The in-crowd (was: Re: Kate (duh) et al)

[btshelp@rigel.tamu.edu (Evolve or Perish)]

kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael L. Kaufman) writes...
>Someone said:
>>I'm not sure I should take this "conspiracy-theory" all too
>>seriously, but I think it's a valid point that there's a certain
>>"in-crowd" on this list that can't be gotten into all too well. I'm
>>not too prejudiced, as I am here so short, but I feel it, yes.
> 
>While it is certainly true that they are part of an "in-crowd", it is in no
>way true that they exclude other people from joining in.

I'd have to agree with this. This is the only group I subscribe to where I 
have no fear of posting (and I'm ALL OVER the net - hi Drewcifer!). In 
most groups there is a definite newbie/oldbie prejudice, but I've felt 
very welcome here. I've even made three good friends here - and two of 
them were a couple who moved to my town and mailed me just because I was 
on Gaffa!

Of course, I get flamed by Drukman - but hey, who doesn't?

Happy holidays (whatever they may be) to all!


b r e t t 
-- 
Laws are good because they force us to get numbers with lots of sixes
tattooed on our heads and tattooing does NOT hurt.  Woof!

							-- K.