Phred wrote:

> In article >, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
> [snip]
>>>
>>Belong to/subscribe to. <shrug> I knew what ginny meant.
>
> Nope. I think I disagree with you Cathy. RFC is the only group I
> know where the term "belong to" would be appropriate for so many of
> the people I see here. No doubt there are others with a similar
> "community", especially in soc.* and perhaps other rec.* newsgroups,
> but I see no sense of "belonging" that could be attributed to anyone
> in any of the other groups I currently subscribe to -- 31 in all,
> mostly very low traffic and including 11 computer related and 13
> regional aus.* groups.

Fair enough, Phred. However, I think you didn't realize what I was
getting at, so let me try to explain it a little better. I am fully
aware that 'subscribe' is the the correct term, but if ginny (or
anybody else) chooses to use the term 'belong' instead, it's no skin
off my nose...

> RFC would typically have three to four times
> the traffic of the *total* of these others most nights.

Quite so.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Egg tastes better when it's not on your face...