Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!texbell!splut!jay
From: jay@splut.conmicro.com (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Some observations on this whole mess.
Message-ID: <3031@splut.conmicro.com>
Date: 11 Nov 89 10:54:27 GMT
References: <11171@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <2752@cpoint.UUCP> <6803@ficc.uu.net> <1989Nov4.170406.11407@alembic.acs.com> <17312.255800a4@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <1989Nov8.185626.26339@alembic.acs.com> <3022@splut.conmicro.com> <1989Nov10.041227.6622@alembic.acs.com>
Reply-To: jay@splut.conmicro.com (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard)
Organization: Confederate Microsystems, League City, TX
Lines: 22

In article <1989Nov10.041227.6622@alembic.acs.com> csu@alembic.acs.com (Dave Mack) writes:
>Agreed, it's not a realistic result.

Then why bother bringing it up?

>Then why didn't the YES voters vote NO to sci.aquaria and wait for the
>"correctly" named group to roll around? The answer, IMVHO, is because
>they felt that the name Richard selected was reasonable, that his
>concerns about distribution were valid, and they saw no reason to wait
>at least five weeks to make a handful of structure freaks happy.

Aw, cmon. I doubt seriously that any significant fraction of the 466 YES
voters gave ti that much thought. "Hey, I want an aquarium group! I'll
vote YES!" Conversely, over 300 people most likely did give it that much
thought. "Handful of structure freaks"? More like a handful of people
who want to destroy the Great Renaming.

-- 
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 +----------------------------------------
Shall we try for comp.protocols.tcp-ip.eniac next, Richard? - Brandon Allbery