Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wasatch!cs.utexas.edu!milano!peyote!mosley
From: mosley@peyote.cactus.org (Bob Mosley III)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: SRH (soc.rights.human) is up, but with problems
Message-ID: <91@peyote.cactus.org>
Date: 28 Aug 89 03:19:50 GMT
References: <19297@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu> <1989Aug27.164129.5585@acheron.uucp>
Organization: Capital Area Central Texas Unix Society, Austin, TX
Lines: 20
Summary: TCP/IP for ENIAC - A call for VOTES!

In article <1989Aug27.164129.5585@acheron.uucp>, clarke@acheron.uucp (Ed Clarke/10240000) writes:

[hah! fooled you! :-):-)]

> 
> To the best of my knowledge, only one group ( something about tcp/ip on 
> ENIAC machines ) has been rejected by Gene despite the vote.  Since this
> was an obvious attempt to be a pain in the ass,  he's been forgiven for
> omitting it.

...that is, by everyone except the talk.bizarrites that first proposed the
group. There is still a dull rumble of Spafford flaming about the issue
to this day.

...on a matter of clarification, how do alt. groups fit into the offical
list criteria? It's been my understanding that these were essentially
"optional" groups, and had to be requested by each site outside of the
"Spaf list".

							OM