 | | Re: LUGNET as an "Adult" site —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | Hi! (...) I think Greg's been doing a pretty good job of keeping it sidesplitting. :) But I've been wondering about JAL and his choice of places to ramble...when was the first time he posted? Is it at all possible that we're being semi-spoofed (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: LUGNET as an "Adult" site —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) That is possible. But as long as most of the people participating keep it at the current silly level so it's good for laughs, there are worse things that could happen, eh? Still, one does wonder! ++Lar (who is still laughing about some of (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LUGNET as an "Adult" site —Greg Perry
|
| | | | | (...) A couple of folks in non-posted communications to me have suggested that we're being "moultonized" by JAL. I've read most of the postings and in my completely unqualified opinion I'd have to say no - I truly believe this is on the level (well (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LUGNET as an "Adult" site —Kyle D. Jackson
|
| | | | (...) I began wondering the same thing. It's all just so well crafted, and as many have shown, it's an easy style to copy. The first post I noticed was 11 Jun 2001, a response to Brad Justus: (URL) then-on it's been non-stop. I took a gander waaaay (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: LUGNET as an "Adult" site —Dave Low
|
| | | | (...) Seems a bit suss, although of course people can change over time. I had a go at the jal-baiting, failing to follow my own advice at (URL) : (...) IMHO the best response is to deal with them on their own terms. Leaving them alone is probably (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
