RE: Re: Indoor_Construction

From: Don DeLoach <ddeloach_at_comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 15:25:26 -0600

I agree with Ben. As long as the discussion leads quickly back to Indoor.

 

Don DeLoach

Editor, NFFS Free Flight Digest

 

 

  _____

From: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Benjamin Saks
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 3:21 PM
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] Re: Indoor_Construction

 

  

Mark I humbly disagree. Any news which indicates an increase in potential
flying sites for us is 100 % relevant.

On Oct 7, 2010 5:18 PM, "Mark F1diddler" <f1diddler_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> --- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, Benjamin Saks <bensaks_at_...>
wrote:
>>
>> i think airships would be on topic. they are the reason we have hangers
to
>> fly in.
>
> And equally tangentially, golf ball technology is the reason we have good
rubber for indoor, but a "golf ball history" article from a golf magazine
would be pretty far fetched for a group supposedly about Indoor Free Flight.
>
> At some point EVERYTHING relates to everything else.
> Mark F1diddler
>
Received on Thu Oct 07 2010 - 14:25:30 CEST