Subject:
|
Re: Posting Dates (Was: The Care and Feedng of Your Trademark (Was: Community Policing...))
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Feb 2002 18:10:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1624 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.people, Matthew Gerber writes:
> [OK...I'm going to keep my cool here, and not attack Scott, despite my
> sensabilities crying out for lots of sarcasm, exclamation points and capital
> letters. I'm just going to point out a couple of facts and leave it at that.
> I suggest that anyone following this thread or this post NOT reply to either
> it or Scott's last message. Let this stand and let the thread die.]
>
> Scott,
>
> You have just dug up a month old thread.
It looks like you both did. Scott's message is dated 1-Feb, a couple of
days following the previous message, although it showed up some 8 hours ago.
If I look at the dates, you're the one holding the shovel.
I thought this NNTP date posted/approved thing was corrected.
-Rob.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Posting Dates
|
| (...) I don't see it as broken. The date of a message is the date it was composed. The date it was posted is unimportant, imo. :) Dan (22 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Community Policing is a Good Thing(TM) (Was: Re: Do you think there is a market)
|
| (...) Scott (et al.), First, see this post, in response to a very polite and non-confrontational questioning of Larry, and the other GoB members, about the whats, whys and wherefors of establishing , asserting and maintaining a trademark: (...) (22 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.market.theory)
|
83 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
