Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sbcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!philabs!sbcs!debray
From: debray@sbcs.UUCP (Saumya Debray)
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: UNC can't respond to Tim
Message-ID: <649@sbcs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 30-May-84 09:41:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: sbcs.649
Posted: Wed May 30 09:41:37 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Jun-84 09:28:43 EDT
References: <860@druxm.UUCP>
Organization: SUNY at Stony Brook
Lines: 17

toml@druxm.UUCP (LaidigTL):
	> Suppose UNC had some good reason for their actions re Tim.  In
	> order to present their side of the story, they would have to
	> broadcast (very likely damaging) private information about Tim.
	> I hope we all agree that a university should not do this.

Yes, but they can certainly explain that this is the reason for their
silence. Saying nothing does little to inform us of any constraints they may
be under.
-- 
Saumya Debray, 	SUNY at Stony Brook

	uucp:
	    {cbosgd, decvax, ihnp4, mcvax, cmcl2}!philabs \
		    {amd70, akgua, decwrl, utzoo}!allegra  > !sbcs!debray
	       		{teklabs, hp-pcd, metheus}!ogcvax /
	CSNet: debray@suny-sbcs@CSNet-Relay