how about the meaningless post category for you? I already explained he edited my post to alter the meaning by removing the detailed explantion that followed which he obviously could could not refute or he would have. If he can refute the explaination he is welcome to go back and find it and do so. Otherwise its just a fraud altered post and so is your post agreeing with it. Fair is fair. jco
-----Original Message----- From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 7:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) How about the "Shameless Lies" category, then? John On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 12:43:42 +0100, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:05:12 +0100, J. C. O'Connell >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> I am not repeating the same argument >>> over and over.............. >> >> Mark! > > Sorry, but I don't think I can include that in the 2005 quotations > list. I'm way over quota in the "irony" category already. :) > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.4/109 - Release Date: 21/09/2005
