Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830713); site flame.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!qtlon!flame!kay
From: kay@flame.UUCP (Kay Dekker)
Newsgroups: net.games.rogue
Subject: "rogue" ... is it really rogue?
Message-ID: <315@flame.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 10-Jan-85 08:59:07 EST
Article-I.D.: flame.315
Posted: Thu Jan 10 08:59:07 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 14-Jan-85 02:59:24 EST
Organization: VLSI Group, Warwick University, UK
Lines: 31

[You faint from lack of bytes ...]

I must confess, I'm puzzled.  I've just been reading this:

>From: usenet@gatech.UUCP
>Newsgroups: net.announce.newusers
>Subject: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
  .....
>10.  net.games: Where can I get the source for empire or
>     rogue?
>
>     You can't.  The authors of these games, as is their right, have
>     chosen not to make the sources available.

Strange, for one constantly sees news of the form "Wanted: source for rogue".
I've even posted such myself.  I am reliably informed that such postings
often obtain satisfactory results.  Yet the article in net.announce.newusers
SPECIFICALLY states that the sources are not available. Can the excellent
Mr. Spafford be guilty of perpetrating a terminological inexactitude?

The question arises: If I have a "rogue" source on a machine, is it rogue?
Is it legitimate?  What is "real" rogue ("real", I suppose, meaning "by the
author(s) of rogue") ?

Could those-in-the-know settle this?  Possibly a family tree of rogue
programs might help.  Certainly the confusion should be cleared up, if only
for the sake of the innocent peruser of net.announce.newusers. :-)

							Kay.-- 
"I'm afraid we haven't got round to providing a bug for that fix yet ..."
			... mcvax!ukc!flame!kay