xeno, fyi, to the rest of the world, what Jim did was just correct a misconception.
for you and Barry, and perhaps a few others to interpret this as "interacting" with Barry makes for a rather weak case. maybe you are trying to run the routine you did with Judy, on which she bit so hard. that was rather comical. but, then again, perhaps you don't understand that exceptions are made for any rule, self imposed, or not. so, just to repeat, correcting an misconception, is not the same as interacting with someone. get a consensus, if you have a question about this. or take a step back and realize there is the "letter" of intent, and the "spirit" of intent. this distinction is a cornerstone of our legal system, btw. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote : I couldn't match the IP addresses in the ak_ak post header with anything Jim has sent, but I am about to have lunch, so I didn't try very hard. It is kind of interesting that Jim, directly addressing Barry using the reverse_archery handle says he meant never to interact with Barry again, but in order to send the message directly addressed to Barry in the post, he did interact. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <j_alexander_stanley@...> wrote : What IP addresses? People who show up with the no_re...@yahoogroups.com email address are anonymous, with email and IP addresses both undisclosed. From the header info, there is no way for me, Rick, or anyone else to determine anything about ak_ak's true identity. Keep in mind, Sal, that this also applies to your own FFL identity as well. Hmmm, I've done it before successfully. Even found my own local server. Maybe I'm wrong about this one. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : LOL, those IP addresses sure give the game away!
