RE: plea for reason

From: Tom Richards (tomr@aicasting.com)
Date: Tue Nov 30 1999 - 20:37:40 EET


Deleting this stuff is just a click away, so I don't mind it. Frankly, I'm
glad to know who are good vendors, and who are not. And if someone is
burned, he should be accorded a response (defense).

At 08:30 AM 11/30/99 -0600, you wrote:
>Michael: Thanks for your voice of reason. I don't doubt that there are
>issues that need to be settled, but not here. I see this as much more
>harmful than all the the spamming flack.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Rees [mailto:rees@michaelrees.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 29, 1999 9:44 PM
>To: rp-ml@bart.lpt.fi
>Subject: plea for reason
>
>
>Yo, Hello, knock knock, anyone home. I think we've had enough of this. Just
>leave it alone. We had almost the same flame war last year. Someone, I don't
>care
>who, just say no. for example "No I won't post messages that I know is going
>to
>piss everyone off" or "no I won't respond to a message that pisses me off".
>Please just let it die.
>
>--
>michael rees effective immediately
>suite Number 301 www.michaelrees.com
>1015 Washington Ave 314 494 7393
>St. Louis Mo 63101 msr@michaelrees.com
>
>
>
>For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
>
>For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
>
>

For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:53:35 EEST