Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site uiucdcsb
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcsb!mcewan
From: mcewan@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <12700027@uiucdcsb>
Date: Wed, 23-Oct-85 15:44:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uiucdcsb.12700027
Posted: Wed Oct 23 15:44:00 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 25-Oct-85 08:10:40 EDT
References: <1894@pyuxd.UUCP>
Lines: 33
Nf-ID: #R:pyuxd.UUCP:-189400:uiucdcsb:12700027:000:1346
Nf-From: uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU!mcewan    Oct 23 14:44:00 1985


>>>> If what you are trying to tell us is that you are not consistent, I suggest
>>>> that you keep your mouth shut until you have some firm idea of what the hell
>	     ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^
>>>> you're talking about (by the way, just in case you don't know, this isn't
>    ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
>>>
>>> Oh come *on*, now.  Is this kid stuff really necessary?  Isn't the
>>> signal to noise ratio poor enough without this?
>> 
>> I don't understand - what are you objecting to?
>
>
> Do you *really* think this kind of stuff is appropriate to a public forum?
> That it is appropriate to private correspondence is arguable.

Perhaps not, but I'm not the first to make such a suggestion, and it's a
lot milder than a lot of stuff that goes through this group (such as anything
from Ray). Maybe I should have asked "What is so exceptionally objectionable
about this posting that it is singled out for this complaint?"

By the way, I would really appreciate it if more people would edit out
extraneous stuff when including a posting in a response. It will not only
save on transmission cost and readers' time, but also make your response
more readable.



			Scott McEwan
			{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!mcewan

"There are good guys and there are bad guys. The job of the good guys is to
 kill the bad guys."