Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ucbvax!MITCH.ENG.SUN.COM!wmb
From: wmb@MITCH.ENG.SUN.COM (Mitch Bradley)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Off Basis
Message-ID: <9008291905.AA11232@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 29 Aug 90 18:07:35 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: Mitch Bradley <wmb%MITCH.ENG.SUN.COM@SCFVM.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 29

>    That's great, I compliment you. But what's the point? Are you violating
> ANS policy at great risk to yourselves, your reputations, or to the backing
> of ANS for the standard, or WHAT ? Having decided to do it and done it at
> all, then it shouldn't have been casual or an afterthought. In for a dime,
> in for a dollar: if you're going to test some rule, do it for a good reason,
> De Facto as well as De Jure.

I wasn't expectin' the Spanish Inquisition! :-)

But seriously, folks, could we lighten up a little here?

Us TC folks are trying to muddle through this whole process, and we
are only human, okay?  We could probably do better, but we have other
jobs too.  The committee screwed up by not implementing electronic
distribution sooner and better.

I would like to propose an end to this discussion thread, on the grounds
that the TC has heard it and is trying to fix it (i.e. trying to implement
electronic distribution), subject to some constraints.

Recent arguments have generated much heat and little light.

You may show your approval of my proposal by NOT replying, neither to
me nor to the net.  You may vote "no" by sending U.S. Mail to the TC,
in the form of a technical proposal detailing specifically the set of
distribution formats that should be used.  An offer to help implement
your proposal will give it greater weight.

Mitch