I didn’t look at email thread But the clarification I was looking at was relevance of SDWAEC2
Everything else I was pretty clear if I wasn’t clear on this maybe it’s the way I communicated So for that I’m sorry I look back at what I wrote Thanks On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 2:48 PM Jon Perryman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 20:24:09 -0500, Joseph Reichman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Thanks and I apologize if sone of my posts made it seem like I wasn’t > listening to what you were telling me > > Joseph, you missed Peter's point. Clearly you don't understand this is not > about "seems like". By ignoring several clarification requests, you caused > lots of confusing posts because you forced false speculation that would > have been avoided by the clarifications. Everyone is wasting their time > reading irrelevant posts (not just the poster) because you couldn't be > bothered to respond. Do you not consider this rude? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
