 | | Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.) —Todd Lehman
| | | | (...) Below is a copy of a message I have just written to Matthew via e-mail. If Matthew does show up here today, please try to keep things as civil as possible. --Todd ___...___ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:24:33 -0400 From: Todd Lehman (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | (canceled) —Mike Stanley
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.) —Scott Arthur
| | | | | | | (...) Play? I am the devil's advocate. :-) It can be a bit one sided here at times. Scott A (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.) —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | | | | (...) Indeed. Politeness, civility, and camaraderie is *so* boring, really. :-) ++Lar (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.) —Selçuk Göre
| | | | | Todd, I can understand your intention to being fair, but do you really think this is necessary for this case? Do you really believe that someone could have an acceptable excuse and/or explanation for such a situation? I suggest letting him scrawl (...) (24 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | |
