home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.running
- Path: sparky!uunet!pmafire!news.dell.com!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.service.uci.edu!ucivax!ucla-cs!ficus.cs.ucla.edu!page
- From: page@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Thomas Page)
- Subject: Re: A contribution for the FAQ: SHOES
- Message-ID: <1993Jan25.191431.22382@cs.ucla.edu>
- Sender: usenet@cs.ucla.edu (Mr Usenet)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: wingfield.cs.ucla.edu
- Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
- References: <1993Jan22.160045.22279@cs.ucla.edu> <SIERRA.93Jan25104743@occs.cs.oberlin.edu>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 19:14:31 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <SIERRA.93Jan25104743@occs.cs.oberlin.edu>, sierra@occs.cs.oberlin.edu (Sue Sierra) writes:
- |>
- |> I appreciate this posting very much - I'd just been starting to wish I hadn't
- |> thrown out the shoe review issue of Runners' World. I think, however, that
- |> before this goes in the FAQ it should be edited so that those shoes which
- |> come only in men's models are clearly marked so. Currently the women-only
- |> shoes are marked off (and rightly so), but the men-only shoes are not
- |> distinguished from those available in both men's and women's models. Women
- |> are not a "special interest" running group any more than men are.
- |>
- |> Sue Sierra
- |> sierra@cs.oberlin.edu
-
- --
- I whole-heartedly agree with you. I realized part way through doing it that
- I was leaving out the weight of the women's version, and that was due to
- laziness, but that some of the shoes don't come in women's models, I overlooked
- completely. As I get time, I will add the information (or someone else is
- welcome to).
- ----------------------------- -------------------------------
- Thomas W. Page, Jr. email: page@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
- 3531 Boelter Hall day: 310 206-8696
- Department of Computer Science
- University of California
- Los Angeles, 90024-1596
-