From chekmate@purenorth.com Fri Jan 29 16:03:57 1999
Received: from mxu1.u.washington.edu (mxu1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.8])
	by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.1+UW98.09/8.9.1+UW98.09) with ESMTP id QAA35478
	for <failure@lists.u.washington.edu>; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:03:56 -0800
Received: from monk.purenorth.com (IDENT:root@monk.purenorth.com [209.167.215.2])
	by mxu1.u.washington.edu (8.9.2+UW99.01/8.9.2+UW99.01) with ESMTP id QAA05082
	for <failure@u.washington.edu>; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:03:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tim.nobelmed.com (tcnas01-11.purenorth.com [209.167.215.111])
	by monk.purenorth.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA26770;
	Fri, 29 Jan 1999 20:01:20 -0500
Message-ID: <36B24CAE.1C46@purenorth.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:05:02 -0500
From: Tim Knight <chekmate@purenorth.com>
Reply-To: chekmate@purenorth.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: failure@u.washington.edu
Subject: Re: not failure
References: <f0bc8811.36b23eae@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

JackShank@aol.com wrote:
> 
> >From now on when people post non-failure subject matter, could they please
> remove the word Failure from the subject line and change it to something that
> hints to what the post is really about.  It usually isn't so bothersome, but
> there has now been about ten of these posts in a row, with not one mention of
> Failure.  As interesting as non-failure subject matter may sometimes be, the
> posts recently seem to be 1-2 line irrelevant responses to previously made
> irrelevant remarks.  Sorry if I offend, but it is becoming a bit tedious, much
> like this very letter.

Umm, ISs ther any failure contecnt, besides Kellii drumming for Ice?
Dude, the band is Kaput. No more. Finito. I'm surprised theres as much
Failure content as there is! Plus, since I've joined, it's always been
that way, barely anyone puts NFC for non Failure content...
Jus deal...

Tim
Gone for real now
.