|
|
Re: A typical scientist? (Re: Evidence . . . .
J. P. Gilliver (G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk)
18 May 1995 02:18:24 +0100
In article <807@landmark.iinet.net.au> gil@landmark.iinet.net.au writes:
[]
> Well no, Carl. Wrong again! We are rather less concerned with people
> objecting to bullshit, as they have every right to do, than we are
> with their flooding the newsgroups of other branches of science with
> their constant abuse.
>
> The problem we are addressing here has to do with the manner of your
> participation in our conference. That you and so many identifiable
[]
Perhaps when posting a followup to something that is posted to four newsgroups,
you might say which one you consider to be `yours', as the rest of us don't
know which you mean. (I think `conference' is Compu$serve-speak for newsgroup,
to a first approximation.)
--
J. P. Gilliver (John); also G6JPG @ GB7NNA on the amateur radio packet network.
`Ergonomic' =/= `dext-handed'. (john.gilliver@gmrc.gecm.com at work.)
The summit of Everest is marine limestone.
I hope you dream a pig.
|