To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.piratesOpen lugnet.pirates in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Pirates / 430 (-20)
  Saw some 6250s and 6296s on sale today.
 
As I said, they were $30 Canadian ($20 US). That's not too bad, particularly for the 6250 (Cross Bones Clipper). Anyone interested? -- Paul Davidson (25 years ago, 15-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Mr L F Braun (<387F7F9F.766BF76@p....msu.edu>) wrote at 19:57:19 (...) I *knew* there was something about it that made me uneasy :-) (...) Absolutely! Spell checker overridden on that one. (...) Hmmm. Interesting point, but not (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
(...) Snipping all that stuff that I didn't write.... (...) Kind of like someone from Boston, "I have to pahk the cah." Even my Boston Terrier has to bark, "Bahk, bahk!" :-) Canadians are hard to pick out, but I can usually do it (and these are (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
DISCLAIMER: I'm a little loopy today. Medication. (...) It also has the LEGO edge--"brik" to me brings to mind "blok," something about which no more should be spoken. 'Nuff said. *suppressing shudder* (...) I hope you mean to get at the (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
(...) I'm for Great Brikain, Brikannic, and Brikish myself. But then, I think "colour" is a silly way to spell color, and I like cheque over check, so I'm not sure you should pay the slightest attention to my opinions. Bruce (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Richard Parsons (<FoBLH7.DHF@lugnet.com>) wrote at 10:13:06 (...) Given that this is an imaginary world, I have no problem with either, and can see advantages in either spelling. I can see where you're coming from completely, (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Port Block, busted link
 
The URL I've been posting in my sig for the past week or so is a dud (sorry). Port Block is moving a little bit over the next month, and some dufus (me) used an incomplete URL in the sig. Its fixed now. Hmmm, this might be a good time for you guys (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
Mr L F Braun wrote in (...) rather than the colonial 'Brikish' :-) (...) Colonial degeneralities (oooh, a neologism, ™ me, oh yeah). Ardour, candour, endeavour, and/our...hmm, that last one sounds a bit funny, but the others are aboot right. Now, (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle,
 
Mr L F Braun wrote in message <387E6DA4.CB015F6F@p...su.edu>... (...) compiling so long ago, on 5 January 1999? Got it. Killed it dead ;-) Richard Still baldly going... Check out Port Block at (URL) the change in URL - Port Block is moving over the (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle,
 
Timothy D. Freshly wrote in message ... (...) happily-married one at that) Forget about ad-hoc advice - you want to be writing a book for lawyers! A happily married lawyer....... So like, wow ;-) I'll have to go back and look at whether I can work (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
(...) Why wouldn't I? I'm a Bricki...er, British historian, not prone to Colonial degeneralities (oooh, a neologism, ™ me, oh yeah). Ardour, candour, endeavour, and/our...hmm, that last one sounds a bit funny, but the others are aboot (1) right. (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Mr L F Braun (<387E6CA9.1DB73BA2@....msu.edu>) wrote at 00:24:09 (...) Hee hee! Glad to see you're using the Brickish version of the word, rather than the colonial 'Brikish' :-) BTW, Great Brickain is (c) me 1999: (URL) lying (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
(...) Employment (...) Heh... Just call it a Y2K bug... everyone else is using it <grin> James (URL) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle,
 
Hi, By the way, just a potential "checkbook" oops--did the story begin compiling so long ago, on 5 January 1999? Just saw it on the page and was curious. It all looks magnificent, though--and the story holds together nicely. That Johnny Thunder (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
(...) Yeah--it's understandable. Granted, if I made that particular gaffe at *any* time of day, I'd probably be forced to turn in my Imperial Historian Employment Card. Let's hope they don't find out about my "Boer War starting in 1999" ooops. (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle,
 
(...) But OF COURSE Lawyers give marital advice, and it's always the same: GET A DIVORCE! I mean, how the heck can lawyers make money otherwise? It wasn't much of a career change to go from Lawyer to Pirate, after all. (oooOOOOoooOOOOOooo, I'm a bad (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle,
 
Richard Parsons <rparsons@hinet.net.au> wrote in message news:Fo9xuw.EpC@lugnet.com... [snip] (...) giving (...) a (...) I guess this comes from me actually being an attorney (and a happily-married one at that). Chalk one literary idea to the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle,
 
Timothy D. Freshly wrote another worthy sub-plot element. Minor mods makes this "Aurora gently tells Doolittle of his wife's infidelity. In the best traditions of the understanding male, Doolittle repressed his hurt feelings, saw his wife's issues (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
Tony Priestman wrote (...) so--for a long time the British and Dutch companies were arch-rivals (...) another reason why the Brickish navy isn't too bothered :-) Mmmm, wasn't particularly paying attention myself. Did you know that when at 2am the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)
 
  Re: John E. Doolittle.
 
On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Mr L F Braun (<387CCD37.8DE52DE2@....msu.edu>) wrote at 18:51:35 (...) Double oops. I missed that. It's got to be the Dutch one though, it's another reason why the Brickish navy isn't too bothered :-) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.pirates)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR