From: pack-news@rattus.net 
  
 Charles  writes: 
  
 > In article <2q9j0mFrq7foU1@uni-berlin.de>, Thad 
 >  wrote: 
 > 
 > > Each proposed group will have its own YES/NO section on the ballot. If 
 > 
 > I don't see the point in proposing a group that is premature to exist. 
 > Also I dislike your change of the proposed name of the proposed slr 
 > group. It seems like you are so stubborn in your slr has to have 
 > interchangable lens thesis that you have mucked up the proposal. 
  
 Frankly, at this point, the naughty elistists have shot themselves in 
 their collective foot. If a non-interchangeable-lens SLR has a 
 sufficiently expansive system, then they can be told to bugger off 
 because it /does/ belong in this group. 
  
 Ho ho ho. 
  
 B> 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)