🚀 go-pugleaf

> Yep, but you've ripped that out of the context it was
> said in,


Something you should be a certified authority on, Rod.





Rod Speed <rodspeed@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:RpEw3.8165$O_1.58699@ozemail.com.au...
>
> Tom MacIntyre <tmacinty@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:37c2b2b0.12942465@news1.ns.sympatico.ca...
> > Rod Speed <rodspeed@ozemail.com.au> wrote
>
> >>> I certainly haven't raved,
>
> >> You've claimed quite a few times that I have changed my
> >> position on  the use of the dos prompt. That is complete crap.
>
> > Whose quote is this...?
>
> >>>>> Hardly anyone uses the DOS prompt anymore. Dinosaur stuff.
>
> > Is it yours?...
>
> Yep, but you've ripped that out of the context it was
> said in, routine file ops on a working Win9x system.
>
> > if so, you appear to have backed down from it, having admitted,
> > and rightfully so, that the knowledge of DOS is handy when
> > Windows is dead in the water, and hardly dinosaur stuff.
>
> Then you really do have a massive problem between your
> ears if you cant manage to grasp that that was said in a
> PARTICULAR context was saying absolutely NOTHING
> about the use of the dos prompt in OTHER situations.
>
> And lets not try to put a spin on what I have
> said, I never 'admitted' that, I have said that
> all along. Trivial to prove using deja.
>
> >>> How can you mention context, when you have
> >>> perpetrated the butchery you've done here?...
>
> >> Because its completely trivial for anyone with half a brain to
> >> check what the context was if they doubt what I said there.
>
> >>> a lot of what your post contains was NOT together,
> >>> at least from my server, and in my memory.
>
> > This was a mistake on my part...I went back and checked. Your post
> > was not butchery, I just had a bit of trouble correlating it to the
original
> > on the first attempt. As I said, I have no problem admitting a mistake.
>
> Bet you wont on that claim you made about me
> changing my position on the use of the dos prompt.
>
>
>