🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3p7dgc$6br@crl.crl.com>,
   walterc@crl.com (Walter C. Cooksey) wrote:
>Jim,
>
>The problem may be that this group is not carried by most sites in the
>Atlanta area.  After I started asking it be carried at Emory, I was told
>that it was not an 'official' group and had not been setup via standard
>procedure, but just started by certain sites.  Since Emory's proiders don't
>carry it, I assume that most providers in Atlanta don't.
>
>Walt

Well, tell them to get a life then. Alt.groups have no required creation 
procedure, and neither should (do?) local groups. There was an extremely large 
amount of interest in an atl.singles group expressed in atl.general several 
months ago. We discussed it there, and I sent the initial control message. 
There is absolutely no reason for an ISP to refuse to carry this group. It is 
a real point of interest for many Atlantans. What the hell else matters? It is 
named well also. Blah. Sometimes computer people are just too geeky.

��