waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) (11/29/89)
UNITEX is alive a well and living in the 'etherNet'.....
All rumors reporting our demise our greatly exaggerated. So
much for theatrics....
Apparently, there is a major shift and change underway in
our society... like the wunderjhare of radical emotive
therapy (ala Albert Ellis) and what spawned a new age of
self-involved, self-referential brats...voila ---> the age
of yuppie enlightenment (actually an oximoron but useful for
effect). All this will hopefully pass very soon. "Oh
Albert...can this really be the end.. to be stuck inside a
network with the braindead blues again..."
There is an obvious lack of communication and understanding
regarding the recent resignation of the
misc.headlines.unitex moderator. This very medium is ideal
for fostering such a BIG lack of understanding about what
really was involved. I'm convinced that no one really
cares. I am told that I am pompous and have no real
understanding of how UseNet operates by people (like Brad
Templeton...you gotta be kidding) that seem a lot more
pompous than I ever did and certainly a lot less
knowledgeable of this Network or any network for that
matter.
Big business, governments, the nonprofit community and the
academic environments are suffering from what I've tried to
highlight in a simple, straightforward title to this
message.
The facts don't seem to interest anyone anymore. In fact, what
UNITEX was doing or the pioneering effort made by UNITEX
(statements made by the National Science Foundation on behalf
of UNITEX) was of no importance to anyone except the usually
'bright few'.....
Electronic networks are a valuable conduit for real information.
Unfortunately they are a poor substitute for channeling peoples
hostility, frustration and bitterness or whatever new dilemmas
are pressing hard on modern yuppie man.
If anyone out there is engaged in research or actually
trying to DO something, then I'm sure my title description
needs little explanation. For the others..... it's simply
not worth my time to explain.....
'You are what you pretend to be...'Brad.... 'so be careful what
you pretend to be....' K. Vonnegut
Dr. James Waldron
aka the 'real' Dr. J ===> ROCK ON!
David Essex (A collegue of Dr. J)
[He knows the 'truth'].
karl@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) (11/29/89)
waldron@newport.rutgers.edu writes:
UNITEX is alive a well and living in the 'etherNet'.....
All rumors reporting our demise our greatly exaggerated. So
much for theatrics....
Hardly. Most of the rest of your article consisted entirely of
theatrics. It started with your article's Subject: and goes downhill
from there. Case in point, especially the 2nd parenthesized comment:
Apparently, there is a major shift and change underway in
our society... like the wunderjhare of radical emotive
therapy (ala Albert Ellis) and what spawned a new age of
self-involved, self-referential brats...voila ---> the age
of yuppie enlightenment (actually an oximoron but useful for
effect). All this will hopefully pass very soon. "Oh
Albert...can this really be the end.. to be stuck inside a
network with the braindead blues again..."
Berke Breathed might be able to pull such stuff off, but you do not
appear to be similarly gifted.
Having just read Dorothy Nicklus' side of the issue, and now having
read this article, I'm entirely convinced that UNITEX is solidly on
the side of error, and that Patt (and Gene and Chuq and, if I remember
correctly, Greg) did the correct thing in leaving the newsgroup behind.
Those folks have a very long and mostly honorable history on the
Usenet, and their outlook on the situation can be taken with only a
small grain of salt. In contrast, the verbage since then coming from
UNITEX has been uniformly abusive, rude, and making a serious effort
to discredit anyone who might have disagreed with your party line. I
don't buy it.
There is an obvious lack of communication and understanding
regarding the recent resignation of the
misc.headlines.unitex moderator.
The appearance from my perspective is that you are equating
"disagreement with us" with "lack of communication." All
communication which has been relayed to us (I note quite carefully
that no one from UNITEX made the first effort to discredit Chuq's
summary of email discussion regarding the appropriateness of your
postings) has pointed very clearly to the UNITEX people taking the
outlook that what they wanted to do was Right and that opinions
contrary to that were not to be tolerated.
Nonsense. People with that kind of attitude deserve to be ignored.
This of course could leave one wondering why I am bothering with this
followup; it has to do with the statement shortly following:
I'm convinced that no one really cares.
Actually, a lot of us care very much. I have withheld forming any
really definitive opinion one way or the other until I could hear the
other side of the issue. Now I have heard that side - now I have an
opinion which you caused to be formed in my mind through the outlook
you have provided. The opinion is already low and dropping fast.
I am told that I am pompous and have no real
understanding of how UseNet operates by people...that seem a lot more
pompous than I ever did and certainly a lot less
knowledgeable of this Network or any network for that
matter.
Attempting to discredit your entire opposition as being incompetent to
discuss the matter in general is not a way to win people to your side.
Very many people on the Usenet have done serious networking for a very
long time, longer than UNITEX has been around by quite a margin.
Big business, governments, the nonprofit community and the
academic environments are suffering from what I've tried to
highlight in a simple, straightforward title to this
message.
If we are suffering from something, it's from the self-impressed
viewpoint of those who think they have solved the world's problems, or
at least think they are well on the way to doing so.
Unfortunately [networks] are a poor substitute for channeling peoples
hostility, frustration and bitterness or whatever new dilemmas
are pressing hard on modern yuppie man.
A great many of us do not qualify for the definitions of any of the
entries in your Subject:. I am no bean counter, no "queer" in any
sense of the word that seems even remotely applicable, nor does
"yuppie" fit me very well (use of computers and networks does not
alone a yuppie make; otherwise, you must admit to being your own worst
enemy) -- again, you have attempted to discredit your entire
opposition by lumping it all into large, monolithic, and just awfully
convenient pigeonholes that really don't match the situation well.
If anyone out there is engaged in research or actually
trying to DO something, then I'm sure my title description
needs little explanation. For the others..... it's simply
not worth my time to explain.....
Good heavens, man, you have an attitude such as I've not seen in a
very long time.
A very great number of us who use this network are indeed involved in
various types of research and other disciplines, and a very great
number really are "trying to DO something." And I still don't agree
with anything you've said. And then you conclude this idea with the
comment that _your_ time is far too valuable to be spent explaining
such elementary concepts...as though your entire opposition is (yet
again) to be lumped into the group who do not understand such stuff.
'You are what you pretend to be...so be careful what
you pretend to be....'
I strongly suggest that you read that back to yourself, slowly,
carefully, and repeatedly. And as much as you said previous to this,
if you don't understand why, it's not worth my time to explain.
--Karl Kleinpaste
Senior Researcher
Ohio State Computer Scienceereiamjh@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Tom B O'toole) (11/29/89)
In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: > [a lot of stuff] Excuse me, but what exactly the hell was all THAT about??? -- Tom O'Toole - ecf_stbo@jhuvms.bitnet JHUVMS system programmer Thats right... Homewood Computing Facilities -fz Johns Hopkins University, Balto. Md. 21218
arest1@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Alexis Reese) (11/29/89)
In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: One of the most bizarre messages I've seen in a long time! > Dr. James Waldron > aka the 'real' Dr. J ===> ROCK ON! > David Essex (A collegue of Dr. J) > [He knows the 'truth']. I'm not sure just what the big deal is about all of this. If you and your friends have USENET access, why don't you simply post the UNITEX articles to misc.misc? No moderator is required there and the USENET world can judge for itself what's been going on. If this information is vital and interesting, the USENET community will want the formerly moderated group to be "unmoderated" or have another moderator appointed. In any case, it's hard to "censor" anyone on USENET!
tjw@unix.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood WA3VQJ) (11/29/89)
In article <3420@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> ereiamjh@jhunix.UUCP (Tom B O'toole) writes: >In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: >> [a lot of stuff] >Excuse me, but what exactly the hell was all THAT about??? That's funny! I thought *I* was the only one who didn't understand! Does anyone remember the Steve Martin/Bill Murray sketch on SNL where all they said for 10 minutes was: "What the HECK *IS* that?". Terry -- INTERNET: tjw@unix.cis.pitt.edu BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS CC-NET: 33802::tjw UUCP: {decwrl!decvax!idis, allegra, bellcore}!pitt!unix.cis.pitt.edu!tjw And if dreams could come true, I'd still be there with you, On the banks of cold waters at the close of the day. - as sung by Sally Rogers
dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) (11/29/89)
I propose the SI unit of bullshit be the "waldron". I admit that it will be inconvenient to use the "nanowaldron" in everyday applications. Paul F. Dietz dietz@cs.rochester.edu
steve@revolver.gatech.edu (11/29/89)
In article <20898@unix.cis.pitt.edu> arest1@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Alexis Reese) writes:
I'm not sure just what the big deal is about all of this. If you and your
friends have USENET access, why don't you simply post the UNITEX articles to
misc.misc? No moderator is required there and the USENET world can judge
for itself what's been going on.
-----
I agree - post the stuff to another newsgroup that is unmoderated.
P.S. - Dr Waldron should let Dorthy Niklus do all his talking for him. His
posting was among the more arrogant, self-centered pieces of garbage
I've ever read. It literally dripped of sarcasm - he obviously thinks
he's hot shit and everyone else is some kind of dumb schmuck. I promise
I won't hold his performance against UNITEX, however.
*** The preceding statements represent the opinions of the author. ***
They must not be interpreted as representing the beliefs of any
other person, institution, government agency, or business entity. bee@cs.purdue.EDU (Zaphod Beeblebrox) (11/29/89)
Said waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron): (in article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu>) | | [ the WEIRDEST and most inane drivel I've seen in quite a while ] | Talk about flame fodder. I think this article takes the cake for unintentional humor. Someone should repost the article into talk.bizarre and alt.flame so they can get in on the fun. Yes indeed, the "waldron" is now the official measurement of stupidity in a Usenet article. B.E.E. -- Z. Beeblebrox | "Ich bin ein Berliner!" -- President Kennedy, 1961 (alias B. Elmore) | "Tear down this wall!" -- President Reagan, 1987 bee@cs.purdue.edu | ..!purdue!bee | Berlin Wall RIP 1961-1989
wcn@max.u.washington.edu (W C Newell Jr) (11/29/89)
This followup is only being sent to news.groups, which I don't read, so bear that in mind when constructing your flame... In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu>, waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: > Big business, governments, the nonprofit community and the > academic environments are suffering from what I've tried to > highlight in a simple, straightforward title to this > message. I consider this to be the most insulting statement I have ever read in an electronic medium to date. It's not so much what was said, it's the fact that it came from a man who claims to speak for an organization I respect and admire. It ranks right up there with Al Campanis' infamous "blacks in baseball" quote. If the UN knew the truth of what you were about, I'm quite sure they'd disown you. > Electronic networks are a valuable conduit for real information. > Unfortunately they are a poor substitute for channeling peoples > hostility, frustration and bitterness or whatever new dilemmas > are pressing hard on modern yuppie man. > > If anyone out there is engaged in research or actually > trying to DO something, then I'm sure my title description > needs little explanation. For the others..... it's simply > not worth my time to explain..... And for that little pearl of wisdom, I'm quite sure the NSF would disown you, too. I am reminded of a vignette they show every-so-often on Sesame Street. It is an episode of "Monsterpiece Theatre", hosted by Alistair Cookie, entitled 'Taming of the Shoe'. It is based on a play by William Shoespeare. The hero, Grovero, must learn to 'cooperate' with his shoe before he can walk to the mall. If a three-year-old can understand parody, Dr. Waldron, I should think that you can understand me. Bill Newell Systems Analyst, Applications Consulting Group University of Washington WCN@MAX.U.WASHINGTON.EDU
scott@bbxsda.UUCP (Scott Amspoker) (11/29/89)
In article <3420@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> ereiamjh@jhunix.UUCP (Tom B O'toole) writes: >In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: >> [a lot of stuff] >Excuse me, but what exactly the hell was all THAT about??? I second that. It was a bigger waste of bandwidth than most network garbage. -- Scott Amspoker Basis International, Albuquerque, NM (505) 345-5232 unmvax.cs.unm.edu!bbx!bbxsda!scott
spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford) (11/29/89)
If any of you are still wondering why I recommended deleting
misc.headlines.unitex instead of just unmoderating it, maybe the
base article this is following up helps to clarify matters.
I believe it to be a breach of etiquette and applicable law to publish
electronic correspondance without permission, so you'll have to take
my word on it that Dr. Waldron has mailed a number of
equally....unusual... messages to me, Chuq, Patt Harring, the
sysadmin at ccny, and others about this episode. Some have been
considerably more strident and at times vulgar. One to Patt was quite
threatening. One to me was quite insulting (personally). And at least
one mail message about Patt could be grounds for a lawsuit if fixed on
paper.
I have suggested to Dr. Waldron that perhaps he doesn't understand how
best to communicate with others electronically. He then posted the
article to which this is a follow-up. Sigh. It's hard to give
someone the benefit of the doubt when they persist in being so
obnoxious. May I suggest that we not encourage him by debating this
further, here or elsewhere on the net?
Coincidence department: someone has pointed out to me that Dr. Waldron
is posting from a machine at Rutgers, the same great institution that
provided us with Prof. Bob Webber for a while. I don't believe that
is a reflection on Rutgers itself -- it still doesn't outweight the
fact that Mel Pleasant and Chuck Hedrick also post from Rutgers, and a
good friend of mine is on the faculty there. Still, it does make one
wonder what's in the water there....
--
Gene Spafford
NSF/Purdue/U of Florida Software Engineering Research Center,
Dept. of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, W. Lafayette IN 47907-2004
Internet: spaf@cs.purdue.edu uucp: ...!{decwrl,gatech,ucbvax}!purdue!spafcudep@warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson (Vato)) (11/29/89)
In article <KARL.89Nov28143730@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu> karl@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) writes: <> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu writes: <> [stuff deleted] <Good heavens, man, you have an attitude such as I've not seen in a <very long time. Thanks Karl - someone with perspective and a very nice summing up too! Even over the recent flamage about the *.aquariword debacle, no-one managed to be so dumb as Wallydron just has been. I just it wasn't a forgery now I've joined in - the style was funny. It's a good thing I had a sensible article to reply to instead of the original, otherwise I'd have had to post to /dev/null to avoid complaints. <> 'You are what you pretend to be...so be careful what <> you pretend to be....' <I strongly suggest that you read that back to yourself, slowly, <carefully, and repeatedly. And as much as you said previous to this, <if you don't understand why, it's not worth my time to explain. Once again, good advice, but mebbe more people should apply that to their postings in general? 1/4 :-) -- \FLESH\ \/ato (Ian Dickinson), Consultant/Programmer - Unix/Networking \VOICE\ (+44 203 or 0203) 525225 (Home), 523037 (Work), 838526 (Cov Artfac) \PAPER\ Computing Services, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK \EMAIL\ vato%warwick.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk ..!mcvax!ukc!warwick!vato
sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (11/30/89)
In article <3420@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>, ereiamjh@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Tom B O'toole) writes: > In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> > waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: >> [a lot of stuff] > Excuse me, but what exactly the hell was all THAT about??? As near as I can tell, he was trying to convince all of usenet that what Chuq and Patt, etc, did concerning the unitex group was justified. He certainly convinced me. -- USmail: Bob Sloane, University of Kansas Computer Center, Lawrence, KS, 66045 E-mail: sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu, sloane@ukanvax.bitnet, AT&T: (913)864-0444
carlo@electro.UUCP (Carlo Sgro) (11/30/89)
In article <3420@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> ereiamjh@jhunix.UUCP (Tom B O'toole) writes: >In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: >> [a lot of stuff] >Excuse me, but what exactly the hell was all THAT about??? Well, when I saw the posting, I thought that it was an attempt from someone who was against the UNITEX group to discredit Mr. Waldron with a forged posting. I'm still waiting for the followup posting disavowing the previous posting's content ... -- Carlo Sgro Vote for your favorite .signature! watmath!watcgl!electro!carlo Call 1-900-GOODONE ($2 on your phone bill).
bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) (11/30/89)
In article <8767@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford) writes:
Coincidence department: someone has pointed out to me that Dr.
Waldron is posting from a machine at Rutgers, the same great
institution that provided us with Prof. Bob Webber for a while.
I can see the National Enquirer headlines now:
SPACE ALIENS TRANSPLANT PHD BRAIN!
You thought putting Donald Trump's brain into Bill the Cat was
tough? Wait till you see the fun when a Rutgers faculty
member's brain is installed into the body of a United Nations
lackey! Next week: Elvis' brain into Richard Nixon, then Guru
Shree Rajneesh into Richard Stallman! Can *you* tell the
difference? 68% of Lithuanian housewives polled can't!allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery) (11/30/89)
As quoted from <3420@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> by ereiamjh@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Tom B O'toole): +--------------- | In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: | > [a lot of stuff] | Excuse me, but what exactly the hell was all THAT about??? +--------------- If I had to guess, our puerile net."friend" of the forged Peter DaSilva postings has found his/her/itself another target. ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi) uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp *(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)* *Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)* expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization. Mail me for info.
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery) (11/30/89)
As quoted from <8767@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> by spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford): +--------------- | I believe it to be a breach of etiquette and applicable law to publish | electronic correspondance without permission, so you'll have to take | my word on it that Dr. Waldron has mailed a number of | equally....unusual... messages to me, Chuq, Patt Harring, the +--------------- That *wasn't* a forgery? Then I suggest that, on top of everything else, the U.N. might want to reconsider the administration of UNITEX.... ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi) uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp *(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)* *Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)* expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization. Mail me for info.
wally@pallas.UUCP (Wally Hartshorn) (11/30/89)
In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: > [Weirdness upon weirdness, interspersed with weirdness] I read the article. I read the replies. I re-read the article. I still have *NO* idea what Mr. Waldron was trying to say. Whoever he is, just based upon that one article, he is an egotistical jerk. Keep in mind that's strictly a first impression, but it does give you an idea of how effective his article was at winning people over to his side -- whatever side that is. -- Wally (uunet!pallas!wally or wally@athenanet.com) "Student signature -- Stand clear."
justin@inmet.inmet.com (12/01/89)
/* Written 4:52 pm Nov 28, 1989 by steve@revolver.gatech.edu in inmet:news.groups */
[...]
P.S. - Dr Waldron should let Dorthy Niklus do all his talking for him. His
posting was among the more arrogant, self-centered pieces of garbage
I've ever read. It literally dripped of sarcasm - he obviously thinks
he's hot shit and everyone else is some kind of dumb schmuck. I promise
I won't hold his performance against UNITEX, however.
/* End of text from inmet:news.groups */
You may not, but I'm going to find it hard not to. I had simply assumed,
reading the base article, that this was some sort of forgery designed to
discredit UNITEX. Sadly, based on Spaf's followup, I must conclude that
this isn't the case. So, can anyone who's been paying attention up till
now tell me (I read the first few articles, concluded that Patt was probably
in the right, and ignored the rest) -- does this Dr. Waldron actually
occupy an important position at UNITEX? More importantly, do the
organization's views tend to match his? I mean, any group that blames
"Yuppies, Queers and Beancounters" for the problems of the world isn't
one I can take seriously -- indeed, given the implicit slurs, I'd say that
it may deserve to be stepped with a lot more force than just having its
Usenet playpen taken away...
-- Justin du Coeur" Maynard) (12/01/89)
In article <18948.2573afe3@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: >In article <3420@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>, > ereiamjh@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Tom B O'toole) writes: >> In article <Nov.28.12.37.44.1989.1726@newport.rutgers.edu> >> waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) writes: >>> [a lot of stuff] >> Excuse me, but what exactly the hell was all THAT about??? >As near as I can tell, he was trying to convince all of usenet that what Chuq >and Patt, etc, did concerning the unitex group was justified. He certainly >convinced me. He convinced me via email; he seems to think that anyone who disagrees that UNITEX should be on the net, or that soliciting funds via the net is not perfectly OK, is a yuppie, misinformed, and "fool and probably even worse". If I was sitting on the fence before, this sort of behavior would push me over the edge. Waldron should realize that he's doing UNITEX more harm than good and separate himself from the project. -- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can jay@splut.conmicro.com (eieio)| adequately be explained by stupidity. {attctc,bellcore}!texbell!splut!jay +---------------------------------------- "...when hasn't gibberish been legal C?" -- Tom Horsley, tom@ssd.harris.com
msmith@topaz.rutgers.edu (Mark Robert Smith) (12/02/89)
The aforementioned article from Dr. Waldron WAS really posted by Dr. Waldron, on the machine newport.rutgers.edu, or at least was forged at Rutgers. The Path: lines and the Message-ID format both look kosher for the Rutgers news system. Mark -- Mark Smith, KNJ2LH All Rights Reserved RPO 1604 You may redistribute this article only if those who P.O. Box 5063 receive it may do so freely. New Brunswick, NJ 08903-5063 msmith@topaz.rutgers.edu
" Maynard) (12/02/89)
I'm afraid that the original article in this particular flame-thread -
the one from Dr. Waldron - never made it here. (Maybe my system dropped
it to keep from running my blood pressure up. :-) Could someone please
email me a copy? I'd like to compare it to the email flame I got from
Dr. Waldron in response to my comments about the anti-Corpus Christi
screed.
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jay@splut.conmicro.com (eieio)| adequately be explained by stupidity.
{attctc,bellcore}!texbell!splut!jay +----------------------------------------
"...when hasn't gibberish been legal C?" -- Tom Horsley, tom@ssd.harris.comdg@cfisun.cfi.com (David Goodenough) (12/05/89)
msmith@topaz.rutgers.edu (Mark Robert Smith) sez: > The aforementioned article from Dr. Waldron WAS really posted by Dr. > Waldron, on the machine newport.rutgers.edu, or at least was forged at > Rutgers. The Path: lines and the Message-ID format both look kosher > for the Rutgers news system. Look at the .signature, and the headers, and tell me where this article started life? -- dg@lakart.UUCP - David Goodenough +---+ IHS | +-+-+ ....... !harvard!xait!lakart!dg +-+-+ | AKA: dg%lakart.uucp@xait.xerox.com +---+