 | | Re: Right theme wrong Place? Train stuff offered! —Roger D. Parks
|
| | | (...) Whilst my words might be quoted, I'm not. (...) realise (...) Humour imparement are us, though? (...) self-explanatory to most. (...) fact (...) nicely? Indeed. And post clues -VIA EMAIL- to the clueless, instead of embarassing them in public? (...) (25 years ago, 4-Nov-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Right theme wrong Place? Train stuff offered! —Richard Franks
|
| | | | | Ouch! IMO, this has got out of proportion. The initial transgression was (IMO) fairly minor, but anyway the debate is no longer about the issues, but a petty discussion of semantics. If we can't discuss this civilly then can we go back to talking (...) (25 years ago, 4-Nov-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Right theme wrong Place? Train stuff offered! —Roger D. Parks
|
| | | | | | (...) fairly (...) Sadly, had a bit of discretion been applied intially, we -would- be talking about or favourite addiction. As noted in the post to which you make reference, I think we're done. I am, for certain. Cheers, Roger ...who is obviously (...) (25 years ago, 4-Nov-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Right theme wrong Place? Train stuff offered! —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) There is nothing funny about some idiot like you baiting me. What makes you think *I* wasn't kidding? Have you had *your* humour aligned recently? (...) It was never my intention to embarrass him. He did that all by himself. (...) Look, I did (...) (25 years ago, 9-Nov-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
