On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:56:44 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <47bc935a$0$36379$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Todd H. wrote:
>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:19:47 -0600, t@toddh.net (Todd H.) wrote in
>>> <84d4qrfq2k@news.giganews.com>:
>>>
>>>> As for a cite, anyone who visited news.cnet.com today would've tripped
>>>> over the headline:
>>> Thanks for the insult.
>>
>> It wasn't meant as an insult, but rather criticism of criticism.
>>
>> Why be a pain in the ass over a cite when a) you rarely give them
>> yourself, and b) one for this was exceedingly easy to find?"
>
>For such a widely publicized and current news item I didn't see the need
>to include a link, but "he who must not be named" isn't happy unless he
>has something to complain about. Yet he rarely includes any citations on
>anything he posts because when you make up stuff out of thin air it's
>tough to find any citations to back you up.

That would be you, Steven, as your own admission (lame excuse) makes
clear.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>

"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford