[bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
- From: "Kenneth A. Cross" <crossk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 07:40:04 -0400
Jim, I have not been able to find page numbers in the file of daisy books I
submit--page breaks yes, but page numbers no. For example, I submitted a
book by Jay Parini which had all of its page numbers in tact. I can't find
any in the Daisy file. (I refer here to the oc file.) Could you please
send me the names of a few books which actually do preserve the page numbers
in daisy but not in the brf file? Thanks.
----- Original Message -----
From: "The Pardees" <fpardee@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 1:52 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
> But the page numbers are retained in the Daisy format. Kurzweil and the
> Bookport open the Daisy version. This is the one I use.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> At 11:17 AM 7/23/05, you wrote:
>
> >Yes, I agree. Right now, I remove all headers in most of my submissions,
> >making sure all pages are accounted for and numbered. Then, the first
thing
> >that happens is that all the page numbers get rejected. The validator
uses
> >them, then they are stripped so that the only two who benefit from the
> >numbers are the submitter and the validator. There's something wrong
with
> >that picture.
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Cindy" <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
> >To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 4:08 AM
> >Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
> >
> >
> > > Kenneth,
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if my answer to Jim got posted, but ...
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if it would work, but my idea is that
> > > the stripper be eliminated, since it seems to strip
> > > pages along with the header, even though it isn't
> > > supposed to, from what we've been told. The
> > > validators' job would include eliminating the headers
> > > by hand, or , where it's possible, by a global replace
> > > with nothing (I've done that many times and it works
> > > well) but leaving in page numbers of putting them in
> > > if they aren't there. That would solve the problem Jim
> > > mentioned of some people who listen to books and/or
> > > don't have machines that can eliminated headers for
> > > themselves. Whether a validator does the minimum of
> > > checking copyrights and being sure that all the pages
> > > are there, eliminating headers wouldn't take that much
> > > more time, and those of us who read and correct as we
> > > go along probably do it already. It really isn't a big
> > > deal for a validator--and certaiinly the small amount
> > > of work and time that's involved is worth it to ensure
> > > that the Bookshare member and reader has page numbers
> > > but not headers. I don't see what function headers
> > > have. I wish a publisher of editor could tell us. I
> > > wonder if it isn't just a left-over tradition from
> > > when books were first published and monks and scribes
> > > decorated books. I'll have to do some research.
> > >
> > > Cindy
> > >
> > > -- "Kenneth A. Cross" <crossk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I just can't help repeating the point that stripping
> > > > page numbers
> > > > invalidates the book for any serious researcher or
> > > > teacher or leader of a
> > > > discussion among blind and sighted users. What we
> > > > end up with is a service
> > > > only for the casual reader. That does not mean we
> > > > don't have a positive
> > > > resource, but it does limit its use, particularly in
> > > > areas where employment
> > > > could result from a more controlled treatment.
> > > >
> > > > I personally have submitted a large number of
> > > > materials which could be used
> > > > in research. They can't be, because one would have
> > > > to procure a print book
> > > > and a sighted helper to use them. To me, that is a
> > > > great concern,
> > > > particularly because I, too, would like to use some
> > > > of the materials on the
> > > > system and have the ability to refer to specific
> > > > pages in discussions and
> > > > teaching.
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Rui" <goldWave@xxxxxxx>
> > > > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 12:49 AM
> > > > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those
> > > > contrarians?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Scott:
> > > > > As I stated before:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Regular print books have headers, some have
> > > > footers, that is part of a
> > > > > print book.
> > > > > If we want digital copies of print books then,
> > > > take the good with the
> > > > bad."
> > > > >
> > > > > If I don't want to read the headers, I can strip
> > > > them out myself or use
> > > > an
> > > > > automated tool (k1000) to do so."
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott and Jim, nothing prevents you from stripping
> > > > those headers out
> > > > > yourself before you begin reading.
> > > > > It would then leave the material in the master
> > > > copy for those of us who
> > > > want
> > > > > it.
> > > > >
> > > > > In fact, I would do more touch-up work on things
> > > > like headers but I don't
> > > > > because the first couple of lines of each page
> > > > seem to be the strippers
> > > > > domain and therefore my efforts would be futile.
> > > > >
> > > > > The ironic thing is that we spend time on this
> > > > list devising and testing
> > > > > various stripper countermeasures and bookshare is
> > > > aware of this and does
> > > > not
> > > > > discourage it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Keri Carmos saw that full well with hp6.
> > > > > (It's like rolling a boulder up hill)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jim:
> > > > > You make some interesting points.
> > > > > As someone has previously mentioned, if the
> > > > headers are too mangled, not
> > > > > even the stripper will strip them.
> > > > >
> > > > > The stripper is just plain erratic. It does
> > > > different things to the
> > > > same
> > > > > header within the same book.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is clearly a case where the benefit is not
> > > > worth the cost. not with
> > > > all
> > > > > this collateral damage being done.
> > > > >
> > > > > I urge you all to continue doing what your doing.
> > > > (if anything try to
> > > > > validate a little more so we can cut down the step
> > > > 1 page)
> > > > >
> > > > > I will drop this issue for now, but i am not
> > > > forgetting about it and I
> > > > trust
> > > > > after these last couple days, Bookshare won't
> > > > forget either.
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Rui
> > > > > a 2004 Volunteer of the year
> > > > > and a 2005 pain in the rear. (smile)
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Scott Blanks" <scottsjb@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:58 PM
> > > > > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those
> > > > contrarians?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Let me speak first as a reader of Bookshare
> > > > books. I mostly read
> > > > fiction,
> > > > > > with the occasional pop culture book thrown in
> > > > for variety. I read
> > > > almost
> > > > > > all these books in Braille. I don't want to see
> > > > repeated text such as
> > > > page
> > > > > > numbers, author/title info, etc. If people want
> > > > to be able to see that
> > > > > > info, there should be an option to include or
> > > > exclude this from your
> > > > book.
> > > > > > Chapters and other major headings should be
> > > > included of course, and I
> > > > > > believe that problem will be addressed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As a validator, I can't think of a good enough
> > > > reason at this point to
> > > > > > stop submitting books and validating them. That
> > > > includes the stripper
> > > > > > issue. If we stop submitting or validating
> > > > works, we're hurting a much
> > > > > > larger group of people than ourselves. The
> > > > ultimate purpose of Bookshare
> > > > > > is to give access to books. There are still many
> > > > books rated fair on the
> > > > > > website, and in the past I'm sure there were a
> > > > much higher percentage of
> > > > > > "fair" books submitted to the site, but we
> > > > wouldn't have wanted those
> > > > > > books held back from being available just
> > > > because they were poorly
> > > > > > scanned. I don't want people deprived of books
> > > > just because of a missing
> > > > > > chapter heading, or because there aren't page
> > > > numbers included.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let's take things slow and easy folks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Scott
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Rui" <goldWave@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:28 PM
> > > > > > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Where are those
> > > > contrarians?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Hello:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I would like to here from people who disagree
> > > > with me.
> > > > > >> Let me know why you think the current setup
> > > > makes sense.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I do not mean for people to play devil's
> > > > advocate with this.
> > > > > >> I'm asking if anyone seriously disagrees with
> > > > the centiments expressed
> > > > > >> over the last 30 hours.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> (There is a method to my madness)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -- Rui (who is probably liked at Benetech right
> > > > now as much as the
> > > > > >> plague)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > >> From: "Deborah Kent Stein" <dkent5817@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > >> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:26 PM
> > > > > >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and
> > > > colatteral damage
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Dear Charlyn and Bookshare community,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> I think a petition is an excellent idea.
> > > > Charlyn, would you like to
> > > > put
> > > > > >>> it
> > > > > >>> together? Rui, would you put it on the
> > > > Bookshare Scans site?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> I also think we should select a day to make
> > > > phone calls and send
> > > > emails
> > > > > >>> to
> > > > > >>> the Bookshare staff calling on them to turn
> > > > off the stripper. How
> > > > > >>> about
> > > > > >>> Thursday, July 28, one week after this most
> > > > recent stripper discussion
> > > > > >>> began.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> We need to take in the fact that, as Bookshare
> > > > volunteers and users,
> > > > we
> > > > > >>> must
> > > > > >>> have direct say on policy issues. Right now
> > > > this list is virtually
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> only
> > > > > >>> vehicle we have for reaching the staff, and it
> > > > is clearly ineffective.
> > > > > >>> The
> > > > > >>> stripper issue highlights a need for a more
> > > > formalized means of
> > > > > >>> communication. Maybe we should develop an
> > > > advisory committee which
> > > > can
> > > > > >>> bring concerns to the staff and have a real
> > > > voice in policymaking.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> As blind people, most of us have grown up with
> > > > the sense that we're
> > > > > >>> lucky to
> > > > > >>> get whatever reading matter is offered to us.
> > > > We had better be
> > > > > >>> appreciative
> > > > > >>> and not complain. On the title page of every
> > > > book from the National
> > > > > >>> Library
> > > > > >>> Service we read that the book has been
> > > > produced for the blind and
> > > > > >>> physically
> > > > > >>> handicapped "with the kind permission of the
> > > > publisher." That line
> > > > > >>> about
> > > > > >>> "the kind permission" says so much! Do
> > > > sighted people need anyone's
> > > > > >>> kind
> > > > > >>> permission in order to read? I AM in fact
> > > > extraordinarily grateful to
> > > > > >>> the
> > > > > >>> volunteers and others who have spent countless
> > > > hours putting books
> > > > into
> > > > > >>> Braille and recorded formats for us, and to
> > > > those who have worked to
> > > > > >>> change
> > > > > >>> copyright laws and make our special-format
> > > > books possible! Most of us
> > > > > >>> would
> > > > > >>> not be literate, educated, contributing
> > > > members of society without
> > > > their
> > > > > >>> help! But I think that our lifelong
> > > > dependence upon others to provide
> > > > > >>> us
> > > > > >>> with books, and the constant feeling that we
> > > > must be grateful and that
> > > > > >>> we
> > > > > >>> can't expect too much, do take a toll.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Bookshare is different. Bookshare is a
> > > > program which is not only FOR
> > > > > >>> us,
> > > > > >>> but BY us. We, the volunteers, determine what
> > > > books go into the
> > > > > >>> collection,
> > > > > >>> and we ourselves make them available. We are
> > > > not "only volunteers"
> > > > who
> > > > > >>> have
> > > > > >>> no right to determine policy. We are the
> > > > backbone of the program - a
> > > > > >>> program which is created to meet our needs and
> > > > those of other blind
> > > > and
> > > > > >>> print-disabled people. The Bookshare staff
> > > > are not users of Bookshare
> > > > > >>> materials. They do not live with the
> > > > inaccessibility of print; they
> > > > > >>> don't
> > > > > >>> experience our issues from the inside. It is
> > > > absolutely essential
> > > > that
> > > > > >>> they
> > > > > >>> listen to what we have to say.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Bookshare is an incredible program, and I
> > > > believe in it utterly. It
> > > > has
> > > > > >>> the
> > > > > >>> potential to narrow the print gap for us as no
> > > > other program ever has
> > > > > >>> before. But we need to take a stand and
> > > > insist that it be the quality
> > > > > >>> program we all deserve.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Debbie
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > >>> From: "Charlene" <caota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 12:11 AM
> > > > > >>> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and
> > > > colatteral damage
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> Maybe we could put together a pteition of
> > > > some sort and put a notice
> > > > on
> > > > > >>>> the volunteer website as well to see if we
> > > > could get enough people to
> > > > > >>>> sign it to send to bookshare requesting them
> > > > to stop using the
> > > > program.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > >>>> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >>>> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > On Behalf Of Pam Quinn
> > > > > >>>> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:02 PM
> > > > > >>>> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >>>> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and
> > > > colatteral damage
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> We take pride in our submissions and I just
> > > > don't think a lot of the
> > > > > >>>> bookshare staff understands how angry and
> > > > frustrated we are when we
> > > > see
> > > > > >>>> that our submissions have been mangled. And
> > > > for what? I just don't
> > > > get
> > > > > >>>> it. Why do they insist on holding on to that
> > > > useless program that
> > > > > >>>> nobody
> > > > > >>>> wants? Seems to me if anything, dropping it
> > > > would mean one less step
> > > > > >>>> and
> > > > > >>>> less work in putting the books on the site.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I use chapter headings for my breaking points
> > > > in .mp3 files too, when
> > > > > >>>> I'm lucky enough to have them.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> It might not be our decision and they might
> > > > not want to listen to us,
> > > > > >>>> but that would be unfortunate, because the
> > > > volunteers and subscribers
> > > > > >>>> have a major role in determining the future
> > > > of bookshare.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Pam
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Original message:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> >I have seriously considered not submitting
> > > > some books I have scanned
> > > > > >>>> >just
> > > > > >>>> >because I thought they would be of little
> > > > use after the stripper
> > > > > >>>> finished
> > > > > >>>> >with them. I put a lot of work in to what I
> > > > submit and it is really
> > > > > >>>> >upsetting to see the final result when my
> > > > original looked so nice,
> > > > and
> > > > > >>>> that
> > > > > >>>> >is only a volunteer's view. I also am upset
> > > > by the messes that I
> > > > come
> > > > > >>>> >accross when I am reading, even for
> > > > pleasure. I use the chapter
> > > > > >>>> headings
> > > > > >>>> >as my MP3 creation breaking points, so if
> > > > they aren't there I have a
> > > > > >>>> big
> > > > > >>>> >mess!
> > > > > >>>> >
> > > > > >>>> >I don't really like throwing fits, and I
> > > > won't on this list because
> > > > it
> > > > > >>>> >seems to serve little purpose, but the fits
> > > > are completely
> > > > justified.
> > > > > >>>> >
> > > > > >>>> >If i submitted a book in DAISY and BRF
> > > > format instead of in RTF
> > > > would
> > > > > >>>> >the
> > > > > >>>> >normal automated processes be skipped? That
> > > > is the only thing I can
> > > > > >>>> think
> > > > > >>>> >of to rescue books where the headers,
> > > > headings, and page numbers are
> > > > > >>>> >invaluable.
> > > > > >>>> >
> > > > > >>>> >Sarah Van Oosterwijck
> > > > > >>>> >Assistive Technology Trainer
> > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity
> > > > > >>>> >----- Original Message -----
> > > > > >>>> >From: "Deborah Kent Stein"
> > > > <dkent5817@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>>> >To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>>> >Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:10 PM
> > > > > >>>> >Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and
> > > > colatteral damage
> > > > > >>>> >
> > > > > >>>> >
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >> Hear, hear! I agree 200%!
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >> We have been telling the Bookshare staff
> > > > about our concerns,
> > > > > >>>> >> politely
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> >> but firmly, literally for years. Despite
> > > > all the talk, nothing
> > > > has
> > > > > >>>> >> changed. I am beginning to think we need
> > > > to take stronger action.
> > > > > >>>> >> We
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> >> ARE volunteers.
> > > > > >>>> >> We do not have to contribute the thousands
> > > > of hours we put into
> > > > this
> > > > > >>>> >> program. And Bookshare cannot survive
> > > > without us. Do we need to
> > > > > >>>> >> say
> > > > > >>>> we
> > > > > >>>> >> will have to stop scanning and validating
> > > > until we know that
> > > > someone
> > > > > >>>> out
> > > > > >>>> >> there is really listening to us, and
> > > > taking action? It should not
> > > > > >>>> have
> > > > > >>>> >> to
> > > > > >>>> >> come down to threats and strikes, but many
> > > > of us are at our wit's
> > > > > >>>> end.
> > > > > >>>> >> What
> > > > > >>>> >> is it going to take to turn off the
> > > > stripper and stop mangling the
> > > > > >>>> books
> > > > > >>>> >> we
> > > > > >>>> >> work so hard to make available?
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >> Debbie
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > >>>> >> From: "Rui" <goldwave@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>>> >> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>>> >> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 11:16 AM
> > > > > >>>> >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] stripper and
> > > > colatteral damage
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>> Good Afternoon:
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> At the bookshare users meeting at NFB, I
> > > > made it very clear to
> > > > Jim
> > > > > >>>> >>> (like
> > > > > >>>> >> he didn't know already) the issues with
> > > > the stripper and why i
> > > > think
> > > > > >>>> >> it should be removed.
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> The whole concept of the stripper bothers
> > > > me, not just the fact
> > > > it
> > > > > >>>> >>> does
> > > > > >>>> >> more than it's supposed too.
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> Its very reason for being agrivates me.
> > > > > >>>> >>> Regular print books have headers, some
> > > > have footers, that is part
> > > > > >>>> >>> of
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> a
> > > > > >>>> >> print book.
> > > > > >>>> >>> If we want digital copies of print books
> > > > then, take the good with
> > > > > >>>> >>> the
> > > > > >>>> >>> bad.
> > > > > >>>> >>> Do not sanitize the book to make it more
> > > > access technology
> > > > > >>>> >>> friendly.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> The
> > > > > >>>> >> very fact that is accessible already does
> > > > that.
> > > > > >>>> >>> If i don't want to read the headers, i
> > > > can strip them out myself
> > > > or
> > > > > >>>> >>> use
> > > > > >>>> >>> my
> > > > > >>>> >> own automated tool to do so.
> > > > > >>>> >>> However, If by chance I do want them
> > > > there, I simply do not get
> > > > > >>>> >>> that
> > > > > >>>> >> option with Bookshare!!!
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> Words do not do justice to how much this
> > > > issue ticks me off.
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> Bottomline, this process does not serve
> > > > the community that it was
> > > > > >>>> >>> designed
> > > > > >>>> >> to assist.
> > > > > >>>> >>> -- Rui
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> >
> > > > > >>>> >>> > From: Mike Pietruk <pietruk@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >>>> >>> > Date: 2005/07/21 Thu AM 11:00:39 EDT
> > > > > >>>> >>> > To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >>>> >>> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper
> > > > > >>>> >>> >
> > > > > >>>> >>> > Pam
> > > > > >>>> >>> >
> > > > > >>>> >>> > agreed! It's inconsistent and
> > > > unpredictable. And the problems
> > > > > >>>> >>> > relative
> > > > > >>>> >>> > to it have been discussed repeatedly.
> > > > > >>>> >>> > The Powers-that-be are all too aware of
> > > > the damage the stripper
> > > > > >>>> has
> > > > > >>>> >> caused
> > > > > >>>> >>> > but seem to have shoved it on the back
> > > > burner probably due to
> > > > > >>>> >>> > more
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> >>> > pressing issues to deal with. It is a
> > > > shame that it cannot be
> > > > > >>>> >>> > dealt with; but Marissa, prior to her
> > > > leaving, pretty much
> > > > > >>>> >>> > outlined where it stands. So I wouldn't
> > > > expect much change
> > > > > >>>> >>> > regarding the stripper as any change
> > > > would require some sort of
> > > > > >>>> >>> > policy change plus programmer action.
> > > > Conceptually, the
> > > > stripper
> > > > > >>>> >>> > makes sense; practically, it has been a
> > > > > >>>> >> dismal
> > > > > >>>> >>> > failure breading as much (or perhaps
> > > > even more) than it has
> > > > > >>>> >>> > repaired. It's not our decision as we
> > > > are volunteers, not
> > > > > >>>> >>> > decision-makers.
> > > > > >>>> >>> >
> > > > > >>>> >>> >
> > > > > >>>> >>> >
> > > > > >>>> >>> >
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >> --
> > > > > >>>> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > > > >>>> >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > > > > >>>> >> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database:
> > > > 267.9.2/52 - Release Date:
> > > > > >>>> 7/19/2005
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >>
> > > > > >>>> >
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
Other related posts:
