Re: A92: New Fargocompiler

To: assembly-92@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A92: New Fargocompiler
From: Jonathan Dickmann <jdickman@rhf.bradley.edu>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 21:57:16 -0500 (CDT)
Delivered-To: assembly-92-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
In-Reply-To: <f06d5866.3574865c@aol.com>
Reply-To: assembly-92@lists.ticalc.org

On Tue, 2 Jun 1998 ADAMMAN106@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 98-06-02 07:17:31 EDT, you write:
> 
> > On Fri, 29 May 1998, Alexander Grutsch wrote:
> 
> I think your mail server is REALLY lagged

then you obviously didn't notice the message from Trey Jazz marked March
18 that arrived June 1st concerning the HP48GX and the TI92 conversation.
According to the ti-calc mailing list archives for June,
(http://www.ticalc.org/mailarchive/assembly-92/1998_June)
Trey's message fell between one postmarked June 1, 14:50 and one at 19:37,
same day, as show below (take from the ti-calc mailing list archives)

-----
From: fondacci christophe <tchi_98@yahoo.com> 
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:50:52 -0700 (PDT) 

To: <assembly-92@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: Re: A92: HP 48GX And TI92
From: "Trey Jazz" <joemama@minot.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 19:35:52 -0600
Delivered-To: assembly-92-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Reply-To: assembly-92@lists.ticalc.org

From: Anton Ivanov <ivanova@ucs.orst.edu>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 19:37:46 -0700
-----

now THAT is what I call WAY-MOMMA lagged.  75 days?!?!  no amount of
REALLYs would be sufficient. :)  And I find it kind of funny that no one
noticed that but you noticed the three-day lag.  And looking at logs, it's
not a lag, but I assume something else, as his mail server had the correct
date on the 30th of May (also from the archives), and two days later had
the date set back to March 18th.

Jonathan Dickmann
-----
jdickman@rhf.bradley.edu		http://rhf.bradley.edu/~jdickman
-----
"Yes, you're very smart. Shut up." 
	-- Peter Falk as Grandpa, The Princess Bride

References:

Re: A92: New Fargocompiler

From: ADAMMAN106@aol.com