I would be comfortable with PG, except there is no clear definition of what that may be. It's much easier to enforce a "G" rating, where we all seem to know what is and is not permissible. Under earlier regimes, I kinda figure if it was OK on Leno it would be acceptable on this list. Now things are a bit tighter. I don't have a problem with that, though a bit more relaxed would be nice. I just don't want to open the gates to a slew of "F" substitutes. Didn't we have someone stranded in Effing Ham recently? Now THAT was unacceptable! ;-) Karl Wolz |-----Original Message----- |From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of |Michael Sullivan |Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 1:00 PM |To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM |Subject: List Rating G or PG? | |Not to start anything(really) but I suggest that this list rating be |upgraded from 'G' to 'PG'. I guess replies should be to the moderators so |as not to cause problems, but a vote would be cool. |Michael in San Antonio |91GL AT 'Gringo' |73 Beetle |
Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of
Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection
will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!
Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com
The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.
Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.