[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [piecepack] Anonymity, definition of standard piecepack equipment, and my work is worth nothing!
- To: piecepack@yahoogroups.com
- Subject: Re: [piecepack] Anonymity, definition of standard piecepack equipment, and my work is worth nothing!
- From: Porter235 <porter235@...>
- Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 18:31:19 -0400
- In-reply-to: <dc95aa990609041411m7a7069c3g906d18c1a33de7a3@...>
- References: <dc95aa990609032313n7600651dq37f4bd3f936ae430@...> <200609041638.19528.porter235@...> <dc95aa990609041411m7a7069c3g906d18c1a33de7a3@...>
- User-agent: KMail/1.9.4
On Monday 04 September 2006 17:11, Ron Hale-Evans wrote:
> Whoa! Hold on, Jonathan! It's going to take me a while to address all
> of your issues, but the short answer is I consider a JCD Piecepack to
> be standard equipment. I deliberately left the definition of "standard
> equipment" to be open-ended: "they must be photos of standard
> piecepack equipment, SUCH AS the Mesomorph editions or the printable
> versions of the same available from Piecepack.org" (emphasis mine).
Sorry, thank you for your clarification. My major concern was ...
"they must be photos of STANDARD piecepack equipment, such as the MESOMORPH
EDITIONS or the printable versions OF THE SAME available from Piecepack.org"
(emphasis mine).
(I've been havin' a pretty stressfull month or two, and you just got an
unwarranted wad of yuck thrown at you when I read the sentence in questions
with the emphasis I have marked. Sorry. )