----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cybertime Hostmaster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> > Note the last two words: "particular sender", not recipient.  Hence, my
> > script addresses his question and works just fine in this scenario.
>
> Then reply to that persons message, not  Keith Woodworth's or mine, both
> of which show a script that does more.

I didn't reply to you, I replied to Keith's message (try following the
thread before replying).

> The cleanq that Keith noted is one of two things, a custom one, or the one
> by Mark Davis and Craig Sanders.  Without knowing what his script does,
> there is no way I can say whether he was stating it did the same thing as
> the man postsuper example or not.  But the fact remains that the man
> postsuper example is a very versatile one, and does more than what was
> requested.

So you reply without knowledge of what the script Keith presented even does.
Again, my reply was to Andrew's original post and a response to the cleanq
script presented by Keith.  You are the one the that jump in without
understanding the progress of the thread and made some knee-jerk response
about the script I present being flawed.  Beware of that "foot-in-mouth"
syndrome you are occasionally suseptable to.

Bill


Reply via email to