Alan Baker
In article <kho9fj$31k$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent001@section-31.net>wrote:

Flint
On 3/12/2013 2:46 PM, Alan Baker wrote:

Alan Baker
In article <khnsdq$d37$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent001@section-31.net>wrote:

Flint
On 3/12/2013 1:10 PM, Sandman wrote:

Sandman
In article <khnlvr$4pc$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent001@section-31.net>wrote:

"How?" is a question, just like how "Incorrect." and "Interesting." are assertions, all as valid as sentences according to English grammatical rules.

Flint
So you keep saying

Sandman
Since I am correct.

Flint
although unable to provide any cites of said rules.

Sandman
I did. here:

<mr-AA51C0.10344212032013@News.Individual.NET>

Flint
An email address link? Teeheeheheee! :)

Alan Baker
No, you twit: a message ID.

If you had decent newsreading software, then clicking that would open this message:

Flint
Wrong, Ailin Bellyacher . An embedded "@" makes it a broken email link, moron. Just because you fangurlz expect the rest of the world's usenet newsreader software to follow some non-standard MT-Newswatcher convention for creating broken links, don't assume such links are proper.

Alan Baker
No. You are quite incorrect.

Here is the appropriate excerpt from the headers of your post to which I am replying:

"References: <kh8gi8$din$1@dont-email.me> <mr-B6D567.08194207032013@News.Individual.NET> <kh9r5j$rp0$3@dont-email.me> <mr-BD956A.12274007032013@News.Individual.NET> <kh9u02$aai$2@dont-email.me> <mr-39C8A0.13175107032013@News.Individual.NET> <kha2le$3dp$1@dont-email.me> <mr-AFC7D3.14072707032013@News.Individual.NET> <khc5s3$r36$1@dont-email.me> <mr-145AB9.10132008032013@News.Individual.NET> <kheal2$mui$1@dont-email.me> <mr-AA5B1D.09081111032013@News.Individual.NET> <khkn1d$ogg$1@dont-email.me> <mr-45274C.15345511032013@News.Individual.NET> <khl4r1$eh3$1@dont-email.me> <mr-AA51C0.10344212032013@News.Individual.NET> <khn3rd$ond$1@dont-email.me> <mr-1B13A4.13021412032013@News.Individual.NET> <khna69$s8o$1@dont-email.me> <mr-1D660B.14385712032013@News.Individual.NET> <khnlvr$4pc$1@dont-email.me> <mr-B03FFE.18101112032013@News.Individual.NET> <khnsdq$d37$1@dont-email.me> <alangbaker-43AE3A.11461312032013@news.shawcable.net>"

Do you notice that the message-IDs it lists ALL have "@"s in them?

Do you see that in this header:

"Message-ID: <kho9fj$31k$1@dont-email.me>"

Do you see that your message-ID for your post has an "@".

Now, just to really shut you up, here's the link to the "Original Version" from Google Groups:

<https://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/322cf386b1c77d 94?dmode=source>

And if you look at it, it has exactly the same message-IDs, each with exactly the same "@" sign.

Flint
Besides, you miss the point. He never provided a cite as requested until *I* provided one he couldn't refute, and even then he provided an irrelevant cite.

BTW, did you hear the latest? Judge Koh proved you to be full of shit.

Alan Baker
The classy thing to do at this point would be to admit you're wrong...