🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <72456@microsoft.UUCP> donc@microsoft.UUCP (Don CORBITT) writes:
>This discussion sure is interesting, but it currently has nothing to
>do with Windows.  Since the first article was cross posted to the 
>MSWin and OS/2 groups, all the replies have been also.  I would sure
>appreciate it if each of us edited the Followup-To or the Newsgroups 
>lines, so that as a discussion veered off track, people in groups
>that are no longer appropriate don't need to skip those messages.
>
>This (my) posting is of course quite selfish.  I have a limited time
>each day to read mail, so I try to be selective.  Since I work on
>Windows, I read comp.windows.ms to see what kinds of problems people
>have, and their suggested improvements for the product.  (And no,
>I unfortunately _don't_ have time to do tech-support by mail for
>thousands of developers.  Wish I did....)
>
>I am not interested in IBMs alleged poor customer support.  If I _did_ 
>want that kind of information, I would read one of the OS/2 groups.
>
>Note that this isn't a flame, just a gentle reminder.  If I wanted to
>flame, I'd use lots of obsc*ne words with 1 l*tter removed, to prove
>that I'm lit*rate. :-)
>--
>Don Corbitt, donc@microsoft.uucp,  Windows developer.
>Mail flames, post apologies.   I'm not the net.police, does it pay well?
>(and finally) "Cross posting is almost always inappropriate."


Gee, why don't we just gear the newsgroup so that we only post on your
coffee break too while we're at it.  I for one enjoy the discussion comparing
the future of OS/2 with windows, and request that it continue.  I don't read
the OS/2 bboards because as of now, I still use the DOS / Windows pair.

I guess that microsoft is getting a bit edgy with OS2 2.0 and Apple breathing
down their neck.



-C