[Linux-aus] Re: [CTTE] Re: Reaction: SCO case: Australian LUGs says it's a storm in a teacup

[Michael Still]

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Mary Gardiner wrote:

> Second, there remains a vast difference between stating that you did not
> receive a reply to your email, and stating that SLUG "did not bother to
> respond". The final paragraph of your article is a misrepresentation of
> what took place, and unfairly portrays SLUG as having ignored an inquiry
> that, in fact, the SLUG committee did not receive.

Which is exactly the same complaint that I have this Sam's behaviour
towards CLUG. Especially given Tridge's extreme efforts towards
contactability.

Mark, is there any progress on this issue?

Mikal

-- 

Michael Still (mikal at stillhq.com) | Stage 1: Steal underpants
http://www.stillhq.com            | Stage 2: ????
UTC + 10                          | Stage 3: Profit