Dear email recipient,
Due to a configuration problem at my site yesterday, some mail
destined for you bounced. The problem has since been fixed.
I am hereby forwarding the bounced message to you, see below.
-- paul
root at cse.nau.edu
>From MAILER-DAEMON Wed Jun 22 07:40:58 1994
Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON
Received: from localhost (localhost) by sunset.cse.nau.edu (8.6.9/2.2-nau) with internal id HAA02441; Wed, 22 Jun 1994 07:40:58 -0700
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1994 07:40:58 -0700
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON>
Subject: Returned mail: Local configuration error
Message-Id: <199406221440.HAA02441 at sunset.cse.nau.edu>
To: <BIOSCI-REQUEST at net.bio.net>
To: postmaster
Status: O
The original message was received at Wed, 22 Jun 1994 07:40:54 -0700
from net.bio.net [134.172.2.69]
----- The following addresses had delivery problems -----
<swift at nauvax.ucc.nau.edu> (unrecoverable error)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
553 sunset.cse.nau.edu config error: mail loops back to myself
554 <swift at nauvax.ucc.nau.edu>... Local configuration error
----- Original message follows -----
Return-Path: BIOSCI-REQUEST at net.bio.net
Received: from net.bio.net (net.bio.net [134.172.2.69]) by sunset.cse.nau.edu (8.6.9/2.2-nau) with ESMTP id HAA02439 for <swift at nauvax.ucc.nau.edu>; Wed, 22 Jun 1994 07:40:54 -0700
Received: (from daemon at localhost) by net.bio.net (8.6.9/8.6.6) id HAA07377 for chlam-list; Wed, 22 Jun 1994 07:22:08 -0700
Received: (from news at localhost) by net.bio.net (8.6.9/8.6.6) id HAA07373 for chlam-arpanet; Wed, 22 Jun 1994 07:22:07 -0700
To: chlamydomonas at net.bio.net
From: chlamy at acpub.duke.edu
Subject: Re: Chlamy nomenclature
Date: 22 Jun 1994 07:22:03 -0700
Sender: daemon at net.bio.net
Message-ID: <199406221422.KAA24950 at acpub.duke.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net.bio.net
Charlene Forest asked:
>Has any decision been made (and who will make the decision) about gene
>names in "Chlamy"? I had the feeling that opinions tended to favor
>keeping the 3 letter, lower case designations for genes. What about the
>dash? Will we hear anything more on the net? Personally I would hate to
>see changes without a strong justification. Thanks. Charlene
I don't think a formal consensus was reached. A summary of the posts I
received runs approximately as follows:
generally opposed to capital letters, either for dominant alleles
(insufficient information on nearly all genes) or for wild types ("why
change the present system" was the main objection)
neutral on hyphens or not - there were some comments in favor and some
against, but no one seemed to be passionate on this issue
general agreement on three-letter codes with the proviso that this is not a
hard and fast rule, and that old favorites like ac and pf will be kept as
is
Elizabeth Harris
chlamy at acpub.duke.edu
