Re: RFD: az.flame

Article View: az.config

Article #487

#487

From: larsenc
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 00:00

17 lines
976 bytes

In <3qk1lt$len@lectura.CS.Arizona.EDU>, tlglenn@CS.Arizona.EDU (Ted Louis Glenn) writes:
>Based on the traffic in az.general, I hereby propose the group az.flame for
>intrastate flamewars. Interstate flamewars can go to alt.flame.
>
>Am I being tongue-in-cheek? 

Probably.

Although there are a lot of flame wars on our az.* groups, an az.flame would
be unneeded "bad press".  I'm sure outsiders already think we are strange
enough as it is.

Net users should flame via email if it isn't relevant to the general discussion
in a group. (IMO, that is).

Craig Larsen

Technical Details

Message-ID: <3s9hh4$42j@nnrp1.primenet.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

References: <3qk1lt$len@lectura.CS.Arizona.EDU>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 105828,c8debfb57066b4c2
X-Google-Attributes: gid105828,public
From: larsenc@LCS.com
Subject: Re: RFD: az.flame
Date: 1995/06/21
Message-ID: <3s9hh4$42j@nnrp1.primenet.com>
X-Deja-AN: 104950602
references: <3qk1lt$len@lectura.CS.Arizona.EDU>
organization: LCS (602) 756-1505
reply-to: larsenc@LCS.com
newsgroups: az.config

Reply to Parent Message