Received: from nova.unix.portal.com by mail.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom)
id QAA21793; Thu, 6 Oct 1994 16:10:46 -0700
From: Paul_-_Griswold@cup.portal.com
Received: from hobo.corp.portal.com (hobo.online.portal.com [156.151.5.5]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.7/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA28530 for <lightwave-l@netcom.com>; Thu, 6 Oct 1994 16:10:57 -0700
Received: from localhost (pccop@localhost) by hobo.corp.portal.com (8.6.4/1.67) id QAA28459 for lightwave-l@netcom.com; Thu, 6 Oct 1994 16:10:56 -0700
To: Lightwave-l@netcom.com
Subject: The Flyer
Lines: 20
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 94 16:10:55 PDT
Message-ID: <9410061610.4.27237@cup.portal.com>
X-Origin: The Portal System (TM)
Sender: owner-lightwave-l@netcom.com
Precedence: bulk
After all the posts about the Flyer, I felt as though I should step in and
say something....
At the risk of blowing my NDA.... Have any of you thought that there may be
a really good reason for NewTek to not want to have machine control? Have
any of you thought that there may be a really good reason why NewTek is
touting the Flyer as an online solution, refusing to address offline work?
Instead of complaining about it... Think about it...