JTK wrote: > Mike Koenecke wrote: > >>It is evident you have nothing >>productive to contribute to the discussion, and have not for some >>time. > > Well, techinically, you're correct, but only because the Maozilla > Politburo has no desire to hear about the defects in their 3+-year-old > web browser and newsreader. Bullshit. We hear about them every day in bugzilla, where most of the problem reports have more useful content than "j00 @11 5uXX0rz".
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? DeMoN_LaG
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? Carlfish
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? JTK
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? jesus X
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? Gavin Long
- [Offtopic] Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? Carlfish
- Re: [Offtopic] Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? JTK
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? JTK
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? Mike Koenecke
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? JTK
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? Garth Wallace
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? JTK
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? Garth Wallace
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? JTK
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? jesus X
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? jesus X
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? JTK
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? jesus X
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? JTK
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? jesus X
- Re: Netscape 6.1 instead of 6.5? Christian Mattar
