From: jpmcw@comcast.net 
  
 edward ohare wrote: 
  
 > On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:34:52 -0500, tskirvin@killfile.org (Tim 
 > Skirvin) wrote: 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 >> .slr-systems means...what?  It would confuse me, and I have an 
 >>idea what you're talking about. 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > The early RFDs had a special definition of slr for the purpose of 
 > excluding cheap slrs.  Rather than change the Charter as a result of 
 > obejctions, the proponents changed the group name to a term which 
 > allowed them to keep a definition excluding cheap slrs. 
  
 Cheap or expensive or middling were never criteria that I saw, and there 
 were several who were adamant about the (wrong) definiton of what an SLR 
 is. So we have a compromise, one which I hated when I first saw it, but 
 that's because I had gotten so used to the original (up to Draft 3, that 
 is!) and I don't like sudden changes. 
  
 I agree with others that not all four groups are likely to be a big hit, 
 and other than voting yes on rpd.slr-systems, I am not sure about the 
 others; either yes or abstain for a couple, no on one, probably. 
  
 My hope is that displeasure with some aspects doesn't deter a positive 
 vote for at least some change for most who care about the photog. groups. 
  
 -- 
  
 John McWilliams 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)