From: Clive D. W. Feather (clive@on-the-train.demon.co.uk)
Date: Wed Jul 10 2002 - 05:49:20 CDT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In message <GyzqEL.87y@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>, Charles Lindsey
<chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes
>[Proposed new text]
> Although both of these methods have seen use in the past, the
> preponderance of current usage on Usenet has been for method (b)
> and many moderators are ill-prepared to deal with method (a).
> Therefore, method (a) SHOULD NOT be used until such time as the
> majority of moderators are able to accept it.
I know that technically SHOULD NOT covers it, but I think the wording
should make it clearer that the reason for not using (a) is purely that
moderators might not be prepared. Something like:
Therefore, method (a) SHOULD NOT be used unless there is good
reason to believe that the moderator in question is able to accept
it (in the absence of information, it should be assumed that he
can not).
- --
Clive D.W. Feather NOTE | Internet Expert | Work: <clive@demon.net>
Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 change | Demon Internet | Home: <clive@davros.org>
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 to fax | Thus plc | Web: <http://www.davros.org>
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk 2.0.5
iQEVAwUBPSwRDCNAHP3TFZrhAQEOAwf/Rm8BhxedeHuBG8fkx23f/wao20pp61wc
3WhAu7WDMaIHUnKJWC+JXhaZFhXkxV4msXmlvHGLGp1seeP6akT+vXgqX7BTK+Y3
dOmtDUuq6Ua3lZWT+vbzs3p0McUC4uGpUK0ZFprqCQFbMT2ZYlxqrnWCh7gOrbnh
0afBmV0e9z6tuYfuqxUmVrQCrLnCQ5y3loxYF/S6//CPRk702PVipokQ0EjhVMbF
d8UERGfLMrBUPVHGRuo69MlUQRlpPsxd4rMIOwkxlXdMqeKNAbrUYb2LJqsclAsk
iE9oSwQsbtFKVFKOWnSHp6eVzSmf0dSknflMcIGJ0wYv/WL11Q+fRg==
=5UUB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----