[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: VMs: VMS provenance

To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: VMs: VMS provenance
From: Rene Zandbergen <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 23:01:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-reply-to: <000001c467b1$14dcbf20$0100a8c0@jeff>
Reply-to: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx

--- Jeff <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I now have enough circumstantial evidence to say one
> of two things.
> 
> 1. Gordon Rugg is right in EVERY respect or
> 
> 2. The VMS is an important historical document.
> 

I favour option 2. But what is important for some,
is not necessarily important for all, so how can one
exclude:

3. None of the above

Cheers, Rene

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list

Follow-Ups:
- Re: VMs: VMS provenance
  - From: Jeff

References:
- VMs: VMS provenance
  - From: Jeff

Prev by Date: Re: VMs: Copernican manuscript?
Next by Date: Re: VMs: Copernican manuscript?
Previous by thread: VMs: Re: Re: VMS provenance
Next by thread: Re: VMs: VMS provenance
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread