Re: [recoznet2] For Your Eyes Only (WHOOPS)

2000-03-19 Thread Sandy Sanders
I heartily agree with Rod on this. Laurie has proved his (I'm punting, too, here) credentials over and over on this list. At the very least, as we're moving on past Karen Crooke, let's not allow her to claim any scalps. And any reading of Laurie's postings would see that, although

Re: [recoznet2] For Your Eyes Only (WHOOPS)

2000-03-19 Thread Peter Tremain
PROTECTED] To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:41:41 +1100 Subject: Re: [recoznet2] For Your Eyes Only (WHOOPS) Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I heartily agree with Rod on this. Laurie has proved his (I'm punting, too, here) credentials over and over on this list. At

Re: [recoznet2] For Your Eyes Only (WHOOPS)

2000-03-19 Thread Andrea Velox
on, 20 Mar 2000 09:41:41 +1100 Subject: Re: [recoznet2] For Your Eyes Only (WHOOPS) Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I heartily agree with Rod on this. Laurie has proved his (I'm punting, too, here) credentials over and over on this list. At the very least, as we're moving on past Ka

Re: [recoznet2] For Your Eyes Only (WHOOPS)

2000-03-18 Thread Rod Hagen
Title: Re: [recoznet2] For Your Eyes Only (WHOOPS) I wrote: Whatever the case, lets just get on with everyone! Whoops! This is NOT what I meant to say! Getting on with everyone is NOT a good idea. It breeds a foolish and useless complacency about issues that really matter! What I meant to say