16 Jan
2005
16 Jan
'05
10:22 p.m.
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Christopher L. Morrow <christopher.morrow@mci.com> said:
That process/procedure is in place for a good reason, circumventing it will lead to problems in the long run. Do you circumvent for MS, for AOL, for ATT? At what point do you draw the line? My home business of pot painting?
If the proper procedure was circumvented in the first place (which appears to be the case with panix.com), then it should be circumvented to repair the damage as fast as possible.
If it can be proven to have been cicumvented, sure. I don't think anything beyond conjecture about that has been said 'publicly' yet, has it?