Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!wuarchive!texbell!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: Complimentary but not overlapping Message-ID: <7411@ficc.uu.net> Date: 24 Dec 89 15:36:32 GMT References: <10728@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 22 In article <10728@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> rissa@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Patricia O Tuama) writes: > I just want to know now that the newgroup creation guidelines have > been amended to include the da Silva Process, whether or not anyone > else who wishes to follow the same procedure is required to hold a > separate discussion period or whether he/she can simply skip that > step like Peter did. Jesus Harold Christ on a Bicycle. For the last time, I didn't skip the discussion period. I skipped the call for discussion because the discussion was already going on. I, at least, would see nothing wrong with you having held a call for votes for talk.skeptic immediately after the vote for sci.skeptic, because the discussion of sci.skeptic included a lively discussion of talk.skeptic (lively, yeh, H-bombs are lively:->). However if you were to want to hold such a vote *now* you'd have to go through all the motions. -- `-_-' Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. . 'U` Also or . "It was just dumb luck that Unix managed to break through the Stupidity Barrier and become popular in spite of its inherent elegance." -- gavin@krypton.sgi.com