Howard J. Rogers wrote:
>> I hate to continue to drag this out Howard but why not just acknowledge
>> that Richard is correct?
>
>
> About what, Daniel?
I know this suggestion will make you uncomfortable and likely earn me
another poke in the eye with a sharp stick ... but we are talking about
Richard Foote ... not Don Burleson or someone from TUSC. You can just
say "Thank you Richard" just as I posted a thank you to you for
correcting me. You don't have to always be right. And you don't have to
always get your back up on every issue. This is Oracle not a religion.
Not once have you ever in this group, to the best of my oft faulty
memory, acknowledged a mistake or an error in anything. This might be a
good time to start. Richard was correct. Really. He was. Honest. At
least in this correspondents opinion.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Sun Nov 21 2004 - 00:21:05 CST
