> But as you saw fit to include [OT] in the subject, it's off
> the tech
> list.
>
Ah, but being a sneaky little dead bastard I actually used {OT}, not [OT].
So it did come across <g>... heh-heh...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ed Leafe
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 3:46 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [NF] Didn't know Mr. Hale was so despised - really ought to
> be{OT}, but... heh-heh, since I am dead now....
>
>
> On Apr 17, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Gil Hale wrote:
>
> > Ed started this as [NF], so surely there is merit in him
> > having done this, even if he did it knowing full well I do not read
> > [OT] and
> > wanted to make damned sure I saw this thread in all its glory. Nice
> > try, it
> > worked <g>...
>
> It was a Python post, and it featured a prominent ProFoxer, so why
> not [NF]?
>
> But as you saw fit to include [OT] in the subject, it's off
> the tech
> list.
>
> -- Ed Leafe
>
>
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
