 | | Re: Robotics subgroups by mail (was: sensors) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | (...) I don't either, unless the subject of sensors is currently suffering from not having its own group/list, which I don't think it is. I just responded to Rob trying to be objective. He doesn't have my support in creating a new group for sensors (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Robotics subgroups by mail (was: sensors) —Andy Gombos
|
| | | | I also fail to see why a seperate group is needed. If a seperate group is made, then all the people from this list that do not suscribe to the subgroup cannot participate in dicussions, unless they go to the website, or use a news reader. This could (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Robotics subgroups by mail (was: sensors) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) Nope, that statement as a whole is not correct. It's partially correct in that people who subscribe only to the lego-robotics@crynwr.com mailing list would indeed not automatically see a new sensors subgroup of lugnet.robotics, but it's not (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Robotics subgroups by mail (was: sensors) — Todd Lehman
|
| | | | [I'm replying to an email that Stuart Crenshaw wrote. He said it was OK to quote him here and reply for everyone's benefit. I quoted his reply inline below to fit into the thread.] (...) No, you actually can post to lugnet newsgroups via e-mail (not (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
