On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 12:56:37AM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 07:13:21PM -0500, William Ballard wrote: > > It's pretty clear what the intent was -- those are intended to > > represents specific brands. I have no idea if that's permitted or not. > > Of course it's allowed, you blithering idiot. This has got to be the > most *random* thing I've seen on -legal in months.
"I don't know" is random, and makes him a "blithering idiot" to be flamed? Your bursts of undeserved incivility (see also [EMAIL PROTECTED]) are quickly starting to overwhelm your contribution to this list. Find a better outlet, please. -- Glenn Maynard