Barry wrote:
> I'm shocked! :-)) & *currently* can only see one spelling mistake in 
your reply:-))

Dammit, I suppose that you're going to say that my posting 
was 'fundamentally' flawed? You could have taken the posting in 
the 'positive' spirit in which it was sent, but instead you've looked 
on the 'negative' side. My 'potential' can only improve, providing I 
don't get attacked in a verbal form of assault and 'battery'. I shall 
persist in 'charging' ahead with my postings unless there is a re'volt' 
which would inevitably h'amp'er my efforts. So, having explained my 
position, I'll 'sine' off with a 'wave' ;-))
Roger

Reply via email to