Re: .sig (was: Re: Many consonants)

Daniel Andreasson wrote:
>
>Some people wrote:
>
> > > > > Therefore, it is impossible for something to be
> > > > > impossible. Therfore, your
> > > > > .sig is faulty.
>
> > > We-ell, your new sig is crying out to be refuted too.
>
>Come on now. That's not the usual tone we have here. Be
>nice to nicole.
I wasn't trying to be mean - and I'd thought it pretty obvious I was only
making a humurous (if technically true) observation.

If Nicole or anyone thought em unkind, my apolgies.

                                                 Andreas


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp