Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!cmcl2!philabs!aecom!werner
From: werner@aecom.UUCP (Craig Werner)
Newsgroups: net.med,net.nlang,net.news
Subject: Flame etymology clarification
Message-ID: <2466@aecom.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-May-86 18:35:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: aecom.2466
Posted: Fri May  2 18:35:44 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 4-May-86 07:12:25 EDT
Distribution: na
Organization: Albert Einstein Coll. of Med., NY
Lines: 20
Xref: watmath net.med:3897 net.nlang:4514 net.news:4775


	I would like a clarification of the usage of the word 'flame' from
the UUCP squad squad.

	Does the correct usage of the word 'flame' encompass both a public
diatribe and a private criticism, or does it just have the narrower meaning
of the former, public, use.
	To rephrase the question: is it possible to flame by mail, or does
by definition, a flame require a posting.  (Admittedly a private critique
can be just as sizzling as a public one, but is it correct to call it a flame.)

	Please respond by mail.


-- 

				Craig Werner
				!philabs!aecom!werner
              (1935-14E Eastchester Rd., Bronx NY 10461, 212-931-2517)
     "The proper delivery of medical care is to do as much Nothing as possible"