One shot is ok but not 2. gh was kdding(I think) but Elitenet, on the other hand, is not. As far as T&FN is concerned(I didn't start this), perhaps gh is just warning me that I better not fall for the same thing they did. To wit, quoting from letsrun:
"The magazine is nicknamed the Bible of the Sport, but it looks like they've quit doing some of their own research. On page 36 of the newest Track and Field News, it says "Ivy League officials are considering withdrawing their schools from NCAA Div. 1 competition and moving to Div. III reports the New York Times. The only problem is this item never appeared in the NYTimes, it appeared on the LetsRun.com message boards as a hoax post. We like knowing that the so called "Bible of the sport" gets their information from our website. If Track and Field News is "The Bible of the Sport", then does that mean that LetsRun.com is the "God of the Sport"? In the future, they just need to ask us what is a joke and what is true. Their editors as they advance in age must not be able to catch the wit, sarcasm, and hoaxes of our younger posters (although we'll admit that for a brief moment, we fell for the hoax as well)." The information is reliable and, believe me, people are interested in this stuff. I have the offlist messages. Is there some sort of journalistic standard I am supposed to meet here? And whose standards, pray tell, should I be meeting? This thread started with the following on December 10: "Someone just posted a rumour to the Can list that Charlie is supposed to be behind the scenes of Tim and Marion. They were all supposed to have been seen at York's fine indoor track in Toronto today. Is this possible?" On December 18, we got this: http://wwwi.reuters.com/images/2002-12-19T005803Z_01_GALAXY-DC-MDF171281_RTRIDSP_2_SPORTS-ATHLETICS-JONES-DC.jpg Now, as far as Elitenet's post is concerned, she was interested enough in this story to specially request that the pic above be sent to her other email account. Spare me the condescension. Regards, Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > My sentiments, exactly > thank you Mr. Hill > > In a message dated 1/11/2003 2:28:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >Thanks for the clues, Martin. We're now on a plane. > > > >Sincerely, > >The National Enquirer > > > >
