Re: Postings

heh (ashton@netcom.com)
Thu, 13 Apr 1995 07:33:29 PDT

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Tim Pierce: "Re: Postings"
Previous message: Bernhard Muenzer: "Re: How can Walnut Creek continue ?"
Next in thread: Tim Pierce: "Re: Postings"
Reply: Tim Pierce: "Re: Postings"
Reply: John Kahila: "Re: Postings"
Reply: Peter J. Kappesser: "Re: Postings"

Once upon a time, edhew@xenitec.xenitec.on.ca chunked:
>[In the message "Postings", "Monee C. Kidd" <mkidd@wariat.org scribes... ]
>
>} It's now been two months since I orginally submitted my FAQs for approval. I
>
>When they get stacked up and I can't wait any longer, I'll just strip
>news.answers out of the "Newsgroups" field and post what I must to the
>newsgroups intended excluding the one requiring approval. When the
>approval finally does come through, I simply add news.answers back into
>the Newsgroups field.

I've long thought that there should be an unmoderated alt group for
all those silly faqs ... you know ... alt.culture.net-viking, alt.gorets,
alt.spam.barf.barf.barf, ... that kind of thing. Many of those
alt.silly.group.names have faqs, but are not really suited for
news.answers and are not willing to run the gauntlet.
Having these faqs tossed into one group would be a grand pointer
to where silly stuff was going on in the looney bin.

Anyone have ideas for alt.groups where this might be fitting?

Ob: the Cabal does not exist

Next message: Tim Pierce: "Re: Postings"
Previous message: Bernhard Muenzer: "Re: How can Walnut Creek continue ?"
Next in thread: Tim Pierce: "Re: Postings"
Reply: Tim Pierce: "Re: Postings"
Reply: John Kahila: "Re: Postings"
Reply: Peter J. Kappesser: "Re: Postings"

[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]