=STC Technology Ltd/prmd=STC plc/admd=Gold 400/co=GB