🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <HAGERMAN.92Nov19204019@rx7.ece.cmu.edu> hagerman@ece.cmu.edu (John
Hagerman) writes:
>In article <1992Nov19.202817.29139@sfu.ca> palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer)
writes:
>>
>> Wow. Thanks for the information, John. I hope someone will be able
>> to drop the other shoe and tell us where to learn more about this
>> twenty-year-old technology.
>
>Your ability to communicate sarcasm without a smiley is nice to see.
>But I fear that your comments may mask one important point of my post,
>which was to demonstrate that many of the questions asked here can be
>sufficiently answered by a tiny bit of research.  Need I explain why
>actually doing such research is useful?

I've failed again, I'm afraid. I wasn't being sarcastic; I have no idea
how this is done, and since I teach physics, I think that is a lacuna
in my knowledge which needs to be filled. I asked some specific 
questions about generation and distribution, and I'd really like to
know the answers to those questions.

I've only recently adopted the "smiley" (my version has a double chin)
because I was being misunderstood. I am quite vain about my command of
the language, and I had never seen a smiley in Mark Twain, so I didn't
use them, either. Now I see that it can work the other way as well. 

Leigh