 | | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) No, he's just adjusting to being a New Englander... Todd, you need to do better than that though, that's a poor example of double negativese. Frank (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Shiri wrote in message ... (...) his (...) misteaks." Now there's an idea! Of course that won't help those not in the know any... Frank who may be a respectable member of the AFOL community who does make the occasional misteak (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
(...) Larry's the best one to answer that. :) (...) Well, I don't think they can -- and that's 98% of the reason I jumped on Larry for what he posted. And it's also why I posted something similar-but- different right afterwards. The other 2% is (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
(...) I can answer this much - when Larry makes a mistake (which, people say, he never does), he answers by saying "I never make misteaks." Or someone else says it for him - because this is 'his' line, his little pun, a trademark of a sort. (CMIIW) (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Allan Bedford wrote in message <01bf79b1$4ab7e040$3...hx1138>... (...) It's a running gag. Check out: (URL) is given a little more leeway than some people, but that is because of his history as a solid contributor. There really is no way to avoid (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in article <Fq3o8y.6nK@lugnet.com>... (...) few (...) raised (...) something (...) more (...) know (...) even (...) I'm glad you used that last little quote. It highlights my point exactly. I've been reading (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) This is an incredibly ridiculous statement. While the Army Airborne were the first troops on the ground (with M16's only), everyone knows that the Marines, thanks to the maritime prepositioning system, were the first fully equipped armed (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) No offense taken. (...) But it is relevant to those of us who are employed in the computer networking industry. I, as a developer / administrator of networking technology, have a responsibility to myself and my career to ensure that wanton and (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
Having also been "in an armed conflict on foreign soil" (in fact, I was in the middle of Iraq with the 1st Cav while the Marines were still sailing back and forth in the Arabian Gulf playing decoy, but I digress), I can say that the Gulf War and (...) (25 years ago, 17-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
Hello Jeremy, First let me apologize, I agree with many of the replies that it was not a gentlemanly thing for me to have publicly criticized you in such a fashion. I meant you no disrespect personally, it's very easy to become dettached when you're (...) (25 years ago, 17-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
