On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 12:51:48 PM -0600, Randomthots ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Marco Fioretti wrote:
>
> >Randomthots <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >>Out of consideration for all the poor slobs living in technologically
> >>underdeveloped countries
> >
> >The poor slobs will be delighted of your kind attitude. In any case,
> >I have explicitly mentioned several ADVANCED, very trendy use cases
> >where one pays for byte. have you read my message?
>
> Yes, I read your message. Did you read the OP's message? Did you
> read the responses? Did you take note of the direction and intent of
> the responses?
Yes. That;s exactly why I started a *different* thread. Once I noted
the direction of the original one, I knew I had nothing to say about
the original question, and I already knew that there are good reasons,
as Andrew said, to always use the same editor.
I just noticed, before leaving that thread, that a myth was mentioned
and explained (in a NEW discussion) why it is a myth. REGARDLESS of
what anybody does with his private email, or of email and email
clients in general. There is no need at all to summarize to me that
thread, I was talking of something else.
Ciao,
Marco
--
Marco Fioretti mfioretti, at the server mclink.it
Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/
[WYSIWYG] Word processing may be an obsolete idea of the 1980s...no
longer a necessity in the age of the Web and email
Michael Stutz, The Linux Cookbook
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
