>  I have to admit that you are really good at nitpicking.

I have a great teacher :-)

>> I was replying to Andrew's point, which you conveniently deleted before
>> replying...
>
>  In the same way you ignored what he *meant* with is point and nitpicked
> about the *literal* meaning of whatever he said, sidetracking to some
> completely ridiculous slippery slope.

Actually, I was just using an example to point out that his argument was 
invalid.  Without using the example, I would just say that there is no 
reason why a company should have to do something just because it doesn't 
cost them anything.

Post a reply to this message