"dave weil" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org... > On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:13:51 -0400, "Arny Krueger" <email@example.com> > wrote: > > > > >"John Atkinson" <Stereophile_Editor@Compuserve.com> wrote in message > >news:firstname.lastname@example.org... > >> "Arny Krueger" <email@example.com> wrote in message > >> news:<xsWdnRUuGJE4gtSiXTWJiA@comcast.com>... > >> > BTW, I notice that this Card Deluxe review site is down... > >> > www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?280 > >> Incorrect. The link works fine; the review is on-line as usual. > >Atkinson again shows that he thinks he's omniscient. He obviously can't > >comprehend the idea that a link would be down at one time, and restored at > >another. > You don't seem to acknowledge that it could have been a problem on > your end. Or someplace along the way... For the record I sucessfully visited the site maybe an hour later. At the time I wrote the post I had no idea of the full domain or total duration of the problem, but I wanted to prepare people for the possibility that the link might be down when they tried it. >I seem to remember you saying the same thing about *my* > connection when I claimed that a link was down on *your* site. That's quite a different thing than saying that the report was incorrect. Your report was correct, but the problem was obviously someplace between your site and my web site as I checked and knew that my site was continuously up during that time. I'd bet money that Atkinson never personally checked his site's web logs before he made his angry little post. I'd bet that he lacks the interest and/or ability to do so. But I could be wrong about this.