Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site jhunix.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!aplcen!jhunix!ins_akaa From: ins_akaa@jhunix.UUCP (Kenneth Adam Arromdee) Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.flame,net.misc Subject: Re: bizarre argument Message-ID: <1078@jhunix.UUCP> Date: Thu, 31-Oct-85 17:16:12 EST Article-I.D.: jhunix.1078 Posted: Thu Oct 31 17:16:12 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 3-Nov-85 06:42:27 EST Reply-To: ins_akaa@jhunix.ARPA (Kenneth Adam Arromdee) Organization: Johns Hopkins Univ. Computing Ctr. Lines: 23 Xref: watmath net.news.group:4181 net.flame:12597 net.misc:8821 Isn't it strange that the following two claims are being made about the destruction cross-posting? 1) There was a cross posting to net.bizarre about it's destruction, so if you were too lazy to respond, it's your fault. 2) It was justifiable to not cross-post to net.bizarre about its destruction because such postings belong in net.news.group and if you don't bother to read net.news.group, it's your own fault. A slight contradiction here... was there or wasn't there a cross-posting? (As far as I know there wasn't.) Also, the first argument implies that cross-posting IS the proper procedure to follow to inform readers of the group in question, while the second one implies that it is not. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- If you know the alphabet up to 'k', you can teach it up to 'k'. Kenneth Arromdee BITNET: G46I4701 at JHUVM and INS_AKAA at JHUVMS CSNET: ins_akaa@jhunix.CSNET ARPA: ins_akaa%jhunix@hopkins.ARPA UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!aplcen!jhunix!ins_akaa