Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Newsgroups: net.news.group Subject: Re: bizarre argument/net.flame deletion Message-ID: <846@psivax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 7-Nov-85 12:44:41 EST Article-I.D.: psivax.846 Posted: Thu Nov 7 12:44:41 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 11-Nov-85 05:16:26 EST References: <376@ihdev.UUCP> <4494@alice.UUCP> <552@moncol.UUCP> <1097@jhunix.UUCP> Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA Lines: 24 In article <1097@jhunix.UUCP> ins_akaa@jhunix.ARPA (Kenneth Adam Arromdee) writes: > >Furthermore, I am not permitted to read net.news.group, which means that the >ONLY way I could read your posting about net.flame was in net.flame. This >applies also to other postings not relating to net.flame that appeared >in net.flame and net.news.group only. If net.flame is cut off, there will >be no way I can read these postings. > I find this policy to be exceedingly *strange*! To allow reading of pure noise groups like net.flame and *forbid* reading of important administrative groups taht are critical to the proper operation of the net is, to say the least, absurd, or even inconsistant! Would sending mail to the News Admin at John Hopkins help to get a more rational policy? Or is there some other way we could influence the News Admin to seriously reconsider this policy? I do not see that it is proper to cripple your interaction with the net in this manner. -- Sarima (Stanley Friesen) UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa