Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)
From: robert@bonomi.invalidDate: 06/24/02
- Next message: Christopher Browne: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- Previous message: John Armstrong: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- In reply to: Christopher Browne: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- Next in thread: Christopher Browne: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- Reply: Christopher Browne: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: robert@bonomi.invalid Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 17:09:31 GMT
In article <af7c2p$c39ek$1@ID-125932.news.dfncis.de>,
Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> wrote:
>
[[.. munch ..]]
>
>By the way, I'd think that Jun 23 23:31:48, when BigLiar apparently
>checked email, is _before_ Jun 22 23:47:31, which is when the message
>in question was sent. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't _think_ the two
>messages pulled in Exhibit C include the one described in Exhibits A
>and B.
As you're the second to make this mistake, I'm going to point out the
"true facts". Note the _date_ on each timestamp. "Checked mail" is
almost TWENTY FOUR HOURS _AFTER_ the mail was sent.
- Next message: Christopher Browne: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- Previous message: John Armstrong: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- In reply to: Christopher Browne: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- Next in thread: Christopher Browne: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- Reply: Christopher Browne: "Re: "proving" a user received an email (good gosh)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]