Path: utzoo!hoptoad!uunet!nuchat!splut!jay
From: jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: alt.flame
Subject: Re: Always playin' the innocent, eh, Lou ?
Summary: Hm. Mark dodges the issues.
Message-ID: <286@splut.UUCP>
Date: 11 Dec 87 19:56:56 GMT
References: <5909@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <1842@chinet.UUCP> <5944@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <6132@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: Confederate Microsystems, League City, TX
Lines: 25

In article <6132@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>, era1987@violet.berkeley.edu writes:
...nothing particularly relevant to the posting which Mark's responding to.

Instead of answering any part of the long story which Lou Marco (the wharf
rat) tells about how Mark flamed him after he tried to take the whole deal
to E-mail, and then referred to him as a vicious pseudo, Mark chose to take
off on two lines in the .signature.

Sounds like Mark is listening to some old lawyer's advice:
	"If the law is on your side, pound the law;
	 if the facts are on your side, pound the facts;
	 if neither is on your side, pound the table."

There's a lot of table-pounding going on here.

How about answering the real post, instead of the .signature? How about
answering the charges, instead of a minor side point?

Or is there not any answer that you CAN give, Mark?

-- 
Jay Maynard, K5ZC (@WB5BBW)...>splut!< | GEnie: JAYMAYNARD  CI$: 71036,1603
uucp: {uunet!nuchat,academ!uhnix1,{ihnp4,bellcore,killer}!tness1}!splut!jay
Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity.
The opinions herein are shared by none of my cats, much less anyone else.