 | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | (...) Laugh at him all you wish, but have the cojones to do it to his face, not behind his back. Jerk. JOHN (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | (...) Well I don't think Al could get much more public than Lugnet, do you? ROSCO (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) I said to his face, not in public. What makes you think he is still among the populus that reads LUGNET? (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) What makes you think he isn't? ROSCO (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) He never posts anymore. What makes you think he is? (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) (URL) Never???> (...) Seems to me he regularly chimes in every few months. But I could be wrong. ROSCO (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) You are. Twice in the past half year. So what makes you think he is? (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) And just how does that make my statement "he regularly chimes in every few months" wrong? (...) See previous post. ROSCO (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) Because twice in the past half year isn't the same as regularly chiming in every few months. (...) So you are saying that because he has posted twice in the past half year, he is regular reader of LUGNET? Sorry; non sequitur. (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) LOL please explain the difference to me? (...) No I'm saying that because he posts every few months, that he is still among the populus that reads Lugnet. Whether he only reads when he feels like it, or when he gets an email from someone, is (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | (...) Past performance is no guarantee of future results. (what you snipped: non sequitur) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | (...) No it isn't, but it IS what makes me think he is still among the populus that reads Lugnet. And that is what you asked, isn't it? ROSCO (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Fair enough. JOHN (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | | (...) "Regularly chiming in every few months" over a period of 6 months means chiming in twice, spaced "regularly" over the time, i.e at 3 months and 6 months. Chiming in twice in the last 6 months could mean chiming in on Day One and Day Two, and (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) OK. I thought I could assume people would read my question in the context of the current thread, but I guess that was a rash assumption. So please explain how that difference applies in this particular case? ROSCO (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Jude Beaudin
|
| | | | | | | (...) Ross, The difference is Tom uses a calendar that has months that are 20 days long on average. Those crazy Americans, first they mess up DST now they have a new calendar. Jude (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: DST sucks! (was: malicious behavior) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | (...) LOL ummmm shhhh, don't mention DST when talking to an Australian ;) ROSCO (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: DST sucks! (was: malicious behavior) —Jude Beaudin
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Sorry Ross, I didn't know you had it so bad. (URL) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: DST sucks! (was: malicious behavior) —Bob Parker
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I feel his pain. It happens here in Arizona too: (URL) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) You can't assume that because he has posted on LUGNET a few times, he is reading or aware of anything that is going on on LUGNET. The only real way to know if someone is a regular reader is if that person posts often each week. Sure, there are (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | (...) I think you can assume that he is aware of whatever he replied to. (...) That's one way, but not the ONLY way. Real or otherwise. (...) I was never asked to verify anything - I was simply asked "What makes you think he is still among the (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Conversely, you make my point. If he doesn't reply to something, we can't assume he's read it, and it would be off his radar, or as I put it, "behind his back." Your initial point was, because he posts now and then, he's around and aware of (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) No, my initial point was because he posts now and then, I THINK he is still among the populace that reads Lugnet. (...) Why don't you ask him/her? (...) Thanks, I'll remember that next time I'm posting at a latin forum. (...) Now you're (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) But you admitted that one doesn't necessarily follow from the other, so I don't know why you'd think THAT. (...) Why don't you stop being obtuse and answer the question? I want to know another way you seem to THINK there is of knowing this (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Because I DO. (...) I'm sorry for being so obtuse - I was simply pointing out that asking them is one other way to know (assuming you receive / believe the answer). Standing and looking over their shoulder while they read is another. Do you (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Well, my point is that you have no reason to think that. (...) You know my neighbor, and where we live? I chose my neighbor precisely because you don't know him. You don't know anything about him. Just as you don't know anything about any (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) OK. Let's try this from the other direction, kiddies. The populace that still reads Lugnet is a group of people. It contains many subgroups, for example: The people that still read lugnet.org.scibrick The people that still read a few groups (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) He's not necessarily in the "still reading" subgroup category. He could've been just popping over to LUGNET when he got "pinged" by a regular reader, or after a major event like an ILTCO convention. Which is exactly what I suspect is the case. (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) He could also be still reading. (...) Why do you suspect that? (...) (URL) Oh I doubt it>. Of course that could just be someone impersonating him. (...) I never claimed to know about his Lugnet reading habits. (...) Or even moot. Yes, I do (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Yes, Ross, you made that perfectly clear. What you haven't made so clear is WHY you think that for no apparent reason. (...) Because I have no evidence to the contrary. You are obtuse. (...) Is that why you know so much about him-- because you (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) 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". (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | | | | (...) 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. (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | (...) 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 (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: omnipotent behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | | | | (...) I firmly believe lar has a team of small girls in Africa tapping away on laptops that read the entire internets and give him a daily report. It's the only possible explanation for his apparent ability to be everywhere. (...) The entire world (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: omnipotent behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Oodalalee! All Hail Larry! ===...=== JOHN (Larritarian since 1999) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | (...) Actually, there ARE other ways-- ish-- but they're not easy! And they're not necessarily open to everyone. For instance, an admin could check on the Lugnet server to see how many times he's logged in. But it's not public information. You can (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | (...) I'm sure I'll get a private email for Lar, or at least someone will, if he doesn't like anything I say about him here. (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Hello??? McLaren???? You are getting a public one right now. JOHN (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | (...) Hang on, isn't this usually the time for an oh so high-larious Monty Python quote, not Back To The Future? I'm not sure exactly what your problem is here, John. I bear no malice towards ++lar, and certainly didn't intend any in that message. I (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | (...) You got it. Well done. (...) That "incident", if you will, in my mind marks the time when he finally gave up on LUGNET, and so any ref to that is a sore spot for me; call it my personal "N word". When e invoked his name, I admit, I lost it. (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Eric Sophie
|
| | | | | | | (...) Really though John, for standing up for our friend, you are teh awesome too. (...) Again let us pause and wish him luck and good bricks where ever he may be. Let us keep warm the bosom that would warmly embrace him, should he be so inclined to (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.fun, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) Hear! Hear! 'Nuff said (1) Dave K 1. adding to my repertoire of 'Dave-isms' (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) I wouldn't necessarily call my 'tirades' in this thread (and others) a form of 'community policing'. I was adhering to my personal sense of justice (much like Helo did last episode of BSG) and 'standing up' for what I perceived to be a (...) (18 years ago, 15-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | (...) I never said it was a very good joke, nor necessarily accurate. When you mentioned community policing earlier in the thread, it just struck an ironic chord with me. ... (...) Well, at least someone's' taking this thread, and indeed Eric, (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Allister McLaren wrote: <snip> (...) You misread me, sir. I'm not 'taking Eric seriuously'. I am, however, taking injustice seriously. As should you. As should anyone. The second we allow injustices to slide, then, well, (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Jude Beaudin
|
| | | | | (...) Where was the injustice? Jude (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) After all this time, my memory's a little foggy on that subject... I think I'll go find a link to it. Nyaah, I'm done. Dave K (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | (...) In terms of seriousness, someone fiddling with images on a toy forum rates pretty low with me, which, incidentally, is the exact reason I dived into this thread in the first place. Who in their right mind seriously thinks starting legal (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) Who in their right mind would provoke a 'known entitiy' and not expect the 'known result'--isn't that the very definition of insanity? I'm all for a debate about the scalability of transgressions, if you wanna go down that road. That said, an (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | (...) Who said I didn't expect it? (...) Show me where I asked for a 'bye'. If I've breached the TOS, I'll take my lumps. I don't consider anything that's happened here a 'malicious' provocation. 'Mischievous' at worst. And your repeated claims that (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | (...) I think what Dave is driving at is that even though your actions may technically be with the TOS, it is a question of civility. Pushing people's hot buttons and watching the fireworks isn't what LUGNET is about. Lugnet is about laughing with (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX) !!
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | | | | (...) I'm not sure why you're bringing Jlug into the discussion here. If I could set the fut to lugnet.org.jlug right now, I would. But now that you have, I say you're arguing from ignorance. There's a far greater sense of camraderie there than I've (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Only because it is the only other forum which I know you use, that's all. Really. (...) It wasn't my intention to insinuate that. I was making a comparison based on tone. Style. Manner. That sort of thing. (...) My only point is that a JLUG (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | | | | | (...) :sigh: (URL) and (URL) (...) Are you saying he's being accidentally mischievous? (...) No, you probably can't. (...) You chose to butt in with the adversarial stuff. I figured you liked it that way. :shrug: (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) 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 (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) 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 (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) <snip> (...) <snip> Verbose? Who, me?? Dave K -no one around here but us scarecrows... (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) See, Al, at the end of the day, you're just a plain jerk. JOHN (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I prefer to think of Al as a jerk with the lot. ROSCO (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) You'd know. JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) LOL, and again you take "I think" and change it to an assertion of knowledge. ROSCO (18 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: indignant behavior —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Tut tut, John. That's bordering on incivility. Think of the children reading this. (18 years ago, 26-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) In fact it wasn't all online. (...) It wasn't. And the FAQ doesn't say it was. It says "it started making sense to have a group that could participate online". I see no "need" in that excerpt at all. Just as there was no "need" for the (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —C. L. GunningCook
|
| | | | | | | | (...) You are wrong. I think I would know, since I wrote that, and I was the one joking around. The whole thing started as a joke in real life, because I am geographically challenged from other "local" groups. You know, friends joking... real people (...) (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) It's not shocking, just unclear. Not that it really matters, but these friends with whom you joked-- they aren't AFOLs I assume, because presumabley they are the ones with whom you are geographically challenged. Perhaps you joked with (...) (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —C. L. GunningCook
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Snipped (...) No, they are AFOLs. Just because I am geographically challenged to them, doesnt mean I didnt actually make the drive (numerous times). Snipped more... (...) Indeed. (...) Exactly (*grins*). Janey "Delusional, Red Brick" (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Chris Magno
|
| | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.fun, John Neal wrote: snip (...) snip (...) FIREWORKS!!! i LOVE fireworks!!! its what I DO !!!! Chris www.thepyroguys.com 1. then what is the number one thing lugnet is about? (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) Special deals for lawyers, too! I love it:-) lol (...) And the number one thing LUGNET is about is.... (at least, me) Camaraderie. But hey, I'm into pyro, too! (URL) (I'm in some of those pics!) JOHN (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) I'm not saying it's an injustice that requires severe punishment. It's your perspective that you need to work on. The facts-- Person A, in a position of authority, changed links on the Technic sidebar. The *only* links that were changed were (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —Marc Nelson Jr.
|
| | | | | (snip everybody) Here's the thing, Dave: you're totally right. But there's no point in worrying about it any more. There seems to be a consensus that it's OK to bully Eric on LUGNET. I've (URL) protested it before>, but apparently the admins and the (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Standing up! Was... Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | 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, (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) <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 (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: malicious behavior —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) 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 (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | |
