Re: Split comp.databases.informix!

Richard Thomas wrote: > Tim, > > I would dearly love to have the luxury of reading cdi on a newsgroup, but > my employer (who provides my only access to the big wide world of the > internet), does not have newsgroup access, You're not reading c.d.i on company time now are you? :-) > so I have no alternative to > receiving the whole of cdi (including your online arguments with Cheryl - > Jeez, are you two married or something ;-)) via email. No, we're not married...but she gets the award for number of postings. Geez I thought <I> was bad! *-) It would be great if her postings had a little more depth, but who am I to say what's good material. > I would not like > to see cdi split for all sorts of reasons. Little gems of wisdom can > be found in totally off topic postings, and the people causing the > problems that we are trying to solve would ignore the sub-divisions. If > people post to c.d.*, all we are going to get is a copy of their crap > in each of the new c.d.i.* groups. > Good point. I wouldn't expect the trash to diminish, or some of the silly postings even I put out. All I was hoping for was a little organization. Theoretically, you won't miss ANY posts at all even if the group is split into sub-catagories. Isn't amazing that this is a newsgroup about a data base product that is relational, where you use tables, and yet this group seems to have a hard time with a little organization? ( Of course I'm a fine one to talk, you should see my check book! ) This must be a need by most of the viewers where organization just isn't a priority...such is life... :-) > Cheers, > > Richard. -- \\\\|// (6 6) ==============================---o00--(_)--00o---============================ Tim Schaefer tschaefe@encore.com tschaefe@shadow.net Encore Computer Corp http://www.shadow.net/~tschaefe =============================================================================