Newsgroups: news.misc,alt.internet.services,news.future,news.admin.misc,news.groups
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!keo
From: keo@netcom.com (Kyle Elisabeth Overstreet)
Subject: Re: The Bible of Usenet *may* be changing its name...
Message-ID: <keoD2zpIt.11K@netcom.com>
Followup-To: news.misc,alt.internet.services,news.future,news.admin.misc,news.groups
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <3fukf8$fb6@clarknet.clark.net> <1995Jan24.063304.17871@midway.uchicago.edu> <keoD2xor1.B66@netcom.com> <D2xxHo.EKH@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 01:59:17 GMT
Lines: 16
Xref: news.clark.net news.misc:14819 alt.internet.services:39141 news.future:5437 news.admin.misc:28739 news.groups:124086

Mike Chapman (mike@chimera.med.Virginia.EDU) wrote:
: In article <keoD2xor1.B66@netcom.com>,
: Kyle Elisabeth Overstreet <keo@netcom.com> wrote:
: >A better term: The Usenet Concordance.

: What's wrong with Bible?

Nothing. Except "Concordance" is both more accurate and more resonant. 
"Bible" means Book, and implies a static text. I presume that the work in 
question will be subject to updates, and will not exist primarily in book 
format.

Nothing's wrong with "kippers", either, but I don't think "Usenet 
Kippers" would be a very good name, either.


