What about bionet.foobar??????
ajt at doc.ic.ac.uk
Fri Mar 27 14:04:37 EST 1992
mwfolsom at hydra.unm.edu (Mike Folsom) writes:
: Well, my response was to Tony's quip about bionet.confocal and nothing
: more than some thoughts. It neither requires nor ask for an offical
: response. Anyway, I imagine that alt.foobar and alt.xxx already exist.
E-mail is notorious for being misinterpreted because the non-verbal cues
that modify the meaning of spoken communication are missing.
I put a ;-) after my suggestion about bionet.confocal which is the
conventional way of indicating a wry smile (look at it sideways).
Mike interpreted this 'parenthetical remark' correctly but others may
not have :-(
I think Mike makes a good point in his reply to my little quip and
maybe now he now knows a more about activity on the the confocal list.
I see this sort of exchange as normal in an unmoderated forum, and
Dave's response was a perfectly reasonable reminder that new groups
should be proposed formally.
If we could just harness all the energy that is expended in discussing
the creation of new groups etc. and redirect it into discussing
*interesting* aspects of biology I think everyone would be happy!
Tony Travis <ajt at uk.ac.sari.rri> | Dr. A.J.Travis
| Rowett Research Institute,
| Greenburn Road, Bucksburn, Aberdeen,
| AB2 9SB. UK. tel 0224-712751
More information about the Bioforum