Tom C wrote: > > I'd bayonet that you didn't see my earlier post just prior to yours. It's > one of your foibles. > > Tom C.
One has to cosntantly be en guarde against this sort of thing annsan > > >From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > >To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net> > >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: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > > > 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 > > > > >
