WAS re: Nat's Royal Review in TAG

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Frank Bullen

WAS re: Nat's Royal Review in TAG

Legg inn av Frank Bullen » 06 jul 2005 19:32:02

Out of 67 messages received this evening, no less than 64 referred to this subject. Not that that is, in itself, surprising. But did Peter Stewart really have to send 18 of them - and John Brandon another 22? Would it not have been possible to consolidate whatever is of value in those 40 messages into - say - two or three each?

The first ones I happened to open were totally inconsequential. So. Please, someone, enlighten me as to those of the 63 on the same subject that contain useful comment I simply haven't time to wade through all; this lot to find out if there is anything at all worth reading in them.

Frank

John Brandon

Re: WAS re: Nat's Royal Review in TAG

Legg inn av John Brandon » 06 jul 2005 19:32:03

Don't bother. There's nothing worth reading.

Peter Stewart

Re: WAS re: Nat's Royal Review in TAG

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 06 jul 2005 23:45:05

""Frank Bullen"" <fwbullen@discoverymail.co.za> wrote in message
news:011201c58250$8b106830$c9f721c4@frankd2gjvbg9y...
Out of 67 messages received this evening, no less than 64 referred to this
subject. Not that that is, in itself, surprising. But did Peter
Stewart really have to send 18 of them - and John Brandon another 22?
Would it not have been possible to consolidate whatever is of value in
those 40 messages into - say - two or three each?

The first ones I happened to open were totally inconsequential. So.
Please, someone, enlighten me as to those of the 63 on the same subject
that contain useful comment I simply haven't time to wade through all;
this lot to find out if there is anything at all worth reading in them.

There isn't.

Peter Stewart

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»