Xref: utzoo alt.folklore.computers:10569 comp.misc:11879
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.misc
Subject: Re: Fed up with this jargon debate...
Message-ID: <12312490@bfmny0.BFM.COM>
Date: 28 Mar 91 05:46:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: bfmny0.12312490
References: <1991Mar28.020345.4209@njitgw.njit.edu>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff)
Followup-To: alt.folklore.computers
Lines: 11

In article <1991Mar28.020345.4209@njitgw.njit.edu> cd5340@mars.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>Does anyone here realize that all your complaints about the Jargon
>file is using more bandwidth than the file itself did?  

No we don't, because it's FALSE!

In the past week, there have been 64k bytes of discussion about the
Jargon File, pro and con -- and 950k bytes (!) of Jargon file itself,
original and patches.

Next case.