 | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Before my time. Ross is the man to ask about that. I don't particularly care. (...) I never said it was. 'Shenanigans' is just a turn of phrase. He seems quite sincere, and verbose. (...) Me too. And sometimes (not every time as some seem to (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Why do you believe in god? (...) John, I think this could be cleared up easily by looking at how we interpret words. Lar has posted tice in the last six months, you consider that "not still reading", I consider it "still reading occasionally". (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | 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 (20 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. (20 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 (...) (20 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, (...) (20 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 (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Kinda sad, really... ended in a whimper instead of a bang... Eh, I have no idea what the results will be. After all the data I've read, it's pretty convoluted--who said what to whom and when... And, as I'm told around here, in the grande (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) <spits pop all over screen> I hope this is an example of that Canadian humour you were talking about! The Libby trial makes this kerfuffle seem like world war! :-) JOHN (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Why the sigh? It says JLUG is not for children and there are no rules. Fine. Now this part I don't get: "The JLUG is a group of Lego enthusiast that are not geographically centred but certainly work together through online communication. After (...) (20 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
|
