On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 16:02 -0700, Taral wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:42 PM, comex wrote:
> > I CFJ on the statement: { A rule was amended in the message in which
> > this CFJ was called. }
>
> Ugh. This is why I voted AGAINST.
>
I would have thought that the fact that it was a blatant sc
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:42 PM, comex wrote:
> I CFJ on the statement: { A rule was amended in the message in which
> this CFJ was called. }
Ugh. This is why I voted AGAINST.
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
2 matches
Mail list logo
