Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: William Elliot <marsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:46:09 -0800
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, quasi wrote:
On 26 Feb 2008 06:40:40 +0200, Phil CarmodyBoycotts do work.
<thefatphil_demunged@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx> writes:
Michael Press <rubrum@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Google groups is a bad usenet denizen.
I don't disagree with that.
So why aren't you encouraging people not to use it?
Because it won't work.
For one thing, new Google Groups users will just keep on arriving, ItJust a once a week post
would be a full time job trying to redirect them.
-- Important notice to users of Google Groups
And what would I redirect them to? None of the free alternatives that
What's wrong with mathforum or any other of the suggestions made earlier
in this thread?
I'm aware of are sufficiently low tech for the typical newbie.If newbies require low tech, then they don't belong here,
in a math group, where low tech intelligence is impolite.
How about that, you've invented new acrimonious acronyms.
Low techie, low tech jerk, low tech gibberish.
.
- References:
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: quasi
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: Phil Carmody
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: quasi
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: Michael Press
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: quasi
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: Michael Press
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: quasi
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: Michael Press
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: quasi
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: Phil Carmody
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- From: quasi
- Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- Prev by Date: Re: Comprehensive Solution Manual for Textbooks
- Next by Date: Standard Topology on S^n ?
- Previous by thread: Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- Next by thread: Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|