Re: Publish RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy? - OS2

This is a discussion on Re: Publish RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy? - OS2 ; In news.groups on Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:41:48 -0400, Meat Plow wrote: > On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 13:54:02 -0600, Tim Skirvin wrote: > >> We've received an RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy. A quick >> check has revealed a high ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Re: Publish RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy?

  1. Re: Publish RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy?

    In news.groups on Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:41:48 -0400, Meat Plow
    wrote:

    > On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 13:54:02 -0600, Tim Skirvin wrote:
    >
    >> We've received an RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy. A quick
    >> check has revealed a high level of activity for the group, most (but not
    >> all) of which is off-topic. What does everyone think about publishing the
    >> RFD?
    >>
    >> - Tim Skirvin (skirv@big-8.org)

    >
    > I think it's time to publish the RFD.


    In news.groups, not in a poorly propagated treehouse experiment that
    has failed.


    --
    PJR :-)

  2. Re: Publish RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy?

    On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:54:14 +0000, Peter J Ross wrote:

    > In news.groups on Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:41:48 -0400, Meat Plow
    > wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 13:54:02 -0600, Tim Skirvin wrote:
    >>
    >>> We've received an RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy. A quick
    >>> check has revealed a high level of activity for the group, most (but not
    >>> all) of which is off-topic. What does everyone think about publishing the
    >>> RFD?
    >>>
    >>> - Tim Skirvin (skirv@big-8.org)

    >>
    >> I think it's time to publish the RFD.

    >
    > In news.groups, not in a poorly propagated treehouse experiment that
    > has failed.


    Hence my removal of NGP to the followup and replacing with ng and coos2a.
    Aside, the RFD was already published to ng by Daedalus.


  3. Re: Publish RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy?

    Meat Plow wrote:
    > On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:54:14 +0000, Peter J Ross wrote:
    >
    >> In news.groups on Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:41:48 -0400, Meat Plow
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 13:54:02 -0600, Tim Skirvin wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> We've received an RFD to remove comp.os.os2.advocacy. A quick
    >>>> check has revealed a high level of activity for the group, most (but not
    >>>> all) of which is off-topic. What does everyone think about publishing the
    >>>> RFD?
    >>>>
    >>>> - Tim Skirvin (skirv@big-8.org)
    >>>
    >>> I think it's time to publish the RFD.

    >>
    >> In news.groups, not in a poorly propagated treehouse experiment that
    >> has failed.

    >
    > Hence my removal of NGP to the followup and replacing with ng and coos2a.
    > Aside, the RFD was already published to ng by Daedalus.


    Dammit. I just posted and didn't forgot the followup tricks.

    What I wrote, and was supposed to be in news.groups was "Hmmm. You take
    a vote to take a vote?"

    B/

+ Reply to Thread