Received: by 10.68.138.14 with SMTP id qm14mr3582071pbb.5.1349582372322;
        Sat, 06 Oct 2012 20:59:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Path: g9ni30288pbh.1!nntp.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.alt.net!not-for-mail
From: owl <o...@rooftop.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: iPhone 5 Quality Control Slipping
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 03:59:31 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: ok by me, so long as it doesn't get out of hand
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <sre8.rr@rooftop.invalid>
References: <k4pbg5$ncs$1@dont-email.me>   <CC95F85C.C850%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <853bd835-c04e-475d-bc1b-0838e84285ce@googlegroups.com> <CC95FD56.C85B%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <614bb9e6-f996-4edf-97d1-76909700fc8e@googlegroups.com> <CC9601D8.C85E%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <6e5c39ed-2fba-43cd-87e9-28047c588b1c@googlegroups.com> <CC960949.C864%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <d55.wp@rooftop.invalid> <CC964660.C898%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.rooftop.invalid
User-Agent: tin/1.9.5-20091224 ("Lochruan") (UNIX) (Linux/3.0.0-24-generic (x86_64))

Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 10/6/12 8:16 PM, in article d55...@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <o...@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> > Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> On 10/6/12 4:00 PM, in article
> >> 6e5c39ed-2fba-43cd-87e9-28047c588b1c@googlegroups.com, "fungus"
> >> <fungee2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>> On Saturday, October 6, 2012 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Yes, it is funny how much of a failure you have been in backing your claim.
> >>>> Anyway, step up your game if you want another response from me.  As I
> >>>> noted, you are boring.
> >>> 
> >>> That's the difference between you and I snit.
> > 
> >> Sure: I back my accusations and you do not.
> > 
> > Hmm.  "Between you and I".
> > Where have I seen that sort of illiteracy before?
> > 
> You only confuse COLA with all of Usenet, so not you.  LOL!

Are you lost again?  That reply makes no sense.