PE> You didn't have the problem I was talking about. You called at 8:10,
PE> which was 10 minutes after the last guy, so I had not exited for mail.

BL> That was the second time, you dork. How the *FUCK* could you know the
BL> first time, if I don't connect? I'll note *both* times, the next time.

PE> Because the problem I described only happens if you call IMMEDIATELY
PE> after someone has just called me, sending me mail. Since there was
PE> no-one before you, you didn't have the problem I described.

BL> Use your alleged intelligence, Paul, and the stupidity
BL> should eventually become clear. Ask yourself... what if I
BL> had a cup of coffee and waited ten minutes before I tried
BL> again? You have no way of knowing when I called first, do you?

Poor old Bob, obviously either hasnt got a clue whats actually being
discussed, calling just at the end of a mail toss completing which
MUST be just after another caller, or he is deliberately pretending
to be obtuse, which is even more pathetically senile.

PE> I described what I could do instead. However, I think the BUSY signal
PE> is better for another reason. If you get BUSY, you know where you
PE> stand. If you get NO CARRIER, it could be a problem my end, but you
PE> can't tell the difference between that and failure to answer.

BL> I agreed at first, but further thought has made me change my mind.
BL> A BUSY signal can simply mean that someone else is calling. A NO
BL> CARRIER can only mean there is a problem; most likely your board
BL> is processing the packets or whatever, but it could be worse. In the
BL> first case, you could have a 10 minute wait but in the second it will
BL> only be one minute... or else there is something seriously wrong.

BL> The NO CARRIER gives more information.

Presumably he thinks this is very clever coat trailing. Pity its
actually just more evidence of what senility can do to a person.
@EOT:

---