Google| Subject | Re: Laguna Seca is booked! |
| From | ed |
| Date | 2012-03-27 14:46 (2012-03-27 05:46) |
| Message-ID | <10658947.1428.1332852397191.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynaz5> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
| Follows | -hh |
| Followups | -hh (5h & 24m) |
On Monday, March 26, 2012 4:16:34 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
-hh...
On Mar 26, 5:12=A0pm, ed <n...@atwistedweb.com>wrote:On Monday, March 26, 2012 1:21:59 PM UTC-7, Alan Baker wrote:
it's not projecting to point out the truth (remember alan is the guy that j= ust asked "That actually is a possibility, isn't it?" to "everyone else is = overcompensating but you, you were just being smart").-hhAlan Bakerpedantic, aren't you? =A0;P
No.
=20 Beats projecting.
a simple yes would have sufficed, no need to justify below. :P-hhAlan Bakerquite obviously, the mention of a timeline for when it's a fad is something he thinks is relevant, otherwise why bring it up, right? =A0:P
Quite obviously, he had one when he NEEDED one.
=20 It doesn't absolutely resolve the objective question of 'need', but its a pretty reliable indicator.
2012-03-27
