7 Ways Android 2.2 Froyo Tops Apple's iPhone
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: WARNING: Known bad versions of DD-WRT in the database!
Next: LIVE: Stop ELITE Pedophile Clan in Lithuania and Save A Child NOW!
From: Bellende Belhamel on 22 Jun 2010 07:14 John Navas wrote: > On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:52:16 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote > in <240520101352167782%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>: > >> In article <trolv59j71tj156c648f8ituk790v2q05v(a)4ax.com>, John Navas >> <jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >>> You're actually making assumptions with no foundation. >> >> i'm going by what you wrote. >> write more clearly next time. > > So it's my fault that you misinterpret what I'm writing? ;) Nope, it is his fault for not asking more info before assuming.
From: Bellende Belhamel on 22 Jun 2010 07:17 Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: > In alt.cellular.verizon John Navas <jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:52:16 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote >> in <240520101352167782%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>: >> >>> In article <trolv59j71tj156c648f8ituk790v2q05v(a)4ax.com>, John Navas >>> <jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> >>>> You're actually making assumptions with no foundation. >>> >>> i'm going by what you wrote. >>> write more clearly next time. >> >> So it's my fault that you misinterpret what I'm writing? ;) > > You gave enough information to make logical deductions, but not factual > conclusions as to what you do. But, you clearly could simply tell us; but > I > suspect it will prove embarrassing or you would have done so already. Zeik niet zo. It is clear that the person assuming is in the fault here. That person could have asked more info, instead it filled in the blanks in a matter that suited him/her. He/she could have asked what this "setting up" entailed exactly.
From: Bellende Belhamel on 22 Jun 2010 07:18
nospam wrote: > In article <862ho1FdhtU7(a)mid.individual.net>, Thomas T. Veldhouse > <veldy71(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> You're actually making assumptions with no foundation. >>>> >>>> i'm going by what you wrote. >>>> write more clearly next time. >>> >>> So it's my fault that you misinterpret what I'm writing? ;) >> >> You gave enough information to make logical deductions, but not factual >> conclusions as to what you do. But, you clearly could simply tell us; >> but I >> suspect it will prove embarrassing or you would have done so already. > > spot on, and it's not the first time he's played these games. probably > won't be the last either. Actually it is you playing the assuming game. |