Xref: utzoo sci.physics:4201 news.admin:3311
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!ucbvax!decwrl!labrea!polya!cayuga!andy
From: andy@cayuga.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,news.admin
Subject: Is it time for sci.physics.only?
Message-ID: <3732@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 26 Aug 88 06:47:59 GMT
References: <1094@sri-arpa.ARPA> <2765@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <1189@anasaz.UUCP> <134@laffu.UUCP>
Sender: news@polya.Stanford.EDU
Reply-To: andy@cayuga.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 16

In article <134@laffu.UUCP> chuck@laffu.UUCP (Chuck Sites) writes:
>NO. The consiquneces of the technology we develope will always have
>political overtones which should be debated and are being debated 
>(All thanks to you)

Fine, most people seem to feel that sci.physics should carry physics
politics as well as physics.

Is there interest in sci.physics.only "for the rest of us"?

Yes, it's an evil plot.  I want a group for physics, not physics
politics.  I get my political discussions elsewhere.

-andy
UUCP:  {arpa gateways, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!polya.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:  andy@polya.stanford.edu
(415) 329-1718/723-3088 home/cubicle