Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: CALL FOR LOCAL DISCUSSION Revision 2: Split the c.s.a group more? Keywords: reply time limited Message-ID: <6934@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 30 Oct 90 13:05:53 GMT References: <1990Oct28.001448.25414@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston Lines: 25 In article limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: > Yea! (If I recall, with the c.s.a.tech vote was running, I posted > ".tech is ambiguous... let's go with .programmer". Gloat, gloat, :-) You're right. I was wrong. (news flash, Peter da Silva apologises. Clip this article, it's a collector's item) > I know the definintion, you know the definition, but dispite that > we're going to get a million marketing questions and flames. If I > was a new user and want to rant: "C0mm0d0re sh00d do more advertz, > d00d!", I'd be tempted to post it (incorrectly) here. Good. That way I won't have to read these rants. > > comp.sys.amiga.influence > I hate to say it, but the name.space.control.freaks of news.groups > are going to say, "this should be called comp.sys.amiga.flame". They'd be right. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' .