very strange tuning mechanism

[Ron Nossaman]

Scott Jackson wrote:
> OK, I've got to say it, if only to save Ron N from having a break-down. Why
> re-send 250,000 bytes of photographs just to add 20 bytes of question?
> Aaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!
> (And yes, I do realise the irony of wasting more data with my reply. Sorry,
> but at least I feel better now.)
> 
> swj

Yes, but your reply was only 3K, sans recycled photos and 49 
levels of nested replies. You have done well, and are 
absolved, grasshopper.
Ron N