Re: attatched photos

chris@ellingerphoto.com wrote:
> Ellis wrote:
>
> > If someone has taken the trouble to raise a point or question
> > about my suggestion, then I think it is only right for me to
> > respond to them and answer their points. Especially as no
> > valid reason has been given for the idea not to work eg the
> > way this particular program has been written cannot use
> > attachments and the program is of a computer type that cannot
> > be updated, then I would understand, but as it seems it is
> > only preference, despite the fact that millions of others on
> > hundreds of sites send thousands of attachments each day
> > (including those on dial-up) it seems to me to be an excuse.
> > After all, my suggestion was not an 'either/or' but a
> > 'both/and', you do whatever is best for you.
>
> Since I was the first to raise an objection (due to my slow
> dial-up) and this seems to have <cough> become an issue, allow
> me to recind my objection. If this list becomes too tedious to
> download (which I don't really expect), I will accept that
> technology has passed me bye and find a group that will
> correspond by carrier pigeon or smoke signal.
>
Digital or alt-process smoke signal?

:)

cheers,
Scott

-- 
Scott Sellers                |
scottsellers@mindspring.com  |
_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
pinhole-discussion mailing list
pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org
FAQ at http://spitbite.org/pinhole-discussion/list.html