🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <49b55t$so@latour.sandelman.ocunix.on.ca>,
Michael Richardson <mcr@latour.sandelman.ocunix.on.ca> wrote:
>In article <DInvGD.AyD@ferret.ocunix.on.ca>,
>Chris Lewis <clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca> wrote:
>>Who said that?  Bruce - the mad alt newgrouper?
>
>  I seem to recall it being a general consensus: infobahn was dead,
>infohighway got better propagation, let's loose the confusion and
>settle for one group.

I was originally going to come out with a proposal to remove
can.infobahn.

>>>  As long as you want to recreate can.infobahn, can we make that
>>>moderated?
>>
>>ROTFL.
>
>  I thought you might find that funny.
>
>  But, it doesn't answer the question: why create infobahn now? I
>agreed at the time that it was a c0oler name, but I don't care
>about the name anymore, just the content.
>  I have never had a request from any user around me for can.infobahn. 
>  
>  Back to the original problem: we want to have a moderated version of
>can.infohighway. That requires a new name.

. . . CRASH . . .

That was me falling out of my chair.  Awwww Michael, most of the people
are all set to change can.infohighway to moderated, and you waltz in
with "that requires a new name".

Where were you all this time anyways?

Here we go again.

Now what?