🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <C0BGzz.1FA.1@cs.cmu.edu> pgf@srl03.cacs.usl.edu ("Phil G. Fraering") writes:
>   ... The people trying to push this off into
>   other newsgroups, which are accesible neither for posting
>   nor reading purposes to much of the internet population, are
>   IMHO either ignorant of the status quo or actively supporting
>   said status quo...

While I'm reluctant to disagree with Phil after his most complimentary
comments on my contribution :-), I'm afraid I have to here.

If your site does not get talk.politics.space, there is a reason.  Your
site administrators presumably have decided that they do not wish to
expend resources on political discussions.  (If the lack of the
group is just because they don't know their customers want it... have
you told them about it?)  Moving such discussions to sci.space is NOT
a desirable response -- it might make them shut off this group too, on
the grounds that it's too political.

There's always going to be some spillover of politics into sci.space,
because space is a very politics-driven field right now.  But we can
try to keep the knock-down-drag-out fights in talk.politics.space,
where they really do belong.
-- 
"God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
       -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry