To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 8040
8039  |  8041
Subject: 
Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.general
Date: 
Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:55:11 GMT
Reply-To: 
ssgore@superonline.com*spamcake*
Viewed: 
426 times
  
Scott A wrote:

<snip>


I'm not sure I do want to speak to him, but I'm also not sure about how is
banning came about. I pointed out posts earlier which (I think) were worse
than his. So why were they allowed, when his "input" is not?

Scott A

Scott, actually I like some grinding gears just inside some other
regular ones, so I like reading your posts, but MM is completely out of
any comparison I think (actually I'm sure). It's not the just this or
that post from him here. He already explained his sick intentions for
starting this flame war KNOWINGLY. Just read everything from him, both
here and in RTL, and go to his site and read his documents relating the
issue, then I'm sure you would not need any more details about how much
the diameter of this *** ****.

Selçuk



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.)
 
(...) But you would still have read at least read a message in order to reply to it? But I take your point. (...) I'm not sure I do want to speak to him, but I'm also not sure about how is banning came about. I pointed out posts earlier which (I (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

17 Messages in This Thread:






Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR