Posted by Roy L. Fuchs on 12/31/05 19:59

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 16:21:01 GMT, spam@uce.gov (Bob) Gave us:

>On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 15:06:00 -0000, "John Howells"
><john@howells-99.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Therefore the OP's claim that the active material is on the top is
>>> WRONG
>
>>As was yours.
>
>I said that the active material was not on the top. That is correct.
>
>I was not correct when I said that the active material was directly
>coated on the bottom, and I posted a retraction immediately upon
>discovery of that when I broke a disc to find out.
>
>>Your credibility is still shot.
>
>It's your credibility that is still shot for persisting in the wrong
>position when all the data is in.
>
>My credibility is intact because I am willing to state the correct
>thing.


Which means you lied when you said that you "scratched a disc on the
bottom and tore it up".

[Back to original message]