Xref: utzoo news.groups:3186 news.admin:1898 soc.singles:15248
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!purdue!spaf
From: spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Final action on soc.sex
Message-ID: <3744@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>
Date: 4 Apr 88 04:04:15 GMT
References: <3720@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>
Sender: news@cs.purdue.EDU
Reply-To: spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford)
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University
Lines: 16

In my original article I noted that there were posted objections
that were not answered by the time the vote was taken.  This was
due to the fact that the vote was taken as soon as the idea was
suggested, rather than opening the group creation proposal to 
comment before taking the vote.

In no way did I intend to make it sound as if the vote-taker,
Dan Roth, had ignored any comments prior to taking the vote.
My apologies to Dan if anyone got that impression.  His enthusiasm
for the idea just got the better of him and he started the vote
before any posted objections reached him....
-- 
Gene Spafford
NSF/Purdue/U of Florida  Software Engineering Research Center,
Dept. of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, W. Lafayette IN 47907-2004
Internet:  spaf@cs.purdue.edu	uucp:	...!{decwrl,gatech,ucbvax}!purdue!spaf