Kryptolus wrote:
> jukola wrote:
> 
>> Kryptolus wrote:
>>
>>> jukola wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I responded to a "S�ren Kuklau" , not you. I have, most likely, 
>>>> replied you already.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No. You did not reply to me already.
>>> Trolls have a tendency to ignore facts. Is that so?
>>> I say it again. Read my reply.
>>>
>>
>> Once again. Troll accusation. If the truth is not as per your liking, 
>> bend it.
>>
>> There is a message from you timed 00:16 CET to which I replied 00:52 
>> CET. This is the only message I have from you.  Please check your 
>> inbox again. Please check also "unsent messages" if you have, by any 
>> chance, missed to send a particular reply.
>>
>> The thread so far, as I have it in my inbox, has become a little bit 
>> too complex to be quoted in this mail. It can though be done if you 
>> insist.
>>
>> -- 
>> jukola
>>
> 
> I access the newsgroup directly. You apparently use the mail gateway.
> 
> My reply was posted at 18:16 EST +5.
> 

Your reply seem to be floating somewhere. Have not seen it and it has 
not been recorded or received by the mail server used by me. Once I see 
it I will of course reply.

Strange, you latest mail arrived without any problem. No lagging what so 
ever. Well, it's said that 15-20% of all mails will not make it why we 
should be grateful for the mails we get.

I will, however, take a well deserved nap now, it's almost 3 a.m. CET 16 
March 2002. I need the rest. I'm not young anymore :-)

-- 
Cheers
jukola


Reply via email to