hi folks,
not sure if my answer to Kurt's note got lost in the din. If so, please
consider the following as a re-send. If it wasn't lost, then consider
this to be more noise amongst the signal.
Thanks~
-dsp
### start copy ###
Dear Kurt,
Please see:
http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/m
On Jan 18, Philip Newton wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2002 11:27:57 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Bunce)
> wrote:
>
> > I can't remember what the "precedence to denying organizational
> > PAUSE id's" was. Can anyone else?
>
> Maybe he meant something like this:
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg08649.html
On Wed, 9 Jan 2002 11:27:57 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Bunce)
wrote:
> I can't remember what the "precedence to denying organizational
> PAUSE id's" was. Can anyone else?
Maybe he meant something like this:
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg08649.html ?
But that was someone applying for one PAUSE I
I can't remember what the "precedence to denying organizational
PAUSE id's" was. Can anyone else?
Tim.
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 11:42:39PM -0500, Dave Paris wrote:
> I'm aware there has been some precedence to denying organizational PAUSE
> id's in the past. I'd like to revisit this for the fol
