On Sun, 23 Oct 2011, John Smith wrote: > Additional arguments: You (and the people arguing in the discussion forum) > seem to be failing to take into account the context in which the CfJ was > called (i.e. immediately below a clearly labeled document, whose label > matched the referent you collectively are claiming did not make sense) No, we're taking into account that the context didn't matter.
- DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJs 3109, 3111 assigned to omd Tanner Swett
- DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJs 3109, 3111 assigned t... omd
- DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJs 3109, 3111 assigned t... Ed Murphy
- DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJs 3109, 3111 assigned t... omd
- DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJs 3109, 3111 assigned t... Kerim Aydin