The definition of On Topic

From: Doc Shipley <>
Date: Sun Jan 30 16:11:13 2005

Computer Collector Newsletter wrote:

> Not sure if I understand the final part of your statement... would you agree,
> or not, that within a few years (or possibly right now) we'd also have to
> include the earliest versions of Windows (and other early GUI shells) that were
> still just DOS underneath?

   Yeah! And what about DesQviewX? Huh, Huh????

   I'm joking. Your question is valid, if this discussion is valid at all.

   Data point 1: I've never seen any opposition to discussion of SGI
O2s, for example, even though they're several years short of the 10-year

   Data point 2: I've never seen any discussion of MS Windows of *any*
version survive more than a day or so. Well, not since Mr. Erlacher

   My point: There are too many exceptions to any on-topic/off-topic
rule, whether it's based on age, architecture, sales base, speed,
whatever. IMHO, even some of the Windows 9x/2k/XP threads have been
very on-topic and useful, dealing with interaction with or support of
classic systems.

   The real working rule seems to me to be "old stuff in which some of
us are interested, but we Don't Do Windows if we can help it", and
except for the What's On-Topic threads, the list seems to self-govern
that pretty consistantly.

   The only genuine purpose of having a specific policy, again IMHO, is
to guard the front door - to inform people looking to join a CC-list
what we're about.

Received on Sun Jan 30 2005 - 16:11:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:37:45 BST