Xref: utzoo comp.lang.forth:992 news.admin:6278
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!apple!ames!pacbell!noe!marc
From: marc@noe.UUCP (Marc de Groot)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth,news.admin
Subject: Netiquette (was Re: Real programmers)
Summary: What the hell are you doing?
Message-ID: <652@noe.UUCP>
Date: 17 Jul 89 20:46:25 GMT
References: <33180@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: root@noe.UUCP
Reply-To: marc@noe.UUCP (Marc de Groot)
Organization: Noe Systems, San Francisco
Lines: 38

Erik Fair recently posted the article below to comp.lang.forth.  I would
be very interested to know just what motivated him to modify the 
Reply-To: and Followup-To: fields as he did.  I once held Erik's opinions
about netiquette in high esteem.  Does this message indicate that my
judgement of him was incorrect?

Article 427 of comp.lang.forth:
Path: noe!pacbell!ames!apple!fair
From: fair@Apple.COM (Erik E. Fair)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Real programmers
Message-ID: <33180@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 15 Jul 89 19:29:25 GMT
References: <10202@dasys1.UUCP>
Reply-To: nobody@noao.edu
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: USENET Protocol Police, Western Gateway Division
Lines: 11
Xref: noe comp.lang.forth:427

In the referenced article, aj-mberg@dasys1.UUCP (Micha Berger) writes:
>Real programmers use FORTH, and know that cc's main significance is its use in
>TV guide to tell deaf people their bosex will put text on the bottom of the
>screen.

Forth is Lisp, badly reimplemented on inadequate hardware by an
astronomer who didn't know what he was doing.

	nyah!

	Erik


-- 
Marc de Groot (KG6KF)                   These ARE my employer's opinions!
Noe Systems, San Francisco
UUCP: uunet!hoptoad!noe!marc
Internet: marc@kg6kf.AMPR.ORG