On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 16:26:08 +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 04:10:01PM +0100, Peter Haworth wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 19:14:41 +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
> > > Well, er..., there will be a meeting on the 21st. I spoke to Alex last 
> > > night and he said we could hold it at State 51.
> > 
> > Sadly, I can't make it to the meeting after all, even though I'll be in
> > London the next day.
> If this is because you don't have somewhere to stay on the Thursday night,
> I'm sure we can collectively find a way around that.  If you bring your
> passport, we'll even let you south of the river and my sofa is very
> comfortable and has a well-stocked booze cabinet next to it.

Well, it was partly due to having nowhere to stay, but I've requested the train ticket 
now, so it's too late to change my mind. Thanks for the offer, though.

> > -- 
> >     Peter Haworth   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > "I just looked at the HTTP 1.1 spec (RFC 2616).  It's too fscking big.
> >  It's a Request For Comments, goddamnit,
> >  not a Request For An Epic Of Homeric Proportions!"
> >             -- David Cantrell
> /me feels weird

Most of the regular posters on this list (and the others I frequent) are in my sig 
file somewhere. Look, here's another one:

        Peter Haworth   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
'Are you *really* willing to deal with hundreds of newbies who don't
 understand why $a . $b isn't the same as $a .$b and isn't the same as
 $a. $b and isn't the same as $a.$b? And do you realise what the only
 "good" answer we can possibly give them is? "Because Ed said so".'
                -- Simon Cozens

Reply via email to