Subject:
|
Re: IOLTC Update
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2001 22:44:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
783 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains.org, Mike Walsh writes:
> Re-reading my post from yesterday I think I emphasized the LD involvement
> too much.
OK. What kind of "involvement" would there be from LD then?
> Please don't get paranoid about this effort, in my opinion this
> effort is no different than local groups moving some of their dicussion out
> of lugnet.org.abc.xyz onto a mailing list. For one reason or another, they
> have decided that they prefer that some parts of their communication not be
> visible on LUGNET.
I can totally understand and respect that. That just makes sense too.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: IOLTC Update
|
| (...) I'm almost as confused as everyone else by what has got to be an offhand remark, or even a misstatement, that is getting blown out of proportion (or else I am worried too). (...) I thought that the answer is "none, except that if LD wants to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
| "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:3aa14ca7.508392...net.com... [ ... snipped ... ] (...) Steve mentioned that NA was how it should start, it would/will not be a permanent state. (...) reason, (...) I don't know, Steve will (...) (24 years ago, 3-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
