Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!nosc!helios.ee.lbl.gov!ace.ee.lbl.gov!leres
From: leres@ace.ee.lbl.gov (Craig Leres)
Newsgroups: alt.sources.d
Subject: Re: wp2latex (1 of 4)
Message-ID: <6443@helios.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 10 Aug 90 22:00:41 GMT
References: <1990Aug8.114855.17114@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> <-335ZE6@xds13.ferranti.com>
Sender: usenet@helios.ee.lbl.gov
Reply-To: leres@helios.ee.lbl.gov (ucbvax!leres for uucp weenies)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley
Lines: 20
X-Local-Date: 10 Aug 90 15:00:41 PDT

Peter da Silva writes:
> Is it *really* too much to ask that people include an Archive-name: entry
> in postings to alt.sources? It is such a little thing, and saves countless
> hours of poring through files with names like "30Jul90.17652". Just put, on
> the first line of the message:

Yes, I think it *really* is.

The poor suckers can't remember to post alt.sources discussion to
alt.sources.d, how do you expect them to remember to add your header?
It'd be one thing if news software could be configured to require extra
header(s) on a per newsgroup basis but you're talking about something
that has to be manually added.

Personally, I think you should just give it up (and I'm sure you'll
flame me for saying so). Meanwhile, the rest of us will just kick back
and snicker every time you continue your (hopeless) one man crusade by
gracing the net with another "archive-name" posting...

		Craig