Re: In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- From: Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:34:33 +1200
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 08:13:07 +0200, Peter Alaca
<p.alaca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David wrote: on, 23/04/2008 01:52:
On Apr 22, 7:36 pm, Peter Alaca <p.al...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl wrote: on, 23/04/2008 01:03:
There were only 12 authors in the "Getting serious
about archaeological sites starting with Mehrgarh"
Thread starting from Jul 11 2007.
No, not 12 but 7 authors, and not 237 but 39 messages,
starting not 11 but 14 July
A fine example of your research.
I ignore completely your erroneous information.
Of course you do, because you can't prove me wrong.
According to Google at http://tinyurl.com/4s3jqw there are 237
messages and 12 authors.
I don't entirely trust Google groups but this is better than nothing.
Eric Stevens
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- From: David
- Re: In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- From: Peter Alaca
- Re: In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- From: David
- Re: In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- From: Peter Alaca
- In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- Prev by Date: Re: In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- Next by Date: Re: In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- Previous by thread: Re: In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- Next by thread: Re: In the sci.arch Archives is it usual to get 237 Messages into a Thread?
- Index(es):