General Discussion : 42301


General / 42301	42300 \| 42302

Subject:	Re: The way we were: January, 1994
Newsgroups:	lugnet.general
Date:	Wed, 28 May 2003 16:08:19 GMT
Viewed:	968 times

In lugnet.general, Tim Courtney wrote: > In lugnet.general, Adrian Egli wrote: > > Here's a real oldie from Tim Courtney dated Nov 27, 1996: > > http://www.google.com/groups?q=Tim+Courtney,+rec.toys.lego&start=170&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_miny=1996&as_maxd=1&as_maxm=1&as_maxy=1999&selm=57ijn5%2495a%40lana.zippo.com&rnum=180 > > Oh gosh ... old posts from me, I'd prefer not to be reminded :-D That one wasn't > too bad though. Heh. Here's the earliest one I could find from me: http://www.google.com/groups?q=+%22noip%22+group:rec.toys.lego&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=34B92391.2381%40email.psu.edu&rnum=6 "NOIP" was a lack-of-anything-better handle before I felt like committing my name to public consumption. Goofy. Anyway, I'm glad to see that I've been consistent in my pro-clone views all these years! Dave!

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: The way we were: January, 1994
(...) I wonder how many of us can say that clone bricks dragged us into online AFOLdom? See, my first post was about clonedom too. I beat you by 19 months, but I was talking about TENTE, so I think the obscurity/time comparators are about equal. :) (...) (22 years ago, 28-May-03, to lugnet.general)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: The way we were: January, 1994
(...) too bad though. -Tim (22 years ago, 28-May-03, to lugnet.general)

16 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search