Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!think!ames!necntc!dandelion!ulowell!hawk!boneill
From: boneill@hawk.ulowell.edu (SoftXc Coordinator)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: What is going on here?
Keywords: is this why we needed a moderator?
Message-ID: <7074@swan.ulowell.edu>
Date: 14 May 88 21:51:08 GMT
References: <2875@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Sender: news@swan.ulowell.edu
Reply-To: boneill@hawk.ulowell.edu (SoftXc Coordinator)
Organization: University of Lowell, CS Dept.
Lines: 16

In article <2875@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> amlovell@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Anthony M Lovell) writes:
>Are we witnessing the advantage of having this binaries group moderated?
>The move was meant to reduce the discussion of binaries and promote the
>proliferation of executables.  Instead, the opposite has occurred.  The
>only activity is the discussion of non-existent binaries.
>

Patience, patience. Rahul posted a message stating that when the control
message went around for moderation, he was flooded with hundreds of
attempted postings, and needed to sort through them. give him time, and all
will be well...

============================================================================
Brian O'Neill, MS-DOS Software Exchange Coordinator
ArpaNet: boneill@hawk.ulowell.edu 
UUCP   : {(backbones),harvard,rutgers,et. al.}!ulowell!hawk!boneill