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