Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam...
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen (arnt_at_gulbrandsen.priv.no)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 10:31:43 PDT
- Next message: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby): "Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam..."
- Previous message: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam..."
- In reply to: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam..."
- Next in thread: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby): "Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam..."
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
[ attachment ]
Richard S. Holmes writes:
> I likewise think this would be a Good Thing, though whether a vote is
> called for I don't know...
I think it's appropriate for the committee to decide, in its usual manner.
--Arnt
--
Rule Date: 2003-04-11 17:31:25 GMT
- Next message: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby): "Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam..."
- Previous message: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam..."
- In reply to: Richard S. Holmes: "Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam..."
- Next in thread: Jeff Weston (Sir Toby): "Re: Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam..."
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
[ attachment ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5
: Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST