 | | Re: How about a glossary? —John Neal
| | | | In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Ross Crawford wrote: (snipped a bunch of old news) You snooze, you (URL) lose>:-D JOHN (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: How about a glossary? —Ross Crawford
| | | | | (...) Well John, that might even be slightly funny if it was all old news, but if you read carefully, you'll see I included more than your solitary useful link and one totally meaningless one. So please try to keep the stupid **** in (...) (20 years ago, 4-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: How about a glossary? —John Neal
| | | | | (...) Well, that was the joke (hence the smiley). Your post was about 4 minutes after mine... (...) (URL) Lighten up, Francis.> JOHN (20 years ago, 5-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: How about a glossary? —Ross Crawford
| | | | | (...) Well, that was my point. Last I heard, adding a smiley doesn't automatically make a statement into a joke, it generally requires some humour to be present. (...) Really??????? No kidding????!!!!!????? Ha ha ha. ROSCO (20 years ago, 5-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: How about a glossary? —John Neal
| | | | | (...) No, only that it was intended to be taken in a humorous way. (...) Okay. You got the "joke" but decided to deliberately respond with hostility anyway. Fine. LUGNET just got a little less civil. JOHN (20 years ago, 5-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | |
