TECHNET Archives

April 2012

TechNet@IPC.ORG
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Julie Silk <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:15:03 -0500
Reply-To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, "Stadem, Richard D." <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: 4 Questions: No Clean vs flux Deactivation. Possible Hogwash ???
From:
"Stadem, Richard D." <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version:
1.0
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (14 lines) 
Me too. However, I agree that there may be some residual flux, but in this situation it is nearyl always followed by a saponified wash in real life.
________________________________________
From: TechNet [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Julie Silk [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 6:37 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] 4 Questions: No Clean vs flux Deactivation. Possible Hogwash ???

Bets on.  Glazed old-fashioned.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2