"S. Sharrieff Ali" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Charles H. Buchholtz'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion
presented as fact
Date: T
, 2004 4:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [UC] HD nastiness is a result of exaggeration & opinion
presented as fact
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 14:58:17 EDT
In a message dated 4/5/04 12:08:08
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 14:58:17 EDT
In a message dated 4/5/04 12:08:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<<... I'm still trying to find time to write back to Al Krigman, who
mentioned to me that since I was asking about house painters, aren't I glad we
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I responded about <>, he told the list that <>
This is not, actually, a fact - merely his opinion - but when that is posted
to the listserv as a fact, others (in this case, Jim Lilly and I) felt the
need to CLARIFY that it isn't a fact.
How is this not a fact, Mel
In a message dated 4/5/04 12:08:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<<... I'm still trying to find time to write back to Al Krigman, who
mentioned to me that since I was asking about house painters, aren't I glad we don't
have an HD to get in the way of my plans (which is kind of ironic because HD
