On Thu Jun 10 15:44:23 BST 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote :
> I think it was a shrewd move on your (or SS) part to censor the smtp of the
> originator. I think every member of the list can think of a few short
> comments they'd like to direct at this 'B' person. How many of us are there?
around 110 I think.
> If we all flamed this guy he (or she, I suppose) might regret it, but it
> probably wouldn't help any, would it?
judging from the email address, it's a she. See - there are some!!
>
> Although we might all feel better.....
Oh yeah :-)
>
> Out of curiosity, did anyone from SSHQ reply and if so, what did they say?
>
I think the reply was something along the lines of "we're very sorry but seeing as
we've been using this name for around 8 years we can't be bothered to change it
because of one not-very-good record". Substitute your own more offensive terms for my
sanitised versions.
> Inquiring minds want to know
>
> Neil
>
----------------------------------------------------------------
Adam Reeve ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
via WebPop - Adam is NOT in d'house!
*********************************************************
You are being sent this message because you
are subscribed to the Sunscreem Mailing List.
For help send the message text: help
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*********************************************************
