Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!vmp!sonyd1.Broadcast.Sony.COM!blilly.UUCP!balilly.UUCP!bruce From: bruce@balilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly) Newsgroups: news.software.b Subject: Re: Cnews and the cancel control command Message-ID: <1991Feb8.033709.6510@blilly.UUCP> Date: 8 Feb 91 03:37:09 GMT References: <1991Feb4.002104.12830@wolves.uucp> <1991Feb4.185130.6956@zoo.toronto.edu> Sender: news@blilly.UUCP (News Administrator) Organization: Bruce Lilly, Flushing, NY Lines: 15 In article urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs) writes: > >Maybe it would be a better idea to "chmod 000" the cancelled article. That >way, it can at least be restored easily if the Cancel was forged. Sounds OK so far... >How about an "uncancel" control message to restore such an article, while >we're at it? Isn't there already enough of a problem with newgroup/rmgroup ``wars''? Do we really need to add cancel/uncancel wars? -- Bruce Lilly blilly!balilly!bruce@sonyd1.Broadcast.Sony.COM