Will wrote:

Guess how much I care.

Enough to make fallacious appeals to uthority by raising the irrelevant
subject of your qulifications. Hence "clueless".

Steve Firth wrote:
Will wrote:

Guess how much I care.

Enough to make fallacious appeals to uthority by raising the irrelevant
subject of your qulifications. Hence "clueless".

I think your Mac's "a" key has just packed up. What will fail next?

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "John"
saying something like:

http://improve-usenet.org

Am I correct in thinking that as far as I can see this won't work on OE?

It'll work in OE if you install NewsProxy.
--

Dave

On 28 Apr, 12:03, Stuart Noble
wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:
Will wrote:

*Guess how much I care.

Enough to make fallacious appeals to uthority by raising the irrelevant
subject of your qulifications. Hence "clueless".

I think your Mac's "a" key has just packed up. What will fail next?

He's a Mac user, you say? And he calls me clueless.

Will.

Will wrote:

On 28 Apr, 12:03, Stuart Noble
wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:
Will wrote:

Guess how much I care.

Enough to make fallacious appeals to uthority by raising the irrelevant
subject of your qulifications. Hence "clueless".

I think your Mac's "a" key has just packed up. What will fail next?

He's a Mac user, you say? And he calls me clueless.

yawn Since that comes from someone who has decided to only use crap
from the maker of the world's most broken OS, that comment makes you
look even more clueless.

John Rumm wrote:
I would have thought they have every right to archive information placed
into the public domain. Posting to usenet would certainly be counted by
most as "placing into the public domain".

I'm not sure that this is the case.

However, I think they might have a claim that they're not archiving
usenet so much as being a part of it. Usenet easily becomes a very
broadly defined thing.

Dan.