Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 19:27:07 +0100 From: Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SPAM: Score 3.7: Re: Instead of freebsd. com, why not... Message-ID: <2810734464.20050217192707@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <20050217115303.M79020@makeworld.com> References: <9C4E897FB284BF4DBC9C0DC42FB34617641B03@mvaexch01.acuson.com> <dcb2c27a050217030879ce4b5a@mail.gmail.com> <128456842.20050217185105@wanadoo.fr> <20050217115303.M79020@makeworld.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
RacerX writes: > That is a very harsh statement ... It's a very realistic statement. > Now that you have made it; show us the proof that you base your reply > on. I've explained it at length on many previous occasions. > Show us the urls that says what you said. Why are URLs more reliable than what I say? What about URLs on my own site? > Show us the white papers that state what you have stated. Why are whitepapers more reliable than what I say? What if I'm the author of the whitepaper? -- Anthony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2810734464.20050217192707>