Newsgroups: comp.parallel,comp.arch
From: Henry Baker <hbaker@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Admin] Apology for Spec.Execution posting
Organization: nil
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:26:47 GMT
Message-ID: <hbaker-1001950718320001@192.0.2.1>

In article <1995Jan10.134200.14578@relay.acadiau.ca>,
881045m@dragon.acadiau.ca wrote:

> This is the moderator for comp.parallel. It is my choice to allow a posting
> to be placed in comp.parallel. Often, if there are other non-moderated news-
> groups to which a comp.parallel letter is cross-posted to, I will keep the
> headers, and the message will be cross posted. 
> 
> Yesterday I recieved a letter about speculative execution & Islamic laws. I
> knew at the time that I may have trouble with the posting. I considered that
> the posting may mean something else entirely to someone else.  I debated with
> myself over this posting for a while. I must tell you I really dislike
> cutting off a posting. I don't really like second-guessing a poster. I also
> had interpreted the posting not as an attack on any religion, but rather
> something less harmful.
> 
> However, in this case I was wrong. For a newsgroup about parallel
> computing (and cross posted to comp.arch) it was very inappropiate. It was
> my mistake, and as such I apologize. 
> 
> While I will try to continue to have as little influence on the postings in
> this forum, I will give posts that are questionable (like this one was)
> much more careful consideration.
> 
> richard muise, 
> one of the moderators of Comp.Parallel

Since I was the originator of this posting, I would also like to apologize
if any offense was taken, because none was meant.  It was actually a serious
question.  Sometimes technical fields have to deal with non-technical
constraints, and I thought that this might be such a case.

I did not put smileys on my original posting, because I did not intend it
to be a joke.  Apparently, the moderator thought that it was.

