🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8441@netsys.UUCP> len@netsys.UUCP (Len Rose) writes:
>You've got to be a stubborn person.. 
>I think you did it just to irritate people,since your PREVIOUS
>article is probably still un-expired on 80% of the sites on the net.
>Why don't you post this commercialized crap on comp.newproducts WHERE
>IT BELONGS ..


Len,

I'm not particularly stubborn, no. Or at least I try not to be.

I did not repost the note to irritate people. I try to avoid that wherever
possible. As I clearly stated, it was due to a LARGE dmeand that I do so.

Why didn't I post this to comp.newproducts? Didn't know about it. Didn't, in
fact, know that messages of a "commercial" nature were verboten. Also,
now that I know about comp.newproducts, I will still not post there, as, if
after a couple of years on the net, if I don't know about it, chances are
fairly good that many other people don't either (not claiming to be a net
expert, just a general comment).

Why did the repost irritate you, I did, after all, give LOTS of warning.

And, if you don't get the other note I posted prior to this one before you
get this one (I love usenet time warps) then, to encapsulate it, I apologise
if I have offended you. 


And again, to those that sent thank you letters, you're welcome.

-- 
===============================================================================
Jonathan Bing, Master (cheeser)			...ihnp4!hoptoad!dasys1!cheeser
"Pereant, iniquit, qui ante nos nostra dixerunt!"                          also
"Non illegitimus carborundum!"                  ....crash!pro-charlotte!cheeser