Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!tale
From: tale@cs.rpi.edu (Dave Lawrence)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Comp.groupware wins sci.groupware vote
Message-ID: <}}|9R$@rpi.edu>
Date: 7 Dec 89 21:18:45 GMT
References: <8912062133.AA19569@freja.diku.dk> <2197@coconut.bbn.com>
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Lines: 12

In article <2197@coconut.bbn.com> rsalz@bbn.com (Rich Salz) writes:
> Two groups on one vote?  No way.

Quite.  I voted no, in part because of the stupid *.groupware.f rider.
I will addgroup comp.groupware when the message shows up, but not the
.f group.  If it were to exist at all, it would be .d.  As Chip points
out in a seperate article, it simply will not work well to have the
follow-up group for the unmoderated base group.

Dave
-- 
   (setq mail '("tale@cs.rpi.edu" "tale@ai.mit.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))