 | | Re: A new castle babe!!! (and a weird knight--not a woman)
|
|
(...) Perhaps you have a larger picture than I do, but I have to say that the only female I see is on the top of the tower of 6091. The knight by the gate shows no obvious female characteristics. In fact, with that style helm on, how can you say for (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| |
| | Re: A new castle babe!!! (and a weird knight--not a woman)
|
|
(...) My Reasons (may not be enough for you, though): A. I own The Catalog; B. I looked at it under magnification; C. If that is a Mustache, the knight has no mouth and a very long face; D. It looks an awful lot like the Pirate Wench's Head; E. The (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| |
| | Re: A new castle babe!!! (and a weird knight--not a woman)
|
|
(...) And we all know that only girls have eyelashes. *laugh* (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| |
| | Re: A new castle babe!!! (and a weird knight--not a woman)
|
|
(...) shows (...) red (...) minute (...) You seem quite proud of yourself (and quick to temper), Ok, I know now that I was wrong, cause I have SEEN it. I did not wish to offend (no need to get riled), just wished to make a statement from opinion and (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
| |
| | Re: A new castle babe!!! (and a weird knight--not a woman)
|
|
(...) <Snipped my stuff> (...) Ack! I should've realized that sounded angry and arrogant, I apologize. I didn't *mean* for it to sound that way, in fact I wasn't very angry at all. I just wanted to plainly state why I believed what I did. After I (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.castle)
|
