Re: Public Access Unix systems?

Article View: dc.general

Article #55019

#55019

From: Robear
Date: Tue, 05 May 1992 00:13

17 lines
1426 bytes

Doesn't this discussion belong in dc.flame?  Oh, wait, that guy *mentioned*
Suranet - so I guess he should have responded to dc.forsale.  But then how
would the rest of us have known it was a problem?

If someone posts a question like the one that started this discussion in a
group which you consider inappropriate, flame them - don't flame the people
who answer it.  ALL of the local services had a chance to respond, no?

If the offended party had followed his own strict advice, we'd never have
seen his response, and the folks in dc.forsale would have been scratching
their heads, trying to figure out how much caffeine it takes to make 
someone this sensitive to details...

			Robear
Another risque, daring, cutting-edge net.morality post from *me* and no
one else...:-)
.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1992May5.001343.15862@access.digex.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!psinntp!digex!robear

References: <1992Apr25.035239.6808@sura.net> <1992Apr29.163925.27486@access.digex.com> <1992Apr30.211836.28020@sura.net>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 101049,c7fcfc34052987bd
X-Google-Attributes: gid101049,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1992-05-04 17:13:43 PST
Newsgroups: dc.general
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!psinntp!digex!robear
From: robear@access.digex.com (Robear)
Subject: Re: Public Access Unix systems?
Message-ID: <1992May5.001343.15862@access.digex.com>
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
References: <1992Apr25.035239.6808@sura.net> <1992Apr29.163925.27486@access.digex.com> <1992Apr30.211836.28020@sura.net>
Distribution: dc
Date: Tue, 5 May 1992 00:13:43 GMT
Lines: 18

Reply to Parent Message