 | | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
Hello! (...) This thread is the reason why a LGBT subgroup is needed now. Because NOW nobody who was involved in this thread has an unbiassed view upon this matter anymore. ;) Bye Jojo (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is LUGNET what you really want? (Was: Re: Lavender Brick Society)
|
|
(...) Except it'd more likely be lugnet.people.(your country).(your state).(your city).(your street).kyle., just in the unforseen circumstance that there is another Kyle. Don't get me wrong, I reckon lugnet.(incredibly convoluted heirarchy).kyle (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people, lugnet.org, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
"Jeff Pelletier" <jeff@studio7733.com> wrote in message news:I496JG.Io6@lugnet.com... snipped some old stuff. (...) more and (...) to (...) in (...) No (...) is (...) think (...) would (...) speak (...) ignorant to (...) civil (...) can't (...) (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) I couldn't agree more with what David said. As a gay person, I ask no more and no less than to speak equally with someone. If a straight person I talk to mentions "I went to the Lego store with my wife, blah blah blah" then I do in fact desire (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Is LUGNET what you really want? (Was: Re: Lavender Brick Society)
|
|
(...) Wow, controversy on LUGNET. Will wonders never cease? ;] Damn I'm going to regret this. Oh well, as long as my post is more coherent than JAL's, I've done good. ;] I have formed a theory. Here's a pictorial representation of part of my theory: (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people, lugnet.org)
|
