Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!tut!ra!uwasa.fi!ts
From: ts@uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi LASK)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: which archiver/compresser and encoder/decoder to use?
Keywords: archivers, compression, encoding
Message-ID: <1990Feb21.192751.25131@uwasa.fi>
Date: 21 Feb 90 19:27:51 GMT
References: <1513@krafla.rhi.hi.is> <3418@plains.UUCP> <1990Feb14.154555.2435@mks.com> <1047@targon.UUCP>
Organization: University of Vaasa
Lines: 25

In article <1047@targon.UUCP> andre@targon.UUCP (andre) writes:
>
>Finally, not so very long ago we had a poll on what to use,
>the outcome was zoo. Why is it that this discussion has to come
>up every few months? Do we have some sore losers in our midst ? :-)

The reason for the discussion is simple this time.  Since c.b.i.p.
was dormant for a long time before the activities started again, we
wanted to check whether essential new information had come about in
between.  The result was that it best to continue with zoo and
uuencode, for two reasons.  First because our new moderator wanted
it this way, and he is the person who must be given the final say.
If not, anarchy may follow.  Second it is obvious that even if these
two methods are not perfect (what is anyway) the netters have the
necessary tools from Rahul's time, and the 'cost' of any change
would have been great.  So far, all the postings have discussed the
matter in a rational way.  No losers, or whatever, sore or otherwise
have been in evidence.  P.S. I know that you said it jokingly, and I
only say this in case somebody feels offended, nevertheless.  I
certainly don't (but I haven't lost nor won anything either).

...................................................................
Prof. Timo Salmi        (Moderating at anon. ftp site 128.214.12.3)
School of Business Studies, University of Vaasa, SF-65101, Finland
Internet: ts@chyde.uwasa.fi Funet: gado::salmi Bitnet: salmi@finfun