In Reply to: So does that mean Duilawyer's post was correct in the first place? posted by Christine Tham on February 13, 2007 at 13:44:24:
although my question was a really general one, spurred by DUI's post.In which case why ask the question?
I'm running out of new things to say, Christine. I would not want my mates here to think I had just signed off. Thank God Mr Bishop won a Grammy. At least I could post my congrats without any real reason.
Regards,
Geoff
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Yes, I suppose he was ... - Metralla 00:13:20 02/14/07 (16)
- Gee, no need to be so defensive ... - Christine Tham 11:11:39 02/14/07 (15)
- Wait one second - Metralla 21:36:30 02/14/07 (1)
- Precisely - Christine Tham 22:24:47 02/14/07 (0)
- Huh?? - JoshT 15:13:51 02/14/07 (12)
- Re: Huh?? - Christine Tham 17:26:09 02/14/07 (11)
- FWIW - Ted Smith 19:50:07 02/14/07 (10)
- Neither is great, but both appear to be in use - Christine Tham 20:54:32 02/14/07 (9)
- Well, OK, but - JoshT 07:38:11 02/15/07 (8)
- Re: Well, OK, but - Christine Tham 14:48:24 02/15/07 (7)
- "responded somewhat haughtily" - Metralla 19:17:00 02/15/07 (6)
- if you're going to have a blarney, can I hold your coat? nt - Duilawyer 06:10:22 02/16/07 (0)
- Re: "responded somewhat haughtily" - Christine Tham 19:52:19 02/15/07 (4)
- Here is what I find disheartening about this whole thing - JoshT 07:48:12 02/16/07 (3)
- I'm not sure I understand your point - Christine Tham 15:49:44 02/16/07 (2)
- I stand by my posts - JoshT 13:21:25 02/19/07 (1)
- It's interesting that when pressed, you can't/won't substantiate your allegations (nt) - Christine Tham 15:11:46 02/19/07 (0)