Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+OMIGOSH\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+OMIGOSH\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] OMIGOSH (score: 1): Author: "Dan Hearn" <dhearn@air-pipe.com>; Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:21:20 -0700; I recently put together a set of facts re the oil situation in response to a naive post on the subject. I just realized the original post was on AMPS and I sent my response to TOWERTALK. That started; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-07/msg01095.html (6,616 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] OMIGOSH (score: 1): Author: <donhall161@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:17:21 -0500; Dan, Consider this the eighth positive response. 73 Don K5AQ _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contestin; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-07/msg01097.html (7,001 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] OMIGOSH (score: 1): Author: "Ken Kinyon" <w7ts@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:47:29 -0600; I was going to ignore this, but I can't let this go by. I sent him a direct response and it was far from positive, so I don't know where this "all supportive" stuff comes from. Now, can we stop posti; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-07/msg01098.html (7,726 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] OMIGOSH (score: 1): Author: "Bill Parry" <BPARRY@RGV.RR.COM>; Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:51:52 -0500; I'm not sure what we are being positive about but it certainly doesn't seem to be something that ought to be on this reflector. _______________________________________________ _______________________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-07/msg01099.html (8,087 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]