Victor Sack wrote:
> Nick Andrew > wrote:
>
> > (Victor Sack) writes:
> >
> > >I notice that there has been no reaction to my request to provide an
> > >estimate of expected traffic for the proposed newsgroup and the current
> > >traffic on the net related to this topic, i.e. food from an Australian
> > >perspective. This is a standard, even elementary, request and the
> > >reasons for it are well explained in the aus.* FAQ. Yet no estimate has
> > >been forthcoming. Is this no longer of any importance in the aus.*
> > >hierarchy? If so, shouldn't the pertinent parts be deleted from the FAQ
> > >as no longer relevant?
> >
> > No, you're just too late. We've moved on from the RFD already, and are
> > in the voting phase now.
>
> Eh, I posted what was effectively the very same thing, more than once
> even, even quoting parts of the aus.* FAQ, *during the RFD discussion* -
> and nothing happened.
My god man get a LIFE. Wah Wah nothing happened. It's a simple call for
votes for a new aus newsgroup. You don't like it? reply no! Simple
really. I think you've made your points many, many times. I couldn't
have cared less personally speaking, but seeing your attitude I think I
will vote. Yes for me!
> > The proposal now stands or falls on its own
> > merit, inadequate or not.
>
> That is obvious enough about *now*. What about *before*?
Move on, nothing more to see here.
Doc