> > > In a message *[netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active* > > > > > > We all read this: > > > > > > > I am 52 years old and by no means a computer whiz kid. > > > > > > Same here, not a pace modem though, but I am 52 > > > > Me too (at least 52 in March...) Bunch of old fogeys aren't we!! > > > > Get some time in, 59 here:))) > If this is confession time, 1938 is my year, the genuine pre-war article! -- bob...
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active Alexander Birrell
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Acti... David
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A ... Andrew Tait
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW... Daniel V. Smith
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs... Andrew Tait
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs... Alexander Birrell
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW...
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Acti... Steve Evans
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active Tom Earl
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active George Bayliss
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active Ken Woods
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active Ken Woods
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active Daniel V. Smith
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active Andrew Guard
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active Ken Woods
- [netconnect] Re: Active Ltd Vs. CW T/A Active James Pullen
