Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!pipex!sunic!seunet!news2.swip.net!seunet!sdsmail!hermod
Newsgroups: news.misc,alt.internet.services,news.future,news.admin.misc,news.groups
Message-ID: <144@sdsmail.sds.se>
References: <3fukf8$fb6@clarknet.clark.net> <1995Jan24.063304.17871@midway.uchicago.edu> <keoD2xor1.B66@netcom.com> <D2xxHo.EKH@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU><keoD2zpIt.11K@netcom.com>
Reply-To: hermod@sdsmail.sds.se (Hermod Pedersen)
From: hermod@sdsmail.sds.se (Hermod Pedersen)
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 21:27:51 GMT
Subject: Re: The Bible of Usenet *may* be changing its name...
Lines: 21
Xref: news.clark.net news.misc:14847 alt.internet.services:39308 news.future:5458 news.admin.misc:28838 news.groups:124404

 
In article <keoD2zpIt.11K@netcom.com>, Kyle Elisabeth Overstreet (keo@netcom.com) writes:
>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.

I'd prefer kippers, as I can relate to them. Concordance it above my
knowledge threshold. But then, English is not my native tongue, so I
suppose I may be excused, be it either "more accurate" or "more
resonant" (whatever that's supposed to mean). 

