 | | foo!
|
| (...) Which disturbed you then and disturbs you now? C'mon? Reread it, it's not that harsh -- except for maybe the subject line. Disturbs? I think you aren't actually losing any sleep over it, Tim. ;o) Anyway, you know what I owe TLC? Nothing. For (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: foo!
|
| "richard marchetti" <blueofnoon@aol.com> wrote in message news:GMIFnJ.37@lugnet.com... (...) Fine, disturb may have been the wrong word to use. But, it still upsets me in the sense that I believe its futile and not the kind of message that will get (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: foo!
|
| (...) And you think there are ways to get through to them that work? Do tell... (...) Yes, and I have given such thanks over the Guarded Inn, for example. Of course the devil is in the details -- I wasn't quite as pleased to actually receive the (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: foo!
|
| Hi Richard - "richard marchetti" <blueofnoon@aol.com> wrote in message news:GMJ85G.9KB@lugnet.com... (...) My thoughts are - just keep persistent at the constructive criticism. Allan mentioned that he was committed to whining and complaining until (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | | | Re: foo!
|
| (...) The lugnet.dear-lego group is for posting open letters to TLC, not for debates. Richard's original post in this thread was on-topic to the group. At this point, however, both of you are straying pretty wildly off-topic for the group. Please (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.general)
| |
