blake wrote:

>>> so o.t. posts are o.k. for a favored few?
>>
>> Yes. Good thing for you, isn't it? Otherwise you might have the Usenet
>> Police throwing stun-grenades through your window! (I guess it's also a
>> good thing there's no such group as the Usenet Police.)
>>
>
> hey, i'm not the one taking a census of people's post and parsing them for
> OT-ness.

That was merely done because someone else speculated that sf was one of the
most prolific OT posters. I didn't think she was, so I spent a few minutes
counting OT posts to find out. I had also speculated that you and Greg would
rank among the lowest in terms of on-topic posts, so I counted yours and
Greg's posts as well. You're not SURPRISED by the results, are you?

Bob