richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (10/18/89)
Greg Woods wrote: > > AAAAAUGH! Goodness. Calm down before you bust a gut, Greg. There's no need to resort to CAPITAL LETTERS. > The comp.women debate again. Desire for better distribution >is NOT a valid argument for putting a group in a certain hierarchy! It wasn't >for that group (which has now proven that it indeed belongs in soc) and it >isn't for the aquaria group either. Now that the B.S. about technical >aspects of the hobby and other smokescreens are cleared away we can go >to work on the heart of the matter. Now wait a minute Greg, recall that I said (something along the lines of) there are valid arguments for .aquaria being in both sci and rec but sci's penetration into Europe gave the nod to sci rather than rec. It's not primary concern, it was the weighting argument. >Say WHAT?? There you go with those CAPITAL LETTERS again, Greg. >How do you figure? The European admins have (collectively) >said that they DON'T WANT RECREATIONAL GROUPS. Wrong. >circumvented. And if the admins in Massachusetts had said they didn't >want UNIX groups (which they haven't, so this entire analogy is flawed) If you'll take the time to re-read what I wrote, you will notice the analogy is not flawed. -- Help wipe out BBQ lighter fluid in your lifetime richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV