|
|
 | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Well I guess if he has a group of African girls with laptops replying for him then maybe he is unaware of what he has replied to. ROSCO (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Don't assume. I have only read what is in o-t-d, I have not gone back to the original thread, and judging by what I've seen in here, I don't feel the need to waste the time. (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | A long sentence of relatively little import -- was Re: Co-curator update needed?
|
| (...) This, of course, would play right into Matthew's idea-- (URL) I'll go-- "Flash! Ou reporters have just unearthed this startling, world shaking discovery!", exclaimed the visibly exhausted reporter as he stood in front of the newscamera and (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Standing up! Was... Re: malicious behavior
|
| Moving this back to o.t.d. for debatable reasions... (...) As a somewhat parenthetical point to what Marc said above (though flowing right from his poat)-- At what point should people 'stand up' against (maybe perceived) transgressions? I mean, (...) (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Say, you're not in the press corps, are you? ;-) Ah, the good, old days of Watergate... (...) Exactly. (...) To Plame? Only that she can get rich off of a book/TV movie deal. Bottom line-- much ado about nothing. JOHN (19 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
|
