One fine day, this fool sent a rag about Viewer Discretion.VD was a zine that Neil ran, together with TAF and I used to write a serial called `NOFOOLS' (or No Frills of our Lives) that appeared both on VD and on CoN.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 02:34:06 +1100
From: Yap
To: v_d@iname.com
Subject: comments on VD
just had a quick browse through ish #13. it's been the first time i've read your ezine and honestly, it's pretty shitty. since i'm new to your ezine, i just wanted to know what is the main direction/focus of your ezine? sorry, actually i don't mean your zine is shitty, more 'lame' and for a bigger word 'pretentious.' it feels too much like a vulgar teen thing without being humourous(?), if that's what you're willing to attain.
and try and keep things a bit fresher and cutting edge. we all know about chicks going to the can together, we don't need further discussion on it. these are just comments and suggestions. don't take them the wrong way. feel free to send comments and suggestions in about my site below.
Yap
Keeping it real http://welcome.to/kiff
From: CoN
To: Yap
Date sent: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:58:16 -0500
Subject: Re: comments on VD (fwd)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 02:34:06 +1100
From: Yap
To: v_d@iname.com
Subject: comments on VDjust had a quick browse through ish #13. it's been the first time i've readyour ezine and honestly, it's pretty shitty. since i'm new to your ezine, ijust wanted to know what is the main direction/focus of your ezine? sorry,actually i don't mean your zine is shitty, more 'lame' and for a bigger word'pretentious.' it feels too much like a vulgar teen thing without beinghumourous(?), if that's what you're willing to attain.and try and keep things a bit fresher and cutting edge. we all know aboutchicks going to the can together, we don't need further discussion on it..these are just comments and suggestions. don't take them the wrong way.feel free to send comments and suggestions in about my site below.
Yap
Keeping it real http://welcome.to/kiff
There is nothing wrong with criticism if it contains something constructive, hence constructive criticism. I wonder how, and please forgive me here if I lack the enthusiasm of receiving such, when useless (to avoid saying "incredibly stupid") comments arrive from people, how I am to take them.
But, such as the net is, anyone can voice their opinion, just by clicking on that "mail" button.
So, let's go with the mental thoughts (or lack thereof) of our yapping friend here, and see his contructive criticism (I know, I know, but roll with me here) on VD.
Okay, VD doesn't rock his monkey. By looking at the articles present in his page, I can assume that a few of the things that turned him off where the proper grammar and sentence structure, correct use of capitals and the like.
When you are a cool d00d, that's a big no-no.
I am also to assume that since we do not cover useful articles, such as "How to promote your website" or "New Year's at Jen's", which seems like a mix and mash of confused thoughts written by an eight grader, which basically say nothing in particular for a page and a half, we have no right to write our own, meaningless articles. That's right. We run a silly zine and it contains silly articles. But if you do the same, don't tell us we suck.
But back to VD before I go on a frenzy of criticism. VD, in my personal opinion, and as that of a contributor, is not the greatest thing on the planet. But it's not even the worse. It's nice and decent. It also goes to show you that VD and it's staff don't take it too seriously. They do not think of themselves as "Cool, I wrote this stuff, now the world must bow in front of me". Personally I write for my own amusement, and if anyone bothers to read, well, that's fancy.
And since, like every other person, one has to do things in life which take priority (like working, studying, having a life) sometimes VD suffers. One issue might not look so good.
In my personal opinion my article in VD sucked major donkey this time, but I've had better ones and people have commented positively on them. VD, in general, being just 13 issues old and already with subscribers in the hundred, stands to prove that something is being done right. One unhappy, 100 happy? Can't please everyone. Nor, I think, we even try.
But let's examine the Kiff project more closely. We shall do it with the same point of view that our yapping-galore friend here shared with us.
One thing I try to avoid is thinking about having a family.Firstly, 'coz I don't know if I'll ever get laid. Secondly,because I'm not sure what exactly it means yet.
There is nothing wrong in being a kid and writing a zine.
I am now an 'adult', I must be too, if that's what the Law says.The Law is always right, so are the police. 'But what?' you ask,yeah I know they are a bunch of fucks, but as an 'adult' I haveto maintain my new, high opinion.
Okay, so we are actually nineteen. I started writing my own zine at that age and used better zines as an inspiration. However, the article "Why Clubs are Shit" doesn't say anything why Clubs are Shit. A useless article with lack of anything particularly interesting that might make it a good read.
Cinema flicks retrospect for 98
An article with personal comments on movies. Somewhat, this is better than any of the other articles--sorry, I mean "lame" material present on this page. And besides VD, I haven't seen one zine or magazine not do something similar to this. Heck, even CoN had a short brief one about movies.
Stuck In Sorrento, with the New Year's Blues, Again.
Quite captivating title actually. But..
*Note to PUNKS. Alcohol is a drug, much worse than manyILLEGAL things.
^Note to POLICE. FUCK YOU!
A brief rant about being stoned with no real purpose. Maybe this can be the start of a great zine or story collection for drug addicts "My name is Yap and I am an alcoholic", but for now, I'll sit here and shake my head.
Greetings again from the good doctor?Obese Teen Sex Orgy?Fame,Lies & Limbo
Cool title from Dr. Gonzo. Article contains nothing more than a rant on having people reply to his stuff. Let me get this straight: there is nothing wrong with it, plus we do it too. Your zine and our zine are both the same childish part-time work we like to dedicate to it, so why call us lame?
To write me an amusing reply to, at the moment, any of thethree 'articles' that have been unleashed. But don't try to betoo 'amusing' or it will surely not be and I will make fun ofyou.
I guess I won't be winning any prizes with this e-mail, but then again, I doubt anyone has bothered to even read any of this.
I'll stop now. I could go on for a while. There is too much here of nothing at all (and that's no oxymoron), but one thing is sure, for as bad as VD is, The Riff project isn't that much better than we had personally assumed.
masters at work
Make that "morons".
From: "Yap"
To: CoN
Subject: Re: comments on VD (fwd)
Date sent: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 16:56:55 +1100
actually, i'm familiar with some of your work with con so i don't really have many qualms with you.
except you resort to name calling. hey, cool d00d. already you're attempting to stamp your 'authority.' what, isn't someone allowed to use non-caps? or is it that you're so called 'professionalism' is holding you back? my opinion is that your sizeable audience in con is holding you back from experimentation. in a late issue of con last year you did have an issue which contained no humour. i personally liked the experimentation but next issue you have letters in your editorial proclaiming, 'what the fuck?' finally, this isn't a comparison thing. never was. but you seem to resort to it. isn't a film critic allowed to be an everyday film watcher like i am? he doen't need to back up any claims by making a movie of his own. what ever happened to some good old blatant bashing? i've written some kind words to con once and i never got a reply. then i write a 10-15 line cuss-out to vd and i get this. i guess this is how it works.
Yap
http://members.tripod.com/~jyap/
From: CoN
To: "Yap"
Date sent: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:15:18 -0500
Subject: Re: comments on VD (fwd)
On This Day, in the Year of Our Lord 23 Jan 99, at 16:56, thus spoke Yap :
actually, i'm familiar with some of your work with con so idon't really have many qualms with you.
Yes. You discovered it a long time ago on alt.ezines.
except you resort to name calling. hey, cool d00d. alreadyyou're attempting to stamp your 'authority.'
If you consider yourself truly a "master at work", a master doesn't fall for simple, over-done (and may I add "lame" and "teenager like" to the list) styles that the 'net refers to the "eLiTe". ie. hackers, warez d00dz, and people that have to write EvErYtHinG lIkE tHiS BeCaUsE iT mAkEs 'Em So c00l.
what, isn't someone allowed to use non-caps? or is it thatyou're so called 'professionalism' is holding you back?
Nope. It's all a matter of design principle. Beside, if you actually want people to read the stuff that appears on KIFF, you have to make it readable. Proper paragraphing, proper colours, alignment, and of course, a good use of a vocabulary might help. No wonder your site gets hardly any replies. People lose their concentration two seconds after they read the first phrase (and that saves them to endure the sillyness scribbled all over your pages).
my opinion is that your sizeable audience in con is holdingyou back from experimentation. in a late issue of con lastyear you did have an issue which contained no humour. ipersonally liked the experimentation but next issue you haveletters in your editorial proclaiming, 'what the fuck?'
That's debatable. We had letters of appreciation. And complaints happened as well when we had a very long issue packed with humour. You might remember the article "The Last Dinosaur". Those that read it (and I still get e-mails of people telling me they did read it), loved it. Others can't handle anything thats longer than a square of toilet paper. Nothing wrong with that.
finally, this isn't a comparison thing. never was. but youseem to resort to it.
Well, correct me here if I am wrong but you went through VD which contains material ten times better than KIFF and named it things which were either irrelevant with each other or that you were guilty of yourself on the KIFF project. So to make things fair, I went through your site with that same state of mind that you showed us. I took the freedom to go through your ..er.. zine (is that what it is?) and gave you my deconstructive criticism about it. Lastly, you did say "feel free to send comments and suggestions in about my site". I felt free to do so.
isn't a film critic allowed to be an everyday film watcherlike i am? he doen't need to back up any claims by making amovie of his own.
True. But if that same film critic made a shit movie himself, he can't go around criticizing others for movies which are better than his, just because he feels like it. Your example stands no ground.
what ever happened to some good old blatant bashing?
It's more than welcome, but don't get upset if you get some back.
i've written some kind words to con once and i never got areply.
Actually, you wrote:
|
Which was nice, thank you. I replied:
|
I never heard back. If you like, I can send you the Sendmail logs, or the full headers. But I guess that's like killing a bug with a nuclear bomb.
then i write a 10-15 line cuss-out to vd and i get this. iguess this is how it works.
My dear Yapper. This is how it works:
If you have something to say, say it. If you "cuss-out", you will get flamed. Pretty fucking simple. It's one of the rules of Usenet.
If you say it intelligently, properly written and the like (giving a sense that there is a real mature person behind it), you will receive a proper response, with a request for comments or opinions on how to improve the product.
If you have something to criticize, say it, but: if you're not constructive and what you offer is equal to or worse than what you are criticizing, then you better shut the fuck up. In our case:
a) VD has a disclaimer that informs users of what silly drivel they are to expect in each issue.
b) The KIFF my ass project offers, in comparison, a pretty lame collection of .. what? Seven articles?
Beside, even Mr. Gonzo doesn't take the KIFF my ass project seriously. Notice how in his last article he uses quotation marks around "articles". That usually, at least for those that are familiar with how the English language works (so that counts you out Yap) signifies that the word between the quotation is meant sarcastically or that is not the true definition or meaning of it (usually referred to something that is a lot worse. ie. 'Yap has a "great" car!' The 'great' goes to say that the car Yap has it's actually a piece of shit.
Hope this brings some enlightment to you.
Best regards.
And that was the last we heard of Julian Yup. Which is unfortunate: I always love a good e-mail flame war.
Jason had something to say about it:
At 10:20 AM 1/23/99 -0500, you wrote:
actually, i'm familiar with some of your work with con so i don't reallyhave many qualms with you.
If he has no qualms, what was the purpose of his last email? If had a problem with Con, fine, but all he did was describe it as "more 'lame' and for a bigger word 'pretentious.' it feels too much like a vulgar teen thing without being humourous(?)" This doesn't seem like constructive criticism. It also doesn't seem like the hand of friendship. I might go as far as to call it a... qualm.
except you resort to name calling. hey, cool d00d. already you'reattempting to stamp your 'authority.'
If the message he sent isn't name-calling, it's damn close. While he doesn't actually use a derogatory term for CoN, he sure used derogatory terms. That letter did not sound like a legitimate concern he wanted to share to provoke thoughtful discussion and the possible improvement of Con. It sound very much like he wanted to pick a fight. If he didn't want to pick a fight, than he should learn how to write better before he pisses off someone who can hurt him, like a vengeful hacker.
what, isn't someone allowed to usenon-caps? or is it that you're so called 'professionalism' is holding youback?
mklfds sdafgkoeorkp saokgsop wertgkofsdo sagg?
Did you understand that? No? It made perfect sense to me. The reason we have language to begin with is so that we have a common basis for communication. Communication has rules and standards that you must follow in order to be understood. Does that mean you have to write everything in the Queen's English? No. First you have to master the rules before you can break them. Another way to put that is "You gotta write real well before you can write real bad." Still another way of putting it is "e.e. cummings you're not." Look it up, kiddee.
my opinion is that your sizeable audience in con is holding you backfrom experimentation. in a late issue of con last year you did have anissue which contained no humour. i personally liked the experimentation butnext issue you have letters in your editorial proclaiming, 'what the fuck?'
Experimentation is exactly what CoN is about. Of all the articles I've seen Leandro get, I don't yet know of any rejections. The only reason CoN is full of humor is because a lot of us have a sense of humor, and that tends to reflect in our writings. Other days we all get bitter and depressed, and so we get a bitter and depressed issue. Leandro will take just about anything, and CoN evolves according to our moods. For example, CoN used to have poetry in every issue. The last few issues had none. Why? Because no-one's submitted any, not because Leandro said "The readers don't like it, so we won't accept it anymore." CoN isn't about what's popular. It's about what people feel and say. I've been thinking about experimenting with poetry, and I know Leandro would publish it, no matter how bad it was (I write truly awful poetry).
finally, this isn't a comparison thing. never was. but you seem to resortto it. isn't a film critic allowed to be an everyday film watcher like iam? he doen't need to back up any claims by making a movie of his own.
Wow, that was in the general vicinity of a logical argument. Keep working on it, you'll get it.
By making a criticism, you are asserting that something isn't up to a certain standard. How do you know something isn't up to the standard? You compare that thing to the standard.
And if you want that criticism to mean anything, you have to be informed. You have to know the area you're criticizing to some degree. Film critics may not know films, but they do know a lot about them. Otherwise, their opinions are meaningless. Would you trust a film critic who had started watching movies in 1997? Suddenly "Virus" becomes an incredibly amazing and original movie.
But in your case, you are a film critic who has made movies, so to speak. So you mouth off about someone else's movies. You drop a mail to the director of the movie calling his movie more "'lame' and for a bigger word 'pretentious.' it feels too much like a vulgar teen thing without being humourous(?)"
So what does the director of CoN do? He goes to see if you know what you're talking about. Check out your film, he finds that the charges you make against CoN fit your film much better.
That's the best part about that mail. It's like being the thief who's worried that everyone's after his stuff--you accuse others of what you are worried you're guilty of. Yes, even pretentious. You're far more worried about the apperance of being "fresh" than actually being fresh. You wouldn't scream it like a chant if this wasn't so, you'd just go about the business of it and that's all. By the same token, CoN isn't obsessed with being Nasty.
what ever happened to some good old blatant bashing? i've written some kindwords to con once and i never got a reply. then i write a 10-15 linecuss-out to vd and i get this. i guess this is how it works.
I can't speak for the lack of reply, but I glad to see your real intentions surface--bashing. So, you admit you had no intention of offering insightful commentary, you just wanted to piss the editors and writers at CoN off?
So shut your yap.
Out of the blue comes Dr. Gonzo.
My guess as to what happened is that Yap must've told his version of the facts to Gonzo here, who then came to give us a good stern talk.
Dr. Gonzo also ran the following letter with a few slight modifications, where I am referred to as Loserdro and Capital of Nasty as AnalCrustys.
I sat in awe at such witty remarks.
Date sent: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 03:54:33 -0800 (PST)
From: Raoul Duke <doktorgonzo@yahoo.com>
Subject: Personal Attack
To: CoN
Copies to: Yap
G'day Leandro,
I am new to CoN, and to the whole e-zine scene, but I am going through all your old issues, and writing for a 'zine, so there is hope for me yet.
Or maybe not. You see I am Dr. Gonzo of the KIFF project, and it would seem, at least from you, that I may as well quit now. Now this is no bitch session and I am not attacking you or CoN, (I don't think Yap was either btw). BUT, I just wanted to remind you of some of the things you once said.
In http://www.capnasty.org/issues/1998-03/cn980126.html
"What bothers me ... is that this complains come from editors of other zines. You would think they would be a little more open minded then your average net-citizen. I'm just afraid to think what I'll turn like when I'll be their age."
Now this is from way back when (I told you I was reading all the old issues). You were talking about complaints recieved due to your fondness of using 'On This Day, In The Year of Our Lord...'
Now of course, your problem with KIFF is different, but at the heart lies the same issue. You were offended when somebody attacked what you thought to be good and proper (and somewhat humorous).
The reproduced commented was written when your site was in its infancy, kinda like KIFF at present, so there is hope, you just won't be reading it (probably).
Now I'm not really offended, KIFF is something I do for fun, like your site. But was it really fun attacking, actually nitpicking, KIFF? It seems in the flurry of thoughts you perhaps you forgot who you are pretending to be.
I mean look at some of the shit you say about my writing
I am now an 'adult', I must be too, if that's what the Lawsays. The Law is always right, so are the police. 'But what?'you ask, yeah I know they are a bunch of fucks, but as an'adult' I have to maintain my new, high opinion.Okay, so we are actually nineteen. I started writing my own zine at that age and used better zines as an inspiration. However, the article "Why Clubs are Shit" doesn't say anything why Clubs are Shit. A useless article with lack of anything particularly interesting that might make it a good read.
See here. Like you were poking fun at religion with your, 'On this day...' I was poking fun at the notion of 'adulthood' as defined by law. That's why it was always reffered to as 'adult'. That was the whole idea, to highlight the stupidity of it all. Do you understand that Leandro? And does it matter what the title is? You say Yap made unsubstansiated criticism and then you go on to call my article 'useless', because you didn't like the title? Really, for an adult an all.
Stuck In Sorrento, with the New Year's Blues, Again.Quite captivating title actually. But..*Note to PUNKS. Alcohol is a drug, much worse than manyILLEGAL things.^Note to POLICE. FUCK YOU!A brief rant about being stoned with no real purpose. Maybe this can be the start of a great zine or story collection for drug addicts "My name is Yap and I am an alcoholic", but for now, I'll sit here and shake my head.
No 'real' purpose? Oh sorry, did you like the fake one? I thought I spelt it out at the end. I think you screwed up dude, you actually managed to included something constructive, and I will take note. I felt that it was pretty silly and directionless, maybe next time it'll improve. And I didn't notice any drug references in anyone else's writing. You are being awfully childish you know? Also awfully hypocritical.
Greetings again from the good doctor?Obese Teen Sex Orgy?Fame,Lies & LimboCool title from Dr. Gonzo. Article contains nothing more than arant on having people reply to his stuff.
Glad you like the title. 'Nothing more'. Hey, fuck you, it's my writing and i'll do what I want. Isn't that the whole point.
I hope you are not criticising the 'rant', you do a lot of it, I didn't think there was anything wrong with it. I spose if I wanted replies I should have ranted about fly-fishing? Did you see why I wanted replies, to improve, I want to get better, i wanted suggestions.
Anyway, I couldn't help but reply because some of the things you said sounded like what a true fucking idiot would say. But I don't think you're an idiot, at least judging from you work at CoN. So while you try to be more 'open minded' i'll try to be a little less 'afraid to think what I'll turn like when I'll be' your age.
Regards Dr. Gonzo
p.s. maybe check kiff again in a couple of months, even old people like you might like it when it gets better.
A nice, heartfelt, genuine answer from a genuine writer, unfortunately associated with Yap. Sadly, a few months later, Kiff went off the air. If you go there now, the site is gone, and it looks like it died a long time ago, too to boot. I'm impressed: I officially killed a zine.
From: "CoN
To: Raoul Duke <doktorgonzo@yahoo.com>
Date sent: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 08:24:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Personal Attack
Priority: normal
On This Day, in the Year of Our Lord 24 Jan 99, at 3:54, thus spoke Raoul Duke :
G'day Leandro,I am new to CoN, and to the whole e-zine scene, but I am goingthrough all your old issues, and writing for a 'zine, so thereis hope for me yet.
There is hope for everyone, as long as one tries.
Or maybe not. You see I am Dr. Gonzo of the KIFF project, andit would seem, at least from you, that I may as well quit now.Now this is no bitch session and I am not attacking you orCoN, (I don't think Yap was either btw).
We're just touchy.
BUT, I just wanted to remind you of some of the things you oncesaid. In http://www.capnasty.org/issues/1998-03/cn980126.html "What bothers me ... is that this complains come from editorsof other zines. You would think they would be a little moreopen minded then your average net-citizen. I'm just afraid tothink what I'll turn like when I'll be their age." Now this is from way back when (I told you I was reading allthe old issues). You were talking about complaints recieveddue to your fondness of using 'On This Day, In The Year of OurLord...' Now of course, your problem with KIFF is different, but at theheart lies the same issue. You were offended when somebodyattacked what you thought to be good and proper (and somewhathumorous).
Hold on a second here. I'm not sure what Yapper has told you, but here is a concise, yet precise development of what has happened:
Suggestion: next time, when writing a comment or criticism, be at the very least constructive so that it seems like it's someone mature that is writing to us. We will respond politely and ask for suggestions (perhaps I should forward all the silly drivel that Yap has sent to us to you so you can see what I mean). If you're looking for a "cuss-out" like Yap was, you'll get one.
The "Your site is crap" is as useful in criticism as a gnat's testicle hair.
Now I'm not really offended, KIFF is something I do for fun,like your site. But was it really fun attacking, actuallynitpicking, KIFF? It seems in the flurry of thoughts youperhaps you forgot who you are pretending to be.
Actually it was tremendous fun. I had to show Yap his mistake, but he doesn't seem to learn. You on the other hand seem more mature and perhaps you'll understand.
In a nutshell: I come to your zine and I say "your zine is crap." and then I add "it's lame, or for a bigger word pretentious..etc". How would you react to this constructive criticism? You'd think "This dumbfuck should shut his yap!"
On the other hand, had I come and provided suggestions on how to be better, or perhaps a view on this or that to change or improve, you would've probably appreciated them more.
I mean look at some of the shit you say about my writingOkay, so we are actually.. what.. 19? Adults.. please. Beside that, the article "Why Clubs are Shit" doesn't sayanything why Clubs are Shit. A useless article with lack ofanything particularly >interesting that might make it a goodread.See here. Like you were poking fun at religion with your, 'Onthis day...' I was poking fun at the notion of 'adulthood' asdefined by law. That's why it was always reffered to as'adult'. That was the whole idea, to highlight the stupidityof it all. Do you understand that Leandro? And does it matterwhat the title is? You say Yap made unsubstansiated criticismand then you go on to call my article 'useless', because youdidn't like the title? Really, for an adult an all.
Again, your buddy can go around site-trashing and I can't? Please.
Stuck In Sorrento, with the New Year'sNo 'real' purpose? Oh sorry, did you like the fake one? Ithought I spelt it out at the end. I think you screwed updude, you actually managed to included something constructive,and I will take note. I felt that it was pretty silly anddirectionless, maybe next time it'll improve. And I didn'tnotice any drug references in anyone else's writing. You arebeing awfully childish you know? Also awfully hypocritical.
It was nothing more than "blatant bashing", was it not?
Glad you like the title. 'Nothing more'. Hey, fuck you, it'smy writing and i'll do what I want. Isn't that the wholepoint.
Exactly. Apparently, however, for Yapper we stank despite this being our writing and we doing what we want. That's hypocrisy. See, you are upset for what I wrote. It was useless commentary. Now pretend I was Yap and you were me.
I hope you are not criticising the 'rant', you do a lot of it,I didn't think there was anything wrong with it. I spose if Iwanted replies I should have ranted about fly-fishing? Did yousee why I wanted replies, to improve, I want to get better, iwanted suggestions.
It doesn't matter. You could've written with the Bard's English and had the meaning of life. I would've found something to bash on it anyway, just to show Yapper that the type of comments he sent were not constructive criticism.
Anyway, I couldn't help but reply because some of the thingsyou said sounded like what a true fucking idiot would say. ButI don't think you're an idiot, at least judging from you workat CoN. So while you try to be more 'open minded' i'll try tobe a little less 'afraid to think what I'll turn like whenI'll be' your age.
That's funny, quoting me. Reminds me of that "Why Clubs are Shit" (why are they shit? That could've been an hilarious article). Anyway, I think I explained my actions already three times. Hopefully you will understand.
On the bright side, I wasn't as stupid as Yapper when I was his age (and that wasn't too long ago either).
p.s. maybe check kiff again in a couple of months, even oldpeople like you might like it when it gets better.
Debatable.
I digress.
Leandro
Ironically, this e-mail never made it on Kiff...
Date sent: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 20:04:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Raoul Duke <doktorgonzo@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Personal Attack
To: CoN
Leandro,
I am afraid I probably see your point. But I'm not Yap, hadn't even read VD, so I had to reply to your trashing.Anyway, I think you should continue with Yap, nothing like a spastic joust, even if it is only via e-mail.
Regards (sort of),
Raoul Duke.
Metadata: