You're probably right, but all I was trying to do was add a little levity to the situation. Perhaps in another case the lightness of my post would have been seen and appreciated. And that, my friend, is another aspect of having discussions with JCO - there's no way to use levity or humor.
It's probably best for all involved that I just filter every thread that involves JCO ... I'm sure it'll be my loss, but there are other sources of valuable information available here and on the 'net. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Paul Stenquist > I'm sorry, but this is unnecessary provocation. > > On Nov 11, 2006, at 11:11 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > <ROTFLMAO> What kind of convoluted double-speak is that?! > > > > Shel > > > > > > JCO wrote: > > > >> I am saying your wrong in the concept > >> of that reply post of yours. Someone > >> may think they just disagree but if their concept > >> is invalid to my contention than thats another > >> matter altogether and I won't just "let it drop" > >> because it implies that your post is somehow > >> a valid rebuttal/opinion when its not if it is > >> irrelavant to my contention. > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
