Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!wuarchive!texbell!uhnix1!splut!jay
From: jay@splut.conmicro.com (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: is it recreational or technical ?
Summary: rec !-necessarily-= nontechnical
Message-ID: <2952@splut.conmicro.com>
Date: 18 Oct 89 20:50:19 GMT
References: <21042@gryphon.COM>
Reply-To: jay@splut.conmicro.com (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard)
Organization: Confederate Microsystems, League City, TX
Lines: 17

In article <21042@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
>In article <2833646442@lewis.crd.ge.com> welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) writes:
>> rec.autos.tech
>  ^^^       ^^^^
>Thats what I love about the current namespace. Self contradictory names.
>Would it be cleaner to have rec.autos and tech.autos ?

This shows the basic flaw with your arguments against rec.aquaria, and
your insistence on putting it in sci:
Recreation and hobbies does not necessarily mean non-technical.
The name above is not self-contradictory.

-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL   | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jay@splut.conmicro.com       (eieio)| adequately be explained by stupidity.
{attctc,bellcore}!texbell!splut!jay +----------------------------------------
   Send richard@gryphon.com your NO vote on sci.aquaria; it belongs in rec.