Re: Latest Post [Archive] - AviationBanter

Larry Dighera

May 28th 05, 10:11 PM

Please save the HTML for e-mail. It's inappropriate for Usenet.
Thanks.

On Sat, 28 May 2005 18:00:08 GMT, "Barney" >
wrote in >::

>
>------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C56385.206D95A0
>Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627" name=3DGENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><A=20
>href=3D"http://www.newbid.net/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=3D11">http://www=
>.newbid.net/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=3D11</A></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV>Ramp Soon To Go Union..... <BR>Middle management is so sure =
>Continental=20
>Ramp is going union that they told a girl who was trying to transfer to =
>CLE that=20
>she may have to stay in the ramp if she choose a ramp line as an exit.=20
><BR><BR>Although I agree that upper management has done a terrible job =
>with the=20
>pay reduction........I'm not sure unions are the answer.......the =
>pilot,MX,FA=20
>have all laid down for CO......Unions are a big money making =
>business......when=20
>TW,UA,and US went south where were the unions???? Now that CO is in =
>trouble=20
>.......Is now the right time to add more stress to the airline!! </DIV>
><DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
>------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C56385.206D95A0--

Stefan

May 28th 05, 10:22 PM

Larry Dighera wrote:

> Please save the HTML for e-mail. It's inappropriate for Usenet.

And so for e-mail, too.

John T

May 29th 05, 04:32 AM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message

>
> Please save the HTML for e-mail. It's inappropriate for Usenet.
> Thanks.

So... Why'd you re-post it? :)

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

JohnH

May 29th 05, 04:41 AM

Larry Dighera wrote:
> Please save the HTML for e-mail. It's inappropriate for Usenet.
> Thanks.
>
>
> On Sat, 28 May 2005 18:00:08 GMT, "Barney" >
> wrote in >::

<"inapropriate" HTML snipped>

"Hey, Mr. Wier is too lazy to roll the wheel on his mouse. Why should
he give a damn if top posting makes followup articles impossible to
follow? Chronology is only important to authors who have
consideration for their readers. :-)"

Larry Dighera

May 29th 05, 06:21 AM

On Sat, 28 May 2005 23:32:01 -0400, "John T" > wrote in
>::

>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message

>>
>> Please save the HTML for e-mail. It's inappropriate for Usenet.
>> Thanks.
>
>So... Why'd you re-post it? :)

So the OP could see what it looks like to usenet readers who choose
not to display HTML browser output.

Larry Dighera

May 29th 05, 06:23 AM

On Sat, 28 May 2005 23:41:30 -0400, "JohnH" >
wrote in >::

>Larry Dighera wrote:
>> Please save the HTML for e-mail. It's inappropriate for Usenet.
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 28 May 2005 18:00:08 GMT, "Barney" >
>> wrote in >::
>
><"inapropriate" HTML snipped>
>
>"Hey, Mr. Wier is too lazy to roll the wheel on his mouse. Why should
>he give a damn if top posting makes followup articles impossible to
>follow? Chronology is only important to authors who have
>consideration for their readers. :-)"
>

Because the HTML code was not really meant to be read by humans, it
was included below my followup.

JohnH

May 30th 05, 04:02 AM

>> Larry Dighera wrote:
>>> Please save the HTML for e-mail. It's inappropriate for Usenet.
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 28 May 2005 18:00:08 GMT, "Barney" >
>>> wrote in >::
>>
>> <"inapropriate" HTML snipped>
>>
>> "Hey, Mr. Wier is too lazy to roll the wheel on his mouse. Why
>> should he give a damn if top posting makes followup articles
>> impossible to follow? Chronology is only important to authors who
>> have consideration for their readers. :-)"
>>
>
> Because the HTML code was not really meant to be read by humans, it
> was included below my followup.

Lol. Right.