To: restornu
Not that I know of ...
It's just that a new threads are easy for those on dial up
10 posted on
01/19/2005 11:00:55 AM PST by
Mo1
(Does the distinguished Sen from VT wish to act as our treaty rep. for negotiations with Al Queda?)
To: Mo1
Good morning all. Just marking my spot.
11 posted on
01/19/2005 11:16:09 AM PST by
Canadian Outrage
(All us Western Canuks belong South - we'd make good Americans!!)
To: Mo1
Oh I did not know that I am dial up, and it was doing just find......it only those who post those over grown photos that it takes a little time....but that happen anyway in the beganning of a new thread or deeper in the old thread!
Slow mean you have barnicles tracking you!
14 posted on
01/19/2005 11:43:46 AM PST by
restornu
(I am an invisible being of DD.........Ghosty:))
To: Mo1
"Not that I know of ..."
Huh? I am clueless?
"It's just that a new threads are easy for those on dial up"
I am a dial.....it was slowing down?:)
7,560 posted on
04/01/2005 8:15:50 AM PST by
restornu
(Do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God.)
To: Mo1
"It's just that a new threads are easy for those on dial up" That doesn't make any sense to me at all. It is the number of posts per page that make the speed difference, not the number of pages. When I had dial-up, I kept it set at 100. With cable or dsl, I have it at 250.
7,574 posted on
04/01/2005 3:42:30 PM PST by
sweetliberty
(Never argue with a fool. People might not know the difference.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson