In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Smith wrote: > Thank you for clarifying who said what. I am working on Mr. Gerber's > suggestions. Michael's response started with the word "in which case," > which certainly gives me reason to believe that his answer was based on > the reasons for my request. I assumed, I hope incorrectly, that you > and/or he thought I wanted to forge a false header.
that's certainly not what I thought. I didn't respond to your initial post, I was responding to your response. You asked how to do something, a solution was given, and then you said "but I don't want to do it that way". My answer was then "in the case that you don't want to do it that way, you can't do it." If my answer was terse, it was because you seemed to be unnecessarily dismissive of the first, helpful response - if you already knew an answer to your own question, you could have mentioned it... > You asked to know why, and AFTER I was honest with > you, Michael told me there was no solution - which is obviously mistaken > - or worse, not true - since Mr. Gerber provided one almost immediately. I was indeed mistaken (and my answer was not true, although it wasn't my intention to give an untrue answer...). Anyway, that's more than enough of a thread that's off-topic anyway... -- michael
