 | | Re: Virtual Flower Delivery Service
|
|
(...) From the original post: (URL) ^^^...^^^ ^^^^ If you look, it does mention LEGO. Cindy (26 years ago, 17-Feb-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtual Flower Delivery Service
|
|
(...) I think you're arguing whether or not it "should" have looked like spam...? That's a moot argument, since we know that it did in fact look like spam to at least one person. Again, we're all only human, and we tend to read things very quickly (...) (26 years ago, 17-Feb-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtual Flower Delivery Service
|
|
(...) I'm sure I'm not the only person who doesn't look at web sites mentioned in posts which look like spam. If I do, that's just validating the spammers. (26 years ago, 17-Feb-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtual Flower Delivery Service
|
|
(...) That's what I get for having my phone service go out for a day and missing a couple of days of work. Everyone else makes a topic moot before I get to it. :) (...) You're probably right. (...) Nope, Tom's opinion about usenet spam aside, I (...) (26 years ago, 17-Feb-99, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtual Flower Delivery Service
|
|
(...) Easy, Easy. The poor guy was flamed enough yesterday and the day before; let's let it drop. I think Keith gets the idea. It was a simple mistake. Careless maybe, but, well, we're all only human. Obviously it might've looked like spam to some (...) (26 years ago, 17-Feb-99, to lugnet.general)
|
