HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 06:54:24 GMT

TERRY D. BARKLEY <32BSFJC@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>:
>> So, a writer who uses FTL ... travel should be considered fantasy? 
>     Until proven otherwise (beyond doubt), FTL travel and psi abilites are
>still within the realm of possibility.  Just because the technology is
>currently beyond our capabilities...

Oh boy!  A legitimate excuse to discuss this!  (You can't bring this
topic up for the nth time in the regular venues without getting a lot
of pointed invitations to move it elsewhere.)

FTL (psi is a more borderline case) is a convention of the genre.
That is, it is not presented as an unrealized possibility, however
improbable.  Rather, there is a general agreement to allow its use
so that a certain class of story can be told -- even though neither
the author nor the reader believes that it is a 'legitimate' device.
(Remember, FTL does not simply imply a higher technology; it requires
that our current understanding of physics be proved invalid.  If you
assume that, you're playing a completely different game.)

Yes, it is still within the realm of possibility that our world view
will be invalidated to the point where FTL is shown to be possible.
It is also within the realm of possibility that our world view will
be invalidated to the point where ghosties and ghoulies are shown to
exist.  That doesn't make the latter science fiction.

>Fantasy, on the other hand, always has a mystical air about it, and never 
>tries to look to the future...

Terry, this is simply untrue, and I can toss many counter-examples
your way.  Of course, you could respond to any of them by saying
"but that's not fantasy" -- even though many or most people *consider* 
them fantasy.  But that's precisely what a fantasy group has never
been able to get off the ground:  There are too many cases that evade
such facile generalizations.  We've already seen one answer to that
in this discussion:  Leave all the borderline cases under sf, and
let r.a.fantasy have the clear-cut ones.  Begs the question, doesn't it?

There are, as I said, countless counterexamples.  The relatively
recent popularity of fantasy has caused it, like sf before it, to
acquire subgenres that many of its devotees would rather not claim.
How about...

"Conjure Wife", by Fritz Leiber; "At Amberleaf Fair", by Phyllis
Anne Karr; "The Cage", by Stirling and Meier; "The Goblin
Reservation", by Clifford Simak; "Bone Dance", by Emma Bull --
to cover five different subgenres.

-----
Dani Zweig
dani@netcom.com

   'T is with our judgements as our watches, none
   Go alike, yet each believes his own
		--Alexander Pope
Xref: sparky news.groups:22754 news.admin.policy:566
From: steve@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Schallehn)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.engr.power
Date: 16 Nov 1992 23:26:54 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
Reply-To: steve@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Schallehn)
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Keywords: power engineering, new group, request for discussion

rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller) writes:

>2) Why do we need a subgroup of electrical engineering when there is not 
>even a group for electrical engineering yet?

I would agree that a sci.engr.electrical needs to be considered before
any electrical engineering specialization newsgroup is created.  I
don't support sci.engr.power, but I would support sci.engr.electrical.

-Steve Schallehn
From: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders)
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.flame
Distribution: world
Organization:  One of these days for sure
X-News: HERMES MMAIL 1.04 Rev. Sep  5 1992
Subject: Re: RENAME: Those against name change PLEASE READ!
	<1992Nov15.122948.11477@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> <2B067850.87B4@tct.com>
	<1992Nov16.040047.16213@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 21:04:38 -0800

In <1992Nov16.040047.16213@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

>chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>According to dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov:
>>>chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>>>Directing followups only to r.m.m.s is a puerile trick.
>>>I wanted to show that I was fair.
>>As opposed to excellent or good, perhaps?

>Ah HA! So you ADMIT that a "fair" vote is not necessarily "good"!

>>>>Dave, you do your argument irreparable harm by continuing to bring up
>>>>straw men like "keeping up with news.groups."
>>>Why?
>>Because you like to champion positions not based in fact; the more you
>>do so, the more people will tend not to take your positions seriously.

>Facts can be massaged to hide lots of bullshit. 

	That's Chip's point, and you're doing a darn good job of it.


-- 
                    John Henders              " Read the guideline, Luke"
           Just another elitist Usenet user        Obi Wan Spaf
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Getting information
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:49:46 GMT

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>According to gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen):
>>My point is that if a LOT of other people tell you "you should have asked  
>>someonse else", most people will stop being inquisitive after awhile.
>No one who I'd respect would do so.

$ ls /usr/spool/news/news/groups/* | wc -l
1000
$ egrep <disrespect> /usr/spool/news/news/groups/* | wc -l
800
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Two men came before Nasrudin. The first man said, "This man bit my ear -- I 
demand compensation."  The other said, "He bit it himself."  Nasrudin withdrew 
to his chambers, and spent an hour trying to bite his own ear.  He succeeded
only in falling over and bruising his forehead.  Returning, Nasrudin pronounced, 
"Examine the man whose ear was bitten. If his forehead is bruised, the case is
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Date: 17 Nov 92 19:59:16 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <1992Nov13.225451.9730@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com> evan@hpl.hp.com (Evan Kirshenbaum) writes:
>In article <578@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>>One issue remains (that I can see) before we try to modify the
>>guidelines: is there a practical, standardized form that the Subject:
>>line should take e.g. 
>>	"Subject: !!! Newsgroup xxx.yyy might be renamed to xxx.zzz!!!"
>
>Your proposal as a couple of flaws.  First, it doesn't identify itself
>as either an RFD or a CFV, and I think that it is important to keep a

It was "example gratia" and intended to promote further suggestions :)

>Second, and more important, the subject is heavily biased against the
>proposal.  It should not be worded as any kind of "warning" or "call
>to arms" (although individual's articles may be), but should be an (as
>neutral as possible) announcement of a proposed change.

Neutral?  You mean like "RFD:....".  If it's neutral it'll be passed
over and then Dave will come back after the vote and complain that
it wasn't clearly announced....   :)

>Official Discussion:  rename xxx.yyy to xxx.zzz
>Official Vote:  rename xxx.yyy to xxx.zzz
>(or "create xxx.yyy" or "delete xxx.yyy")

Actually I like these.  Short enough that RFD or CVF isn't that
much of a savings, and explicit enough to satisfy the malcontents.

However, having said this, I must say that I have been convinced
(for the moment :) that the responsibility for drumming up interested
support should be left to those interested, once the notice has
been posted.  Once.  I wouldn't object too strenuously if the notice
to the group(s) involved was required to have a subject line
of the form you have proposed instead of the current CFV/RFD form, 
but the requirements should be kept to a minimum.  Repeated announcements 
should NOT be the job of the person sponsering the RFD/CFV, but of the 
people who want to gather support (for OR against).

		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Fosters!  It's Australian for beer, mate!"

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: D. Jay Newman <dn5@apix.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.fantasy
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A72EA7618E013BCA@magic.psu.edu>
X-Xxdate: Tue, 17 Nov 92 13:42:57 GMT
Organization: Penn State
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 18:42:10 GMT

Perhaps I am missing something in the proposed newsgroup, but
the rec.arts.sf.* heirarchy explicitly includes FANTASY.  Why
create a new group merely to duplicate something which already
exists?

()()()()()()()()()()()()() CBEL--Teaching & Learning Technologies ()()()
D. Jay Newman     !  Cautious, careful people always casting about to
dn5@psuvm.psu.edu !  preserve their reputation and social standing never
dn5@apix.psu.edu  !  can bring about a reform.  -- Susan B. Anthony
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.culture.indian
From: srinia@gupta.portal.com (Srini)
Subject: Any one going to india on BA on Nov 30/Dec 1st
Organization: Gupta Technologies Inc
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 20:44:03 GMT

Hi,
     My mother is going from San Fransico -London-Bombay, starting on
Nov 30th from San Fransisco. She does not speak English and
understands it a little. She speaks Kannada and Tamil and broken
Hindi. It would be of great help, if you or any body you know is
travelling on this route (either from SF or from London) and can help
her through the journey. Please send me email at sacharya@Gupta.com or
call me at 415-617-4769.

thank you

--srini
From: nsw@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Neil Weinstock)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: A question, a comment
Date: 19 Nov 92 15:19:38 GMT
Organization: The Flying Squid Patrol

In article <1807@frackit.UUCP> dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe) writes:
[ ... ]
>I think we'd ALL like to see that piece of mail. If it truly exists it
>would deflate Daves last argument. Of course he'll probably argue that
>the subject line of THAT message wasn't clear enough either. 

OK, here it is again.  Below is David Roth's reply to my posting; the
original seems to be lost, as it was only posted to rec.music.synth.

                                - Neil

--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--
Neil Weinstock @ AT&T Bell Labs         //     What was sliced bread
att!edsel!nsw or nsw@garage.att.com   \X/    the greatest thing since?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: david@roth-music.com (David A. Roth)
>Newsgroups: rec.music.synth,news.groups
>Subject: Re: rec.music.synth renaming discussion in news.groups
>Date: 6 Sep 92 23:00:27 GMT
>
>
>In article <1992Sep4.212946.8390@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> (rec.music.synth), nsw@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Neil Weinstock) writes:
>> 
>> There is currently a discussion underway in news.groups to reorganize the
>> rec.music.makers hierarchy.  Among the newsgroups under discussion is
>> rec.music.synth.  The name "synth" is being questioned ("electronic" has
>> been suggested as an alternative), as is the possibility of splitting into
>> "synth" and "keyboard" groups (they seem to have been talked out of renaming
>> "synth" to "keyboard" for now.)
>> 
>> Anyway, I suggest that those who have an interest in this should go check
>> it out.
>> 
>>                                 - Neil
>No more discussion is needed on it.  Leave rec.music.synth the way
>it is and tell the net nerds to mind their own business.
From: hill@norman.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Hill)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Date: 17 Nov 92 14:09:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bxv60G.B4q.2
Reply-To: hill@norman.vi.ri.cmu.edu
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

Tom Holub writes
> I don't have a copy of the Usenet group creation guidelines with me,
> but they are quite explicit on this point; discussion belongs in
> news.groups, not in the affected newsgroup.  A RFD should be posted
> to all interested groups with followups set to news.groups.  This
> is to allow people who aren't interested in the discussion to ignore
> it, and to force people to work harder to get a successful CFV; the
> newsgroup creation process is intended to make it as difficult as
> possible to create new groups.
> 
> In short, Alan's procedures are by the book, except perhaps for 
> his self-nomination for moderator.  The idea still rots, however.
>  -Tom

Well...i'm not too concerned with policy.  Do you really think this  
discussion is better suited to be here?  Are the rules that important?   
Are exceptions not made?  I have a copy of the quidelines.  I'm not for  
offending the gods at uunet, but it is a pretty bad idea to address issues  
about the future of rec.games.netrek ANYWHERE other than rec.games.netrek.

Rob
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.lang.dylan [create this group]
From: Bruce.Hoult@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 02:52:15 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

In article <amos.722395551@sol> amos@sol.acs.unt.edu (Amos A. Gouaux) writes: 
> i too would like to see such a group.  the preview in dr. dobbs was
> interesting.  i would like to learn more about dylan.

I agree.  The current (very busy) mailing list should be
made into a newsgroup.
-- 
Bruce.Hoult@bbs.actrix.gen.nz   Twisted pair: +64 4 477 2116
BIX: brucehoult                 Last Resort:  PO Box 4145 Wellington, NZ
"Cray's producing a 500 MIPS personal computer with 256MB RAM and 8 GB
hard disk that fits in your pocket!"   "Great!  Is it PC compatible?"
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Dave Hayes may be right (was Re: To keep the r.m.s rename...)
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 01:40:03 GMT

hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>Aren't you being just as (if not more so) judgemental and presumptive
>with these snide judgements given in response to perfectly valid answers
>given in good faith?

Yes. Does that make us both wrong?  Or just me?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Possession of a system of knowledge, or any part of it, or an interest in it
or in discovering one, should not be assumed to confer any license or capacity
to operate it. Individual criticisms of a system, incapacity to operate it,
or dissatisfaction with it should not be confused with any shortcoming of the
system itself.
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Would you ALL like a demonstration? (was Re: Dave Hayes may be right)
Date: 17 Nov 92 23:35:45 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <1992Nov16.041519.16573@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
>ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:
>> Dave> How would you like me to post one article per day to the top 100
>> Dave> groups in each newsgroup, inviting everyone over to news.groups
>> Dave> with a subject line like "DANGER! YOUR group may go away."?
>>Well, Dave, is that a threat?  Is this how you expect to convince us of
>>your rationality?
>
>It's not a threat. Such a posting would not do anyone any harm. It would
>create a lot of traffic. Merely considering the idea is not tantamount to
>execution of it. 

Actually, Dave.  It would.  Your 2nd and 3rd sentances contradict each
other.  "It would create a lot of traffic." -- read cost many sites a
lot of money -- read harm.

Secondarily, crying wolf like that might get a *lot* of mail and
complaints sent to your sysadmin from ticked off readers of those
top 100 newsgroups.  You may not consider this to be harmful, but many
people don't particularly getting their mailboxes bombed.

		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Badges?  I don' got to show you no stinkin' badges!"

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: huggins@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Jim Huggins)
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:12:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.211819.3872@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
|This raises an interesting point. The guidelines don't seem to state what  
|groups should be cross-posted to begin with. A lot is currently left to  
|the discretion of the person creating an RFD/CFV. Perhaps this should be  
|more clearly spelled out, particularly in the case of a reorg?

I'm not sure how this could be reasonably spelled out.  The CFV that
I ran a year ago for the rec.arts.startrek re-organization was
crossposted to rec.arts.sf.misc, not because anything in the
rec.arts.sf hierarchy was affected but because there was a proposal
(which didn't make it into the CFV) which would have affected
rec.arts.sf.*.  We kept the crosspost to make sure everyone there
knew what the situation was.  (Of course, there was a mini-flame
war going on at the time, but what else is new in rec.*).

But to get back to the point -- I don't know how you could reasonably
put together a coherent explanation of which groups ought to be
included in the cross-posted RFD/CFV.  The main issue in this
discussion (i.e. rec.music.synth) doesn't center around whether
or not the RFDs/CFVs were posted to rec.music.synth -- the records
show that they did indeed appear there.

Of course, whether or not such postings were clear or were read
is the subject of other ongoing "discussions".
-- 
Jim Huggins, Univ. of Michigan                          huggins@eecs.umich.edu
"You cannot pray to a personal computer no matter how user-friendly it is."
                                                          -- W. Bingham Hunter
From: ake@dayton.saic.com (Earle Ake)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: CFD: rec.collecting split?
Date: 23 Nov 1992 16:42:14 -0500
Organization: Science Applications Intl Corp - Dayton, Ohio
NNTP-Posting-Host: dayton.saic.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]

[ Article crossposted from rec.collecting ]
[ Author was Earle Ake ]
[ Posted on 23 Nov 1992 15:32:31 -0500 ]

	What has become of the discussion of the rec.collecting split recently?
Will there be a vote for rec.collecting.cards?


-Earle
-- 
Earle Ake  Internet: <ake@dayton.saic.com>  NSI-DECnet (SPAN): 28276::ake
-- 
Earle Ake  Internet: <ake@dayton.saic.com>  NSI-DECnet (SPAN): 28276::ake
Xref: sparky news.groups:22775 news.admin.policy:576
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: UDRP Clarification
Date: 23 Nov 92 23:01:32 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: negligable

In article <1eji36INNhmv@talon.UCS.ORST.EDU> stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>Now answer the point: if CFV (including the definition in the article
>where it is used) is too cryptic, why is an undefined UDRP acceptable?

Because they have threaded newsreaders and can look back at the parent
of the UDRP article and get a reference to "Usenet Documentation Revision
Project: Phase Zero" from that.  If you are one of the unlucky people
who don't have a threaded newsreader, tough!

(of course the same logic could apply to those unlucky r.m.s people
who never read the docs to find out what CFV meant.... :)



		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Fosters!  It's Australian for beer, mate!"

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley)
Subject: Re: Is Dave Hayes wasting your tax dollars?
Summary: readers choice, pick one:  :-)   :-(
Keywords: waste in government
Organization: This space for rent.
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 17:31:32 GMT

majafri@cco.caltech.edu (Mansoor  A. Jafri) writes:
>jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) writes:

>Jet Propulsion Laboratory belongs to Caltech and not Unlce Sam.
>It is a private organization. Substantial amount of funding comes
>from private/industrial groups.

If you think that US taxpayers do not ultimately foot the lion's
share of the bill for places like JPL, you have a fundamental lack
of understanding about the aerospace industry.

>btw, furthermore, no tax dollar was wasted in sending this 
>message either ;-)

Your lack of understanding extends to news transport as well.
Your article went through 1 gov and 3 edu sites to get to me.

>One a little serious side, Jan Isley has certainly disappointed
>by trying to inflict a low blow on someone. Sure, can't find 
>anything else or can't defend one's position so why not get nasty?
>Disgusting, in my opinion. 

Pot, kettle, black.
I have seen enough of your considered opinions regarding certain
other votes to be amused at your accusations of low blows.  NOT.
Exactly what was nasty about my post, suggesting that Dave had
too much free time at work?  We should all be so lucky.

And for the record, it is Dave Hayes who refuses to defend his
position, not me.

You should pay more attention before you go getting disgusted.
You did not quote this part of my post, maybe you did not see
it, so here it is again:

>>Stick this :-) anywhere you feel the need.

Yea, Jafri, stick it anywhere you feel the need.  :-) that is.
-- 
If you run a news system you can be  ||  Jan Isley
a petty tyrant.  - Edward Vielmetti  ||  jan@bagend.uucp (404)434-1335
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Date: 19 Nov 92 17:30:34 GMT
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft

In article <id.UL2V.2G6@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)  
writes:
> In article <Bxv6qn.7p9@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil> dobson@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil  
(LCDR Michael Dobson) writes:
> > Now none of the above are reasons to invalidate properly conducted votes,  
but
> > we as a group need to be aware of the increasing number of sites in the  
above
> > situation and do our best to help them out.
> 
> Help, yes. I'll support people like that on a case by case basis. That's it.

Clearly this won't work. How could you possibly help on a case by case basis in  
a preventative fashion?
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
From: hill@norman.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Hill)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Date: 17 Nov 92 00:12:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bxu398.8oA.2
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

Alan D. Cabrera writes
> Where do I say that my idea is mainstream?  As I told you via personal
> email I posted the RFD, request for DISCUSSION, because I wanted to
> discuss the idea.  I tried to discuss it on r.g.n and all I got was
> some flippant answers and a recomendation that if I was serious to post
> an RFD; so I did, after several positive email responses for the
> split.  I don't understand why everyone is taking this so personally.

You didn't say that it was mainstream.  The fact that you took it this far  
(i.e. a RFD) led me to believe that you thought you were correct.  If you  
didn't, why bother with it?  Yes, I read your email, and I think the  
discussion would've been better suited on rec.games.netrek NOT  
news.groups.  How many people have responded to this?  Less than 10, i'd  
say.  How many do you think would participate in this on rec.games.netrek?   
I'd say MANY more.  Where do you think you get better information?

I don't take this personally.  I never have.  I thought that the  
discussion would be better if it was on r.g.n. and I still do.  Nothing  
short of a post from the uunet gods about why the discussion is here would  
convince me otherwise..

> Actually, this is taking on quite comical proportions...  

In what way?  I'm only amused that it has been allowed to continue.

> Alan Cabrera				internet:  adc@tardis.cl.msu.edu

Rob