Re: Enlargements from 35mm scans

[Bob Tyson <bobicho@earthlink.net>]

<x-flowed>>In article <f04330104b5f12122a5a5@[209.179.250.82]>, Bob Tyson
><bobicho@earthlink.net> writes
>>Say, "Kennedy,"
>>
>>*I* didn't write what you attribute to me below. Kindly notice the
>>remark you single out is in "quotes." (That is, set off by ">".)
>>
>Bob,
>         I apologise for attributing the statement to you.
>
>I have gone back to check the original text of your post.  For some
>reason there are no quotation marks on the copy that I received, or on
>the copy stored on the list archives, which I also checked - just three
>dots leading in and out of the statements, and no offset ">" which was
>introduced on my reply.  Because they didn't have attribution text or
>quotes, I read them as being the author's statements, just as I would in
>any other post.  I don't know whether you used quotation marks in your
original message...


I did indeed use quotes, and thank you for your apology. FWIW I 
suggest that if you plan on reacting to what is posted in the future 
it is up to you to realize the full context of any post. In this case 
what you attributed to me had been part of a thread for several 
exchanges. I think you yourself had included the quoted lines in a 
post of your own previously.

I don't have a clue why YOU think this thing is so all-fired 
world-shaking but I for just one am very tired of it all. Can we just 
drop "Re: Enlargements..."?

Please.

Bob
-
** Lumijet PORTFOLIO SERIES Media - 7 NEW Papers - 4 are Epson 2000P
Compatible: Genuine Pearl, Woven Fibre, Vintage Vellum & Faux Linen!
** INKJET ART SOLUTIONS * 800-777-2076 * http://www.inkjetart.com/ **

</x-flowed>