 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote in message
news:4b5a0ffb@news.povray.org...
>
> I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
I didn't... I receive all of my UseNet traffic telepathically. I need a
bandwidth upgrade, though, I'm starting to get headaches.
--
Jack
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:52:11 -0500, Warp wrote:
> I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
I didn't read it, at least I assume I didn't, since the message body
isn't clear what you're referring to. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22-1-2010 21:52, Warp wrote:
> I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
Because the subject line refers to itself, not the body and you can not
parse the subject without reading it?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:4b5a0ffb@news.povray.org...
> I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
>
Because I hate you.
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jeremy "UncleHoot" Praay" <jer### [at] questsoftwarecmo> wrote
in message news:4b5a1792$1@news.povray.org...
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
> news:4b5a0ffb@news.povray.org...
> > I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
>
> Because I hate you. ;-)
May I read this?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> On 22-1-2010 21:52, Warp wrote:
> > I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
> Because the subject line refers to itself, not the body and you can not
> parse the subject without reading it?
I was actually referring to the post rather than its subject line.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22-1-2010 23:03, Warp wrote:
> andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> On 22-1-2010 21:52, Warp wrote:
>>> I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
>
>> Because the subject line refers to itself, not the body and you can not
>> parse the subject without reading it?
>
> I was actually referring to the post rather than its subject line.
>
No you didn't. You probably meant to, but that does not count.
Besides you knew what you meant by that title, hence this is the only
reply that you should not reply to. So I assume you are doing this on
purpose... D*mn it make my head hurt all these levels of logical paradoxes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 01/22/10 12:52, Warp wrote:
> I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
Because it's a public forum, and so your requests are irrelevant. If
you want privacy, do it in a private forum.
--
If you think nobody cares, try missing a couple of payments.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:17:01 +0100, andrel wrote:
> On 22-1-2010 21:52, Warp wrote:
>> I said not to read it, so why did you? Why?
>
> Because the subject line refers to itself, not the body and you can not
> parse the subject without reading it?
There was a subject line? ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
