Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site pilchuck.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!tektronix!uw-beaver!uw-june!entropy!dataio!pilchuck!ingrid
From: ingrid@pilchuck.UUCP (the Real Swede)
Newsgroups: net.med,net.nlang,net.news
Subject: Re: Flame etymology clarification
Message-ID: <340@pilchuck.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-May-86 19:50:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: pilchuck.340
Posted: Fri May  9 19:50:14 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 12-May-86 21:38:31 EDT
References: <2466@aecom.UUCP>
Reply-To: ingrid@pilchuck.UUCP (The Ing Farmerette)
Distribution: na
Organization: Data I/O Corp., Redmond, WA
Lines: 9
Xref: dcdwest net.med:3487 net.nlang:3213 net.news:3170

E-mail being the totally contrived language that it is, I vote
for the definition of a flame as being

ANY ABUSIVE CORRESPONDENCE WHICH APPEARS ON EITHER THE UNIX

SYSTEM, OR IN A PERSON'S PERSONAL MAIL.

And flame my grammar all you like; I write for a LIVING. I can
"relax" on the net if I wish to......