🚀 go-pugleaf

Richard H. Miller (rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu) wrote:
>Camilla Cracchiolo (camilla@primenet.com) wrote:
>: I see no reason why we can't do what sci.med has done.  The creation of
>: sci.med.nursing, sci.med.immunology, etc. did not cause sci.med to become
>: sci.med.misc.
>
>: Actually, I had a hell of a time finding sci.psychology.misc after they
>: reorganized their hierarchy.  I suggest we keep sci.med.nursing and just
>: add the other two groups.
>

>If the proponents had ever bothered to come up with a proposal they could
>rationalize I would agree with you. At this level, the renaming of
>sci.med.nursing is probably not necessary.

If your newsfeed is anything like mine you are way behind the times.

I have picked up your message 8 or 9 days late.

The CFV ( Call For Votes ) was issued on 17 October so you should
look for a copy of it in "news.announce.newgroups".

The CFV was NOT posted to the "sci.med" newsgroup.

Bye,