Subject:
|
Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.pun
|
Date:
|
Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:42:30 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
jsproat@io.com(antispam)
|
Viewed:
|
1193 times
|
| |
|
|
James Brown wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Matthew Miller writes:
> > Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote:
> > > - Spiders are not "bugs"
> > Must be the "significant" thing, since spiders are definitely bugs. As are
> > all insects, and centipedes, and probably slugs.
> Heh... Actually, no. I got chewed out by my sister-in-law for calling them all
> "bugs" - apparantly "bugs" as a term only technically applies to a specific
> class of insect, and not to anything else.
> The things entymologists care about. Sheesh.
I guess it really bugs her, eh? Bee careful.
Cheers,
- jsproat
--
Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@io.com> ~~~ http://www.io.com/~jsproat/
"Hello. My name is Jeremy, and I'm a...a brick chewer."
(in unison) "Hi, Jeremy."
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
| (...) Heh... Actually, no. I got chewed out by my sister-in-law for calling them all "bugs" - apparantly "bugs" as a term only technically applies to a specific class of insect, and not to anything else. The things entymologists care about. Sheesh. (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
