 | | Re: Time for LUGNET Legal Aid? (was: Remy is in the clear)
|
|
(...) 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)
|
|
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)
|
|
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)
|
|
(...) 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)
|
|
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)
|
|
(...) Or, "you're". *sigh*. (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.people)
|
