Xref: utzoo news.admin:5410 news.groups:8715 news.misc:2816
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!ncar!tank!suzy
From: suzy@tank.uchicago.edu (suzy marie mercer)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups,news.misc
Subject: Re: Brad (naturally)
Message-ID: <2594@tank.uchicago.edu>
Date: 4 Apr 89 14:15:47 GMT
References: <3663@ficc.uu.net>
Reply-To: suzy@tank.uchicago.edu (suzy marie mercer)
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 30

In article <3663@ficc.uu.net> jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) writes:
>
>Recently I responded to a pledge by Brad to commit even
>more controversial acts in the future by asking, in light
>of what I saw as pugnacity/bellicosity in some of his recent
>postings, whether he would do so just *because* such acts
>would be controversial.  I asked that he reply on the net.
>
>I have received e-mail from Brad declining to do so, but
>claiming that he is in fact a tireless toiler for
>peace, harmony, and tranquility.
>
>So, I will leave it up to y'all.  Was I off-base?  Or was
>I correct?

>Jeff Daiell


I support your request that Brad explain himself (yet again).
After all, since he chose to announce (read flaunt) the fact
in news.groups that he was going to do even more
controversial things in the *near* future,  then it does
not seem unreasonable that he should be expected to explain
himself in news.groups.  After all, he could have just kept
silent, but, true to past behavior, he chose this course.


Suzy Marie Mercer
University of Chicago
suzy@tank.uchicago.ed