Those are duel questions.
I'm foiled in answering them.
Kenneth Waller
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 8:20 PM
Subject: RE: OT: Let's make the PDML more interesting!
Hey, you pokin' fun at me?
Think you're pretty sharp huh? ;-)
D
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 7:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: OT: Let's make the PDML more interesting!
I'd bayonet that you didn't see my earlier post just prior to
yours. It's
one of your foibles.
Tom C.
>From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: <[email protected]>
>Subject: RE: OT: Let's make the PDML more interesting!
>Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:01:26 -0600
>
>Is there any way to foil this thread before it gets too
>pointed?
>
>D
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kenneth Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 6:42 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: OT: Let's make the PDML more interesting!
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote
> > >
> > > frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >>On 12/21/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Oh, I don't about that, I expect him to take this to the hilt.
> > >>
> > >>I think Doug can handle himself. He's used to the thrust
and parry of
> > >>this list.
> > >
> > > I can't decide if that's really true or not. I'm sort of on
the fence
> > > about it...
> >
> > Mark, I think I get the thrust of your message.
> >
> > Kenneth Waller
> >
>
