Maybe it's time to start over and form a true HP3000 user group that
international maybe call it HP-WUG  (world user group).  just a thought.

Gavin Scott wrote:

> John wrote,
> > "The measure carried 469 to 169."
> >
> > Apparently HP3000-L is not very representative of Interex membership since
> > discussion here led me to believe this would be overwhelmingly turned down.
> > I am stunned into silence.
>
> I think the 1000+ people directly subscribed to HP3000-L, plus the untold
> number who read comp.sys.hp.mpe or one of the summary services, represent
> almost perfectly the Interex membership who are interested in the HP3000.
>
> The problem is that HP3000 members are a small *minority* of the Interex
> membership these days, so it's the ballots that went out to all the non-
> HP3000 users that turned the tide, since none of them knew anything about
> the issues involved.
>
> The sad truth is that Interex has expanded into other areas, with the
> the effect of diluting the power of the HP3000 membership to the point
> that the future course of Interex is not only no longer controlled by
> HP3000 users but may not be able to be significantly affected by them.
>
> G.