🚀 go-pugleaf

In <3338B725.1398@ibm.net>, joseph <josco@ibm.net> writes:
>crobato@kuentos.guam.net wrote:
>> 
>> In <5h0ifo$aje@usenet88.supernews.com>, brian@anv.net writes:
>> >In <3333bbb8.0@usamrid.isd.net>, chucks@isd.net (Erik Funkenbusch) 
>
>> >     Okay, now I'll name some that were late.  Frontpage 97, Publisher
>> >97, Office 95 standard, Project 4, Money 97, Visuall C++ 5, Team
>> >Manager 97, Windows CE... I could go on, but it would be meaningless
>> >without some references...  ;-) 
>
>Perhaps you need tutoring about what is the purpose of a reference.  You
>need not reference obvious facts. As Chris points out, MS's habitual
>tardiness is obvious.  Your game is tiresome.  Why would someone go to
>the library and dig up an article when you never have bothered to do so
>yourself?  


     I don't even know what to say to that.  Do you realize that it's 
Erik who's claiming that MS software is usually on time or early?  Or 
that I'm with you in accepting that MS's 'habitual tardiness' is 
obvious?  Note that my 'list' of late MS products is Erik's list of 
on-time products.  He doesn't need to supply references but I do??? 
And to support what you've deemed an obvious fact???


>
>"Answer the fool according to his folly lest he be wise in his own
>concit."  It's a very old and wise comment regarding the value of
>answering a fool.  Do you know the reference?


     Yes, the Bible.  I don't know the chapter and verse though...

<snip>