John, I think Jim was talking about me. I'm just wondering how he knew I had a bad liver.


>
>It is probably an excercise in futility having a rational discussion with Jim Nelson. If it is not the documentation being in perfect shape, there is some consipiracy going on at MS. Or in this case, Jim's latest rant is that I am the "VB Trojan Horse". I laughed my A** when I read that. Whatever the case may be, Jim has a tendency to dart for the low road. I would like to think that I make technical arguments, and keep them technical. It seem whenever I mention another tool, or disagree with what is going on with the UT, Jim is right there to lay it on me. And I know he is severely PO'd at the stuff I right. Fact is, it is not my intention to wake up every day and figure out how I can Pi** off Jim Nelson today. Yet, somehow, I manage to do this fairly often. It is definitely a personal problem on his end. And to that, I am not in the behavior modification business, so I just let him go off. As I said in an earlier thread, I am not going to get any flame wars with him anymore.
>
>Unlike Jim however, I am giving him the courtesy of a CC on this post..<s>.
>
>Thanks for your support dude...
>
>
>>>No Garrett, it's obviously him who should be so honourable.
>>>
>>>In addition to a bad liver his level of consideration is below tolerable.
>>>
>>>I guess one gets that way when they know everything about everything.
>>>
>>
>>Pretty classless comments. I guess if you can't argue with facts, you talk about something irrelevant and hope they forgot what they were arguing about. Hmmm. . .doesn't appear to be working.