Suzanne at SuzCorner wrote:
Ericka Kammerer wrote:
EdAugusts wrote:

P.S., I think you're wrong about the evolution of ' misc.kids.'
These group names haven't changed in at least 18 years...since before
there was a 'web'.

Good heavens, does your arrogance know no bounds?
Misc.kids.pregnancy was not created until 1994. Several of
us were around then to remember it, not to mention that
anyone (including yourself) is capable of googling and
verifying when it was established.

Ericka, Far from being a newbie, I used to post quite a bit on
misc.kids, back when there was only one misc.kids, and as far as I can
see, misc.kids itself is still around. What happened was not a "name
change" at all. It was a split off into two related groups.

Um, where did I say any different? Banty also made
clear that m.k.p evolved out of another group (m.k), though
if you go back and look at the CFV you will see that there
were more than two groups involved in the misc.kids.* reorganization.
Either way, the name "misc.kids.pregnancy" didn't even exist
18 years ago, and the m.k FAQ applies, just as Banty said, because
it is the "lead" group in the m.k.* hierarchy.

Frankly, however, this is all in the angels dancing on
pinheads category, as the main point is that advertising (which
this clearly is) is not acceptable in these newsgroups, and being
insulting and arrogant (which the thin veneer of "content" is,
even construed in the best possible light) is unwelcome just about
anywhere regardless of the charter. Ignoring netiquette is
poor manners, and so is being insulting to group members, and
if *you* care about your brand image, you would be more concerned
about the ugly light cast on it by your surrogate's behavior than
you would be about defending his inappropriate behavior.

Best wishes,
Ericka