 | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Jeff Boen
|
| | | (...) ahhh.. okay.. i see... so basically i made the statement saying that perhaps we should look to people who know what they're talking about.. and all you can say is that i'm wrong.. i didn't say i'm positive of anything... to quote myself "no (...) (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | (...) I think we should; I think people will trust the information Brad brings back from Billund next week. (...) See, that's a false statement. It's not true that no one here knows for certain whether any of the events that have transpired over the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Jeff Boen
|
| | | | | | (...) I just now got back to this thread.. and I appreciate your words very much... I agree that you and I both were getting slightly irate and perhaps a little obstinant in our stances... kid gloves are not accessories I own, so I rarely find the (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Suzanne D. Rich
|
| | | | (...) Your remarks are less than helpful. (...) If it's legalese you crave, I'm sure you're capable of doing your own homework. (...) My primary concern was not how I would look to you. (...) Be glad there is no such thing as the LEGO police. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Mike Faunce
|
| | | | Was this announcement/explanation ever posted? If so, I missed it. Mike Suzanne D. Rich <suz@media.mit.edu> wrote in message news:FMoD01.DE6@lugnet.com... (...) like (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Suzanne D. Rich
|
| | | | No, I'm sorry I haven't posted yet. I have been thinking long and hard about what I should/could say here. I think I should say as little as possible, so I will be brief. Sorry if my line breaks here are screwed up, Netscape bug. :-\ ---...--- The (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Jeff Boen
|
| | | | | (...) wow... that's pretty much *exactly* what i was asking to hear as all of this progressed... (not the specifics of your LEGO involvement, how could we have known?!?, but your knowledge of what *is* and *is not* going to be a problem for this (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | Thanks Suzanne. It's good to hear what your thinking about all of this. (...) This is an interesting point. Personally, I put my own interests above those of the Lego Company, and I think that's true for a lot of us here. That's not even a painful (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | (...) Or, "you're". *sigh*. (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.people)
|
| | | | |
