Received: from sloth.swcp.com (sloth.swcp.com [198.59.115.25]) by nacm.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id QAA12688 for <executor@nacm.com>; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 16:35:39 -0700
Received: from iclone.UUCP (uucp@localhost) by sloth.swcp.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with UUCP id RAA20080 for nacm.com!executor; Fri, 23 Jun 1995 17:35:37 -0600
Received: by mailhost (nextstep Smail3.1.29.0 #11)
id m0sPIFP-000YbmC; Fri, 23 Jun 95 17:34 MDT
Message-Id: <m0sPIFP-000YbmC@mailhost>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 95 17:34 MDT
From: ctm@ardi.com (Clifford T. Matthews)
To: executor@nacm.com
Subject: enough with the OS/2 vs. Win95 discussion
Sender: owner-paper@nacm.com
Precedence: bulk
Hi Folks,
No matter how tempting it is, please exercise self-restraint and post
not one more OS/2 vs. Win95 article to this list. By now you should
be able to figure out which subscribers are potentially interested in
discussing this via private e-mail and just to make sure I don't
inadvertantly leave anyone out of the fun, I'll even volunteer to
facilitate further discussion off this list with this offer:
If you'd like to continue, or perhaps start discussing
the technical aspects of OS/2, Win95 and WinNT just
send e-mail to ctm@ardi.com with a subject of
"OS Discussion". I'll then send you a list of e-mail
addresses of everyone else who up to that point has
done the same. That way you can "talk amongst yourselves".
Sorry, in general I'm not one for squelching information, but the
topic is no longer germane to this list.
Normally I'd just send e-mail to the parties involved, but 1) that
wouldn't prevent new people from adding their two cents and 2) people
really might want to continue this discussion out of band, so my offer
above is serious, even though it looks like satire.
