Re: ULF photography

From: Sandy King ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 01/20/05-11:56:09 AM Z
Message-id: <p0602040dbe15a03ef56b@[130.127.230.212]>

Judy Seigel wrote:

>On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Sandy King wrote:
>>
>>It seems very clear to me. Patrick asked for contributions about
>>ULF photography, and I don't think persons who don't even know what
>>the letters mean stand to make much of a contribution, so why waste
>>time with an answer that contributes nothing. I don't see that as a
>>rude comment, just an honest opinion.
>
>
>Answering the question would have taken exactly 3 words. The
>put-down was much longer....so THAt was the waste of time.
>
>J.

So why did you not just answer the question, since as we have now
learned, you already knew the answer? As you note, three words would
have avoided any waste of time.

Sandy
Received on Thu Jan 20 11:56:25 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 02/01/05-09:28:08 AM Z CST