cctalk/cctech

[Lawrence Wilkinson]

On 21/11/2018 16:19, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 9:34 AM Pontus Pihlgren via cctalk <
> cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:18:25AM -0800, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
>>> On 11/21/18 6:06 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
>>>> I thought cctalk was supposed to be a complete superset of cctech, but
>>>> looking at the cctech archives, I see a lot of posts that didn't make it
>>>> to cctalk. Does one need to do both to see everything?
>>>>
>>>>      Noel
>>>>
>>> Yes, unfortunately.
>>> Most of the "removing PVA" thread never made it to cctlk
>>>
>>> I think it's time for cctech to die.
>>>
>>>
>> I agree!
>>
>>
> Not die so much as one become an alias of the other.  I actually use them
> both, depending on the nature of my question.  Someone should run a set of
> tests.
> b
>
The original complaints were due to me being on holiday, and some 
existing hitch with the list configuration which means some posts need 
to be moderated through to cctalk (though it should have caught up now.)

But yes, the two lists are largely identical, though of course non-cc 
stuff doesn't make it into cctech. Almost anything goes on cctalk as 
most posts go through automatically anyway.

I think if everyone can refrain from posting non-cc stuff (and in this I 
would include: Queries about modern HW or SW without a direct CC 
relevance, long threads about character encoding schemes...) then we 
could go to a single list, but one might have to get used to being 
jumped on if posting something regarded as off-topic, and perhaps 
finding oneself moderated if persisting.

Lawrence

-- 
Lawrence Wilkinson                                 lawrence at ljw.me.uk
Ph +41(0)79 926 1036                             http://www.ljw.me.uk