] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

["Bill Allen, S.E." <Bill(--nospam--at)AllenDesigns.com>]

Thank you for the complement. First of all, if those who were offended by a
"non-structural" thread would have kept their personal beliefs personal, the
thread would not have gotten out of hand. Second (and more importantly), is
your comment "I am also about one more 50 <DEL> day from signing off." a
threat? Who cares if you sign off? SEAOC does not make a dime from the fact
that you subscribe to the listserv. More importantly, I searched the
archives for "Wood, Chris" and couldn't find one single technical
contribution you have made (either original or beginning with RE:), although
it is entirely possible you have changed your e-mail address recently. If
so, I apologize. Otherwise, consider the following a gift from me: 50*<DEL>.

Adios Chris,
Bill Allen

-----Original Message-----
From: Wood, Chris [mailto:CWood(--nospam--at)pcidesign.com]
Sent: Friday, July 17, 1998 3:14 PM
To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
Subject:


I am so glad the likes of Bill Allen & Kate O'Brien et al are around so that
the rest of us can know what to tolerate and how sensitive to be about our
own personal matters of faith. Their level of tolerance is obviously more
superior to the rest of us.

This is either going to be a STRUCTURAL list or STRUCTURAL and anything else
I feel like broadcasting list. If it is a STRUCTURAL list then tolerance and
sensitivity aren't really going to be an issue. My 2 cents.

I am also about one more 50 <DEL> day from signing off.

Chris Wood

"If it weren't for certain hyper-sensitive Christians (who seldom have made
technical contributions anyway)"

"Wouldn't it be nice if the Puritans would un-subscribe and the contributors
remain?"
Regards,
Bill Allen