🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <44190@cci632.UUCP> tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) writes:
...
>On the other hand, I believe that Mr. Salz is being unfairly toasted
>by this flame-bait.  Mr. Salz has been doing a fine job.  Sure, I wish
>he could get stuff out faster, but it does get out eventually.  And
>there are alternate sources groups for those who can't wait.

Please note that I am not suggesting that we do away with
comp.sources.unix, or Rich.  What I am suggesting is that we consider
exploring other methods of running sources groups, and one method to
consider is peer review.  I simply want to find out if enough people
are interested in a peer reviewed newsgroup to make it feasible.

Remember, people who are interested in participating in a peer
reviewed sources group (comp.sources.reviewed?) should mail a note to

	reviewed@calvin.doc.ca

stating their interest.


-- 
Andrew Patrick, Ph.D.       Department of Communications, Ottawa, CANADA
               andrew@calvin.doc.CA    andrew@doccrc.BITNET
        HDTV:  higher resolution, improved colour, wider screen,
            "sit-com" reruns.  What's wrong with this picture?