🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov2.215850.21693@tetrasoft.com> Joseph R. Grace <JGrace@TetraSoft.com> writes:

   In article <1992Nov2.164512.11435@news.media.mit.edu>  
   lacsap@plethora.media.mit.edu (Pascal Chesnais) writes:
   >  Sorry to disappoint you,  but that is the accepted USENET
   >  process.  I would step in to get stuff posted while a new
   >  moderator is being found,  but it seems Nathan is taking
   >  the initiative.  He should be posting stuff in the queue.

   Somehow, I doubt it (but then again :-).  Please share it (exact quotations  
   please, no interpretations) with us!  If it really says that, I suggest we  
   don't adopt it.  That again seems appropriate for discussion by the readers  
   (and not by individual fiat).

Let me get this right.  You want Pascal to go dig up the information that is
part of every news feed (i.e. you have access to it), but you want him to
provide the exact text since you suspect he would be decietful and modify it
to serve his own intentions.  But it doesn't matter, because if he is right,
you don't want to live by those rules anyway.  Tell me, does this approach to
negotiations often work for you?

   >  Sorry to disappoint you again,  but it is USENET guidelines
   >  which drives these policies.  It seems that commercial
   >  postings should be in the biz hierarchy anyway.
   >  
   >  pasc

   Please share them (exact quotations please, no interpretations) with us!   
   Again, if they really say that, perhaps we shouldn't adopt them!

Translation: I think your wrong, you will lie to support your case, and it
doesn't matter because if you are right it still won't change my mind.

Sheesh...

Bill
--
-------------------------------
	Bill Mangione-Smith
	billms@eecs.umich.edu