Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ns-mx!ceres!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!lll-winken!ames!amdahl!pyramid!ctnews!unix386!dougm
From: dougm@unix386.Convergent.COM (The Manic Tinker)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: REC.ARTS.CINEMA -- drawing the discussion to a close?
Message-ID: <768@unix386.Convergent.COM>
Date: 11 Jan 90 18:53:36 GMT
References: <10938@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Organization: Unisys/Convergent, San Jose, CA
Lines: 17

In article <10938@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>, rissa@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Patricia O Tuama) writes:
> Certainly from my point of view you have 
> yet to demonstrate why it -should- be moderated -- all of your rea-
> sons are based entirely on conjecture.  

How can an argument on a *potential* new group be based on anything
*other* than conjecture?  I am not being flip here; I don't see how
it's possible.

Personally I think:
1) rec.arts.cinema is the best name I've heard so far
2) it should not be a subgroup of r.a.m
3) The charter looks fine
-- 
         Doug Moran          |  I have often felt like a resident of Pompeii
pyramid!ctnews!unix386!dougm |  who has been asked for some humorous comments
dougm@unix386.Convergent.com |  on lava.