Michiel van der Vlist wrote in a message to Roger Nelson:

 >>> I for once thought Roy Witt had a good idea when he suggested it.
 >>> This after some Z1 folks challenged my copyright.

 RN>> Q.E.D.

 MvdV>> Quod Erat Demonstrantum what? What does it demonstrate?

 RN> Which was to be demonstrated.

 MvdV> Q.E.D. is what is tradionally written at the end of a
 MvdV> mathematical proof. So what have you proven? I see no proof above
 MvdV> the Q.E.D.

I offered no proof.  I merely put `Q.E.D' and its description as a means of
showing you how it is understood here.

 MvdV> I submitted articles. You did not.

Okay.

 RN>   Maybe if you posted your reason(s) for your copyright notice we
 RN> could better understand.

 MvdV> I have already done that after I was challenged the first time. I
 MvdV> do not feel like wasting my time in doing it all over again any
 MvdV> time a new player enters the field.

I wouldn't exactly consider it a waste of time to furnish me your
explanation, seeing as how I didn't see it to begin with.  You can do it in
NETmail or email if you like.  Let me know which.

 MvdV> So more since your mind seems to be set already.

It is not.  I am asking you a question.  If you answer it and I don't
understand your reply, I'll ask for clarification.  I cannot make up my
mind about it if you won't answer.


Regards,

Roger 
--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+