RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated - OS2

This is a discussion on RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated - OS2 ; tholen@antispam.ham wrote in news:46ff1cd9$0$4976 $4c368faf@roadrunner.com: > Cross-Poster For Goddess writes: > >> Hail Eris! > > Why should readers hail a Kuiper belt object, Snarky? Non sequitur. >> On Sep 29, 12:34 pm, "Tholenator" tholed: > > Who is "Tholenator", ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 84

Thread: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

  1. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    tholen@antispam.ham wrote in news:46ff1cd9$0$4976
    $4c368faf@roadrunner.com:

    > Cross-Poster For Goddess writes:
    >
    >> Hail Eris!

    >
    > Why should readers hail a Kuiper belt object, Snarky?


    Non sequitur.

    >> On Sep 29, 12:34 pm, "Tholenator" tholed:

    >
    > Who is "Tholenator", Snarky? There is nobody in this newsgroup using
    > that alias. And what was allegedly endured while writing, Snarky?


    Irrelevant.

    >>> Art Deco wrote:

    >
    >>>> * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable.

    >
    >>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    >
    >>>> * No one cares about IBM's OS/2 any longer.

    >
    >>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    >
    >>>> * There is no longer anything for which to advocate.

    >
    >>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    >
    >>>> * Removal would free news servers from the burden of carrying it.

    >
    >>> You mean carrying your and your kook friends' postings to it, Deco.

    >
    >> Nervous, Davie?

    >
    > Who is "Davie", Snarky?


    Irrelevant.

    > There is nobody in this newsgroup using that alias.


    Illogical.

    --
    Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
    in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych.
    COOSN-266-06-01895 - Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.****nozzles
    Winner of the 8/2000 & 2/2003 HL&S award & July 2005 Hammer of Thor.
    Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - Dec. 2005
    "Few things suppress female sexuality more than a flaccid dick and a guy
    talking like Mickey Mouse while wearing panties on his head." - Phoenix
    describing
    Ed "Pantyhead" Wollmann in one sentence.

  2. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio writes:

    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > for writing:


    >>> Please relieve your ignorance


    >> Classic erroneous presupposition of any ignorance on my part, Aratzio.


    > You do not understand the big-8 management boards procedures,


    How ironic, coming from someone who didn't advise about the
    use of factual information in the procedure.

    > ergo you are ignorant.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. Rather ironic, coming from
    someone so ignorant about OS/2.

    > Do I need to explain that lack of knowledge is ignorance?


    You need to recognize your own ignorance, Aratzio.


  3. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    tholen@antispam.ham wrote in news:46ff3801$0$28883
    $4c368faf@roadrunner.com:

    > Aratzio writes:
    >
    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation

    >
    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    >> for writing:

    >
    >>> it is not foolish to point out
    >>> that OS/2 is, in fact, still available

    >
    >> One more time for the really slow kid.

    >
    > As you wish, Aratzio:
    >
    > It is not foolish to point out that OS/2 is, in fact, still available.
    >
    > Now, go work on getting a little faster, Aratzio.
    >
    >> Whether or not it is available
    >> has no bearing upon an RFD.

    >
    > Whether or not it is available has plenty of bearing on the
    > validity of Art Deco's claim, Aratzio.
    >
    >> Will you be posting continuous ignorance

    >
    > Classic erroneous presupposition. I'm the one who knows that OS/2 is
    > still available, Aratzio. Art Deco is the ignorant one, Aratzio.
    >
    >> or will you recognize that fact?

    >
    > Classic erroneous presupposition of a fact.


    Irrelevant.

    --
    Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
    in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych.
    COOSN-266-06-01895 - Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.****nozzles
    Winner of the 8/2000 & 2/2003 HL&S award & July 2005 Hammer of Thor.
    Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - Dec. 2005
    "Now that Google will be established as a "foundational aspect" of the
    Internet, my work is secure and referenceable for many years to come.
    Just as I planned it." - Edmo plots his immortality via Google.

  4. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio writes:

    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > for writing:


    >>> and learn the proper procedures for
    >>> posting of RFDs before continuing.


    >> Practice what you preach, Aratzio, and learn the facts about OS/2 before
    >> continuing. Or do you really prefer to look like a complete fool?


    > What does OS2 have to do with a procedural issue of correct news
    > groups for the posting of an RFD, THolen?


    The issue is the procedural matter of correct information about the
    OS/2 newsgroup, Aratzio.

    > OS2 is off topic.


    Then why are you posting to an OS/2 newsgroup, Aratzio?

    > RFD is on topic.


    Correct information in an RFD is what I was talking about, Aratzio.

    > Learn the difference.


    Practice what you preach, Aratzio. Then take a look at the newsgroups
    to which you are posting.


  5. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cujo DeSockpuppet writes:

    > Aratzio wrote:


    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:


    >>> it is not foolish to point out
    >>> that OS/2 is, in fact, still available


    >> One more time for the really slow kid.


    > Classic failure to comprehend the point.


    Glad you agree that Aratzio failed to comprehend the point, Cujo.

    >> Whether or not it is available has no bearing upon an RFD.


    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    > expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.


    Where is the alleged invective in Aratzio's statement, Cujo?

    >> Will you be posting continuous ignorance or will you recognize that
    >> fact?


    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    Glad you agree that Aratzio's claim about ignorance is erroneous,
    Cujo.


  6. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cujo DeSockpuppet writes:

    > Aratzio wrote:


    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:


    >>> Classic erroneous presupposition of a non sequitur. In reality, the
    >>> facts I presented have everything to do with what was written.


    >> They had nothing to do with the facts I wrote and to which you
    >> responded.


    > You're erroneously presupposing that it's a fact.


    Glad you agree that what Aratzio posted isn't a fact, Cujo.

    >> Which makes it a non sequitur.


    > Classic pontification.


    It's more than just a pontification, Cujo.

    >> Do I need to give you a
    >> dictionary to understand you are wrong?


    > Classic failure to comprehend the point.


    Glad you agree that Aratzio failed to comprehend the point, Cujo.


  7. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cujo DeSockpuppet writes:

    > Aratzio wrote:


    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:


    >>>> Will you be correcting the Big-8 management boards on their
    >>>> published procedures or will you accept that a submission evaluated
    >>>> after it is posted in NAN.


    >>> Will you be correcting Art Deco's false information, Aratzio?


    >> Non sequitur, tholen, I have nothing to do with the veracity of Mr.
    >> Deco's RFD.


    > Irrelevant.


    >> Nor do I care what is your argument is with Mr. Deco.


    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    > expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.


    Where is the alleged invective in Aratzio's statement, Cujo?

    >> That is between the two of you. I am simply advising on the proceedure
    >> for the posting of an RFD.


    > Classic inconsistency.


    Glad you agree that Aratzio was being inconsistent by pointing out the
    wrong newsgroup and failing the point out the wrong information.

    >> Are you too stupid to grasp that, Tholen?


    > Note: no Response.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


  8. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cujo DeSockpuppet writes:

    > Aratzio wrote:


    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:


    >>>> Please relieve your ignorance


    >>> Classic erroneous presupposition of any ignorance on my part, Aratzio.


    >> You do not understand the big-8 management boards procedures, ergo you
    >> are ignorant.


    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    > expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.


    Glad you agree that Aratzio's claim is erroneous, Cujo.

    >> Do I need to explain that lack of knowledge is ignorance?


    > Classic pontification.



  9. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cujo DeSockpuppet writes:

    > Aratzio wrote:


    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:


    >>>> Your postting of a non sequitur to a factual statement is the very
    >>>> defintion of off-topic.


    >>> Classic erroneous presupposition of a factual statement on your part,
    >>> Aratzio. In reality, I'm the one who has been making factual
    >>> statements.


    >> Prove that my statement with respect was fallacious?


    > Illogical.


    >> You post had zero content that directly addressed the statement to
    >> which you responded.


    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim,


    Glad you agree that Aratzio's claim is erroneous, Cujo.

    > laced with invective, as
    > expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.


    Where is the invective in Aratzio's claim, Cujo?

    >> Since it was not related to my statement and to which you responded,
    >> you posted a non sequitur.


    > Classic inconsistency.


    >> Non sequiturs are off-topic in news.groups.


    > Classic inappropriate analogy.



  10. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Hail Eris! On Sep 29, 8:49 pm, tholenator@antispam.ham tholed
    > Cross-Poster For Goddess writes:
    > > Hail Eris!

    >
    > Why should readers hail a Kuiper belt object, Snarky?


    Why not, Tholenator?

    > > On Sep 29, 12:34 pm, "Tholenator" tholed:

    >
    > Who is "Tholenator", Snarky? There is nobody in this newsgroup using
    > that alias.


    You are Tholenator, Tholenator. The fact that you choose not to
    acknowledge the nickname bestowed upon you with great grandmotherly
    kindness is in no way relevant. Tholen will always be Tholenator, as
    evidenced by his surgically-removed sense of humour.

    > And what was allegedly endured while writing, Snarky?


    That would be the mockery which I relentlessly heap upon you with my
    every reply to you, Tholenator, the mockery which you must read even
    while you deny it is there. Feel grateful that I have not chosen to
    post to usenet more often, Tholenator, but I've found a certain few
    Yahoo groups more interesting than your drivel and the real-lifing
    antics
    of the likes of Cranston and "Atlas Bugged", or the incessantly-
    morphing PorchMonkey.

    > >> Art Deco wrote:
    > >>> * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable.
    > >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    > >>> * No one cares about IBM's OS/2 any longer.
    > >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    > >>> * There is no longer anything for which to advocate.
    > >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    > >>> * Removal would free news servers from the burden of carrying it.
    > >> You mean carrying your and your kook friends' postings to it, Deco.

    > > Nervous, Davie?

    >
    > Who is "Davie", Snarky? There is nobody in this newsgroup using that
    > alias.


    That would be Wee Davie Tholen, Tholenator. Nicely dodged question
    about your increasing nervousness regarding the imminent removal of
    your favourite OS/2 group, Tholenator.

    Snarky


  11. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cujo DeSockpuppet writes:

    > Aratzio wrote:


    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:


    >>>> and learn the proper procedures for
    >>>> posting of RFDs before continuing.


    >>> Practice what you preach, Aratzio, and learn the facts about OS/2
    >>> before continuing. Or do you really prefer to look like a complete
    >>> fool?


    >> What does OS2 have to do with a procedural issue of correct news
    >> groups for the posting of an RFD, THolen?


    > How ironic.


    >> OS2 is off topic.


    > Liar.


    Glad you agree that OS/2 is on topic in an OS/2 newsgroup, Cujo.

    >> RFD is on topic.


    > Classic inappropriate analogy.


    >> Learn the difference.


    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    > expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.


    Where is the alleged invective in Aratzio's claim, Cujo?


  12. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cujo DeSockpuppet writes:

    >> Cross-Poster For Goddess wrote:


    >>> Hail Eris!


    >> Why should readers hail a Kuiper belt object, Snarky?


    > Non sequitur.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    >>> On Sep 29, 12:34 pm, "Tholenator" tholed:


    >> Who is "Tholenator", Snarky? There is nobody in this newsgroup using
    >> that alias. And what was allegedly endured while writing, Snarky?


    > Irrelevant.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    >>>> Art Deco wrote:


    >>>>> * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable.


    >>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    >>>>> * No one cares about IBM's OS/2 any longer.


    >>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    >>>>> * There is no longer anything for which to advocate.


    >>>> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    >>>>> * Removal would free news servers from the burden of carrying it.


    >>>> You mean carrying your and your kook friends' postings to it, Deco.


    >>> Nervous, Davie?


    >> Who is "Davie", Snarky?


    > Irrelevant.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    >> There is nobody in this newsgroup using that alias.


    > Illogical.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


  13. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cujo DeSockpuppet writes:

    >> Aratzio wrote:


    >>> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation


    >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    >>> for writing:


    >>>> it is not foolish to point out
    >>>> that OS/2 is, in fact, still available


    >>> One more time for the really slow kid.


    >> As you wish, Aratzio:


    >> It is not foolish to point out that OS/2 is, in fact, still available.


    >> Now, go work on getting a little faster, Aratzio.


    >>> Whether or not it is available
    >>> has no bearing upon an RFD.


    >> Whether or not it is available has plenty of bearing on the
    >> validity of Art Deco's claim, Aratzio.


    >>> Will you be posting continuous ignorance


    >> Classic erroneous presupposition. I'm the one who knows that OS/2 is
    >> still available, Aratzio. Art Deco is the ignorant one, Aratzio.


    >>> or will you recognize that fact?


    >> Classic erroneous presupposition of a fact.


    > Irrelevant.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


  14. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cross-Poster For Goddess writes:

    > Hail Eris!


    Why should readers hail a Kuiper belt object, Snarky?

    > On Sep 29, 6:40 pm, Tholenator wrote:


    Who is "Tholenator", Snarky? There is nobody in this newsgroup using
    that alias.

    >> Meat Plow wrote:


    >>> Art Deco wrote:


    >>>> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) to remove the unmoderated
    >>>> newsgroup comp.os.os2.advocacy.


    >>>> RATIONALE: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy


    >>>> * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable.
    >>>> * No one cares about IBM's OS/2 any longer.
    >>>> * There is no longer anything for which to advocate.
    >>>> * Removal would free news servers from the burden of carrying it.


    >>> All excellent reasons to remove it immediately.


    >> Classic illogic. Those reasons apply to all OS/2-related newsgroups,
    >> yet Art Deco, and now you, are interested in only removing one of
    >> them.


    > What, you mean like comp.binaries.os2?


    I mean everything in the comp.os.os2.* hierarchy, Snarky.

    >> How transparent can you be, Plow?


    > I dunno, how thick can you be, Tholenator?


    Who is "Tholenator", Snarky? There is nobody in this newsgroup using
    that alias.


  15. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 05:45:37 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >Aratzio writes:
    >
    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation

    >
    >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    >> for writing:

    >
    >>> it is not foolish to point out
    >>> that OS/2 is, in fact, still available

    >
    >> One more time for the really slow kid.

    >
    >As you wish, Aratzio:
    >
    >It is not foolish to point out that OS/2 is, in fact, still available.
    >
    >Now, go work on getting a little faster, Aratzio.


    Typical, Tholen, you lie when you cannot support your own statements
    with facts.

    Where does proper placement of a document require me to care whether
    the statements in the document are valid? Your claim that I have any
    responsibility is an out right lie. If you have issue with Mr. Deco's
    RFD please address Mr. Deco. Anything else is a deflection of your own
    responsibility to address the proper person.

    >
    >> Whether or not it is available
    >> has no bearing upon an RFD.

    >
    >Whether or not it is available has plenty of bearing on the
    >validity of Art Deco's claim, Aratzio.
    >
    >> Will you be posting continuous ignorance

    >
    >Classic erroneous presupposition. I'm the one who knows that OS/2 is
    >still available, Aratzio. Art Deco is the ignorant one, Aratzio.


    Why do you think I care whether OS2 is or is not available and whether
    Mr. Deco has this knowledge? Does it in some way affect the procedures
    for the posting of a document?



    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  16. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 05:47:41 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >Aratzio writes:
    >
    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation

    >
    >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    >> for writing:

    >
    >>> Classic erroneous presupposition of a non sequitur. In reality, the
    >>> facts I presented have everything to do with what was written.

    >
    >> They had nothing to do with the facts I wrote

    >
    >They had everything to do with the lies Art Deco wrote, Aratzio.


    So you do admit that your statement was a non-sequitur, since you
    admit it was addressed to Mr. Deco and not to me, the person to whom
    you responded.

    What does corecting the newsgroups the RFD is posted to have to do
    with your non-sequitur about the veracity of Mr. Deco?



    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  17. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 05:51:14 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >Aratzio writes:
    >


    >> Nor do I care what is your argument is with Mr. Deco.

    >
    >The issue is your failure to have an argument with Art Deco, Aratzio.
    >You should have pointed out his lies.


    So you are telling me that my responsibility in correcting the
    placement of the post includes research as to the veracity of Mr.
    Deco's statements.

    I did not read the RFD, how can I do this, Tholen?
    >
    >> That is between the two of you.

    >
    >Your failure to point out Art Deco's lies is between me and you,
    >Aratzio.


    No, you attempt to place responsibility for your argument with Mr.
    Deco upon me is at best dishonest.

    >
    >> I am simply advising on the proceedure for
    >> the posting of an RFD.

    >
    >The proceedure [sic] shouldn't involve the use of false information,
    >Aratzio. You failed to advise Art Deco about that.


    "Should" does not matter, tholen, the procedures are explicit. I do
    not control what is in the RFD nor do I control the procedures
    associated with RFDs. The content of the RFD is Mr. Deco's
    responsibility, the procedures are the realm of the big-8 management
    board. I am neither Mr. Deco, nor am I the big-8 management board.

    Have you tried posting your complaints in news.groups.proposals where
    the big-8 management board currently resides?


    Otherwise, you will have to try something new.

    >
    >> Are you too stupid to grasp that, Tholen?


    Note: No response.

    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  18. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 05:53:13 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >Aratzio writes:
    >
    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation

    >
    >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    >> for writing:

    >
    >>>> Your postting of a non sequitur to a factual statement is the very
    >>>> defintion of off-topic.

    >
    >>> Classic erroneous presupposition of a factual statement on your part,
    >>> Aratzio. In reality, I'm the one who has been making factual statements.

    >
    >> Prove that my statement with respect was fallacious?

    >
    >Simple: my posting was not non sequitur, Aratzio.


    What did your assault upon Mr. Deco have to do with the correct
    newsgroups used for posting of RFDs?

    Nothing, ergo non-sequitur.



    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  19. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 05:55:11 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >Aratzio writes:
    >
    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation

    >
    >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    >> for writing:

    >
    >>>> Please relieve your ignorance

    >
    >>> Classic erroneous presupposition of any ignorance on my part, Aratzio.

    >
    >> You do not understand the big-8 management boards procedures,

    >
    >How ironic, coming from someone who didn't advise about the
    >use of factual information in the procedure.


    Why would I, there is nothing in the official proceedures that
    supports your statement.

    >
    >> ergo you are ignorant.



    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  20. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 05:57:13 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >Aratzio writes:
    >
    >> tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation

    >
    >Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    >> for writing:

    >
    >>>> and learn the proper procedures for
    >>>> posting of RFDs before continuing.

    >
    >>> Practice what you preach, Aratzio, and learn the facts about OS/2 before
    >>> continuing. Or do you really prefer to look like a complete fool?

    >
    >> What does OS2 have to do with a procedural issue of correct news
    >> groups for the posting of an RFD, THolen?

    >
    >The issue is the procedural matter of correct information about the
    >OS/2 newsgroup, Aratzio.


    That would be handled uring the discussion phase of an RFD. Do you
    know what RFD stands for, Tholen?

    >
    >> OS2 is off topic.

    >
    >Then why are you posting to an OS/2 newsgroup, Aratzio?


    Why are you cutting apart sentences so that you can post
    non-sequiturs?

    >
    >> RFD is on topic.

    >
    >Correct information in an RFD is what I was talking about, Aratzio.


    After the RFD is posted to the correct newsgroups you may discuss the
    RFD and its content. Until then it is off-topic.

    >
    >> Learn the difference.

    >
    >Practice what you preach, Aratzio. Then take a look at the newsgroups
    >to which you are posting.


    You will go to all these lengths just so you do not have to address
    Mr. Deco. That is quite cowardly, tholen.


    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast