Re: bounce -> reject

On Wed, 5 Nov 1997, Tomas Fasth wrote:

> Tim Showalter wrote:
> > I have no problem with renaming "bounce" to something more descriptive;
> > "bounce" is already used for other commands anyway ("bounce" in pine, for
> > instance).
> >
> > Would "reject" be okay?
> Yes, I think that's more descriptive than "bounce".
> Are you going to make DSN the mandatory format for a reject?
I'm not sure.  Should I?  (didn't I?)

-- 
                                           Tim Showalter 
tjs(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu