Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!kaufman From: kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael L. Kaufman) Subject: Re: Progress on RFD: split/splinter comp.sys.handhelds Message-ID: <1991May29.181620.2014@eecs.nwu.edu> Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University References: <7679@rex.cs.tulane.edu> <5026@ryn.mro4.dec.com> Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 18:16:20 GMT In article <5026@ryn.mro4.dec.com> taber@ultnix.enet.dec.com (Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber) writes: >In article <7679@rex.cs.tulane.edu>, mandel@vax.anes.tulane.edu (Jeff E >Mandel MD MS) writes: [Jeff writes that among other things, there will be a vote that will allow everyone to vote for exactly what they want.] >Kind of jumping the gun, aren't you Jeff? You don't have the results >from the straw poll. You don't have agreement from the people in on the >private discussion, nor have you brought the discussion out into the >public light where these things are supposed to happen. Is it just me, or does anyone feel that this whole 'split' discussion would go better if people would spend less time taking cheap shots? Patrick, he didn't say that he had agreement, he said that they are going to have a vote that will allow the disagreeing groups to each party to vote for what they want to. And I know that I speak for quite a few of us when I say that we would much prefer if a good deal more of these discussions stayed out of the public light. We are sick of this topic and would much prefer to go on with something else. Patrick, we all know that you disagree with Jeff, but tht doesn't mean you have to insert any conspiricy theories into his postings. Michael -- Michael Kaufman | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on kaufman | fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in @eecs.nwu.edu | the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be | lost in time - like tears in rain. Time to die. Roy Batty