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