 |
|
| Barbecue (alt.food.barbecue) Discuss barbecue and grilling--southern style "low and slow" smoking of ribs, shoulders and briskets, as well as direct heat grilling of everything from burgers to salmon to vegetables. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
Jack Curry wrote:
> "Glitter Ninja" > wrote in message > ... > > Stacia wrote: > > >> I'm through with playing with you. Hopefully >>the cat who dragged this mouse into ARK will kill it and be done with it, >>and soon. > > > YES > You were WARNED abutt CAL/cl. afbers TOLD you were gettin' SCREWED when we > traded CAL for Kibo. But did you *belief* us? NONONONONO, you LAFFED at us > and acted SMUGGE. And mofurther, we have other WEAPOONS we can dispatch. > WE demand RESPEK for our Smokeaddled Branes or we will send KentH to PLAGE > UoR HOSE. NO!!!!!!! NO!!!!!! Jack, we can't do that. The Geneva Convention and all that. On top of that, we can't let the current administration know that we have WMDs. > THIS IS NO DRILL If KentH is unleased, you will feel it to the very core of you being. Then you will vomit, clean up and get on with life. Matthew (No Jack, save KentH for a more deserving froup) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jack Curry wrote:
> "Glitter Ninja" > wrote in message > ... > > Stacia wrote: > > >> I'm through with playing with you. Hopefully >>the cat who dragged this mouse into ARK will kill it and be done with it, >>and soon. > > > YES > You were WARNED abutt CAL/cl. afbers TOLD you were gettin' SCREWED when we > traded CAL for Kibo. But did you *belief* us? NONONONONO, you LAFFED at us > and acted SMUGGE. And mofurther, we have other WEAPOONS we can dispatch. > WE demand RESPEK for our Smokeaddled Branes or we will send KentH to PLAGE > UoR HOSE. NO!!!!!!! NO!!!!!! Jack, we can't do that. The Geneva Convention and all that. On top of that, we can't let the current administration know that we have WMDs. > THIS IS NO DRILL If KentH is unleased, you will feel it to the very core of you being. Then you will vomit, clean up and get on with life. Matthew (No Jack, save KentH for a more deserving froup) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:10:28 GMT, cl > wrote:
> >"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote: >> >> On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:52:17 GMT, cl > wrote: >> >> >Speaking of salads, I forgot you goobs might not have had yours tossed >> >in a while >> >> I've been meaning to ask, CAL, how is the wife these days? Seems you >> don't mention her very often. > >Absolute sweetheart other than the times that she asks me why I waste my >time screwing with you guys. > Rather than ask you to prove the existence of this imaginary wife, much less the implicit claim that you get more action than Sinatra in his heyday, I'll just ask, "What do you tell her when she asks why you waste time screwing with us guys?" Well, what do you tell her? -- Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
>> When I saw this, you could of knocked me over with a feather. > > > Good one. I almost missed it. > Their are many things I miss two. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Cam" > wrote in news:1103145214.974290.210170
@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: > "could of"? hunh...hunh...straining to make second Eastern religion > reference... Its alright. I get that alot. -- Dave Boyd "Sufficient unto the Dave is the evil thereof." MAT 6:34 Remove UCETRAP to reply |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
cl > wrote: > > Even if I were a haas, how exactly would that change how you are? > -CAL Autotranslator: I know I you are but what am I |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
cl > wrote: > > Even if I were a haas, how exactly would that change how you are? > -CAL Autotranslator: I know I you are but what am I |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in
: > Yes, as with the student who insisted that "nonetheless" was a phrase > consisting of the three words "none the less." Hmm. How ever, I've seen that one both ways too often to assume that either of them is "wrong" or even "not preferred". How did he feel about "not with standing" or "never the less"? > No, no, no. Trollerish followups are always welcome, provided that > they are subtle and funny (as yours was). What does bug me, though, as > long as you asked, is when someone jumps into the thread before it's > gathered any real steam and says, "HAW! HAW! THAT ONE GUY JUST TROLLED > YOU!! U R ST00PID!!" I've committed this sin my self, but only to fore stall a boring repetition of the SAME DAMN TROLL AGAIN. Further more, I've been known sometimes to break up a fight between two posters who simply can't leave each other's postings un-replied-to. >>OKAYFINE! > > OKAYTHENBYE! WELLOKAYTHEN! <SLAM!> -- Dave Boyd "Sufficient unto the Dave is the evil thereof." MAT 6:34 Remove UCETRAP to reply |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 15 Dec 2004 22:44:50 GMT, David Boyd >
wrote: >Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in : > >> Yes, as with the student who insisted that "nonetheless" was a phrase >> consisting of the three words "none the less." > >Hmm. How ever, I've seen that one both ways too often to assume that >either of them is "wrong" or even "not preferred". How did he feel about >"not with standing" or "never the less"? They were all correct at one time, say around time that Shakespeare was writing, when "tomorrow" would have been "to morrow." By the Elizebethan Period, some of these phrases had become hyphenated, yielding, for example, "to-morrow." The tendency of the language being to smush stuff together (sorry for using the technical terms), we now have "nonetheless," "notwithstanding," and "nevertheless." As for your attempt to troll me with "how ever," that expression began as "how so ever," if I recall correctly. In addition to smushing stuff together, English tends to drop things that are no longer useful. -- Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 15 Dec 2004 22:44:50 GMT, David Boyd >
wrote: >Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in : > >> Yes, as with the student who insisted that "nonetheless" was a phrase >> consisting of the three words "none the less." > >Hmm. How ever, I've seen that one both ways too often to assume that >either of them is "wrong" or even "not preferred". How did he feel about >"not with standing" or "never the less"? They were all correct at one time, say around time that Shakespeare was writing, when "tomorrow" would have been "to morrow." By the Elizebethan Period, some of these phrases had become hyphenated, yielding, for example, "to-morrow." The tendency of the language being to smush stuff together (sorry for using the technical terms), we now have "nonetheless," "notwithstanding," and "nevertheless." As for your attempt to troll me with "how ever," that expression began as "how so ever," if I recall correctly. In addition to smushing stuff together, English tends to drop things that are no longer useful. -- Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:42:56 GMT, Rose Marie Holt
> wrote: >In article >, > cl > wrote: > >> Even if I were a haas, how exactly would that change how you are? > >Autotranslator: I know I you are but what am I If you say so. I'm still trying to figure out how him being a type of avocado would change anything, unless maybe his writing would improve. -- Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kevin S. Wilson > writes:
> wrote: >> cl > wrote: >> >>> Even if I were a haas, how exactly would that change how you are? >> >>Autotranslator: I know I you are but what am I >If you say so. I'm still trying to figure out how him being a type of >avocado Hey! Dammit. Stacia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kevin S. Wilson > writes:
> wrote: >> cl > wrote: >> >>> Even if I were a haas, how exactly would that change how you are? >> >>Autotranslator: I know I you are but what am I >If you say so. I'm still trying to figure out how him being a type of >avocado Hey! Dammit. Stacia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Darla Vladschyk > wrote:
>cl > wrote: > >>KEVING S WILSON ***YOU HAVE BEEN TROLLED*** >>KEVING S WILSON ***YOU HAVE BEEN TROLLED*** >>KEVING S WILSON ***YOU HAVE BEEN TROLLED*** >> [...] > >Who or what is "KEVING?" Has there been a lot of keving going on >around here? Why wasn't I informed? Has anyone seen my car keys? Cal's new name is officially "Calg". Actually, maybe it is "Calg," only he's misspelled it every single time he's tried to type it. --X |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
cl > wrote:
> >Yeah I do, just read my post again taking not of the ditinction of >internet and USENET : Again taking not of the ditinction, Calg? >First, "NNPT" is something you just made up >Second, "NN2P" is not a system it is a protocol. >Third, USENET was established in 1979 and it used the UUCP >Fourth, where the hell are you getting your wrong facts from? Al Gore >maybe? It's NNTP, not NN2P, you halfwit. Don't you love it when some fool tries to play Mr. Expert and teach the rest of us a lesson? >You have to explain it because you are making it up as you go. No, he has to explain it because you never catch on that this whole thing is a gag. If Candid Camera ever tracked you down, they could turn the show into a 24/7 channel alongside C-SPAN. --X |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kevin S. Wilson > wrote:
>Besides, my point was that CAL would've first had to have had security >clearance, and I doubt that he ever did. You had security clearance -- >all be it an expired clearance -- and that makes all the difference. The little grey men did do the interviews of my co-pre-graduates, I admit. >>Dave "also, specify type of network" DeLaney > >A WANg, of course. What other type was there at the time? You were missing a letter. And of course there were also LANg WANgs in existence, even then. Dave "avenue Q" DeLaney -- \/David DeLaney posting from "It's not the pot that grows the flower It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
cl > wrote:
>Fourth, where the hell are you getting your wrong facts from? Al Gore maybe? Well, he is at LEAST _checking_ his nonsense before posting it. As opposed to others in this thread who shall remain two-initial-less. >> If you're such an experienced old-timer, why am I having to explain >> all this to you? > >You have to explain it because you are making it up as you go. Kevin, it seems nobody's explained to him yet how science _works_. The hypnothesis is a _necessary_ step! >Whats wrong with you? Are you confusing 83-84 and 93-94? You probably >need to prick yourself. Hey, if he could do that I doubt he'd ever leave the house. Dave "and then HE'D be the top poster" DeLaney -- \/David DeLaney posting from "It's not the pot that grows the flower It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
cl > wrote:
>Fourth, where the hell are you getting your wrong facts from? Al Gore maybe? Well, he is at LEAST _checking_ his nonsense before posting it. As opposed to others in this thread who shall remain two-initial-less. >> If you're such an experienced old-timer, why am I having to explain >> all this to you? > >You have to explain it because you are making it up as you go. Kevin, it seems nobody's explained to him yet how science _works_. The hypnothesis is a _necessary_ step! >Whats wrong with you? Are you confusing 83-84 and 93-94? You probably >need to prick yourself. Hey, if he could do that I doubt he'd ever leave the house. Dave "and then HE'D be the top poster" DeLaney -- \/David DeLaney posting from "It's not the pot that grows the flower It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Xcott Craver > wrote:
>Darla Vladschyk > wrote: >>Who or what is "KEVING?" Has there been a lot of keving going on >>around here? Why wasn't I informed? Has anyone seen my car keys? And what about ... NAOMI? > Cal's new name is officially "Calg". > > Actually, maybe it is "Calg," only he's misspelled it every single > time he's tried to type it. Has anyone made the "Cal-gone! Take him away!" joke yet? Dave -- \/David DeLaney posting from "It's not the pot that grows the flower It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Xcott Craver > wrote:
>Darla Vladschyk > wrote: >>Who or what is "KEVING?" Has there been a lot of keving going on >>around here? Why wasn't I informed? Has anyone seen my car keys? And what about ... NAOMI? > Cal's new name is officially "Calg". > > Actually, maybe it is "Calg," only he's misspelled it every single > time he's tried to type it. Has anyone made the "Cal-gone! Take him away!" joke yet? Dave -- \/David DeLaney posting from "It's not the pot that grows the flower It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
No cluons were harmed when Kevin S. Wilson ! wrote:
[snips] > I doubt he was on the USENET (tm) during 93-94, as that would have > required access to a US military network and security clearance. Phooey. He could've hacked his way in, like Kevin Costner. -- Contributing nonsense to the Internoob since 1982 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"cl" > wrote in message ... > ************************************************** ************************** > FACT THREE: CAL is a boob > ************************************************** ************************** > -CAL IFYPFY Kathy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:36:45 -0600, "K. Reece" > wrote:
> >"cl" > wrote in message ... > >> ************************************************** ************************** >> FACT THREE: CAL is a boob >> ************************************************** ************************** >> -CAL > >IFYPFY > Hey, hey! Kathy from AFB comes up to speed meme-wise in record time, 1,-2-3. Color me impressed. Then a lighter shade of pale. -- Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message ... > On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:36:45 -0600, "K. Reece" > wrote: > >> >>"cl" > wrote in message ... >> >>> ************************************************** ************************** >>> FACT THREE: CAL is a boob >>> ************************************************** ************************** >>> -CAL >> >>IFYPFY >> > Hey, hey! Kathy from AFB comes up to speed meme-wise in record time, > 1,-2-3. > Color me impressed. Then a lighter shade of pale. > > -- > Kevin S. Wilson > Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho > "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically > useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. > Furr Ya like that one? I couldn't help myself. I have that condition a lot. I like that shade of pale. There are intelligent people that read AFB, really. Sometimes it just doesn't seem that way. Kathy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:10:28 GMT, cl > wrote: > > > >"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:52:17 GMT, cl > wrote: > >> > >> >Speaking of salads, I forgot you goobs might not have had yours tossed > >> >in a while > >> > >> I've been meaning to ask, CAL, how is the wife these days? Seems you > >> don't mention her very often. > > > >Absolute sweetheart other than the times that she asks me why I waste my > >time screwing with you guys. > > > > Rather than ask you to prove the existence of this imaginary wife, > much less the implicit claim that you get more action than Sinatra in > his heyday, I'll just ask, "What do you tell her when she asks why you > waste time screwing with us guys?" > > Well, what do you tell her? "Having fun with that goof-ball Kevin until something interesting comes on the telly. Maybe the BBC repeat on making cheese will come on ...Oh, and while you are up, get me something to drink sweety" -CAL |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
David DeLaney wrote: > > cl > wrote: > >Fourth, where the hell are you getting your wrong facts from? Al Gore maybe? > > Well, he is at LEAST _checking_ his nonsense before posting it. As opposed > to others in this thread who shall remain two-initial-less. > > >> If you're such an experienced old-timer, why am I having to explain > >> all this to you? > > > >You have to explain it because you are making it up as you go. > > Kevin, it seems nobody's explained to him yet how science _works_. The > hypnothesis is a _necessary_ step! > > >Whats wrong with you? Are you confusing 83-84 and 93-94? You probably > >need to prick yourself. > > Hey, if he could do that I doubt he'd ever leave the house. So that is why he has a dog. -CAL |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote: > > As for your attempt to troll me with "how ever," that expression began > as "how so ever," if I recall correctly. In addition to smushing stuff > together, English tends to drop things that are no longer useful. > Kevin, you are so smushing. Has anyone ever told you so? -CAL |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:26:09 GMT, cl > wrote:
>So that is why Kevin had to design a winch and then found out he could >use it for snowmobiles. Stalk much, Pro? BTW, please let me know how I can look up all of the patents you hold. Key words will be fine, but the patent numbers would be even better. You do realize -- don't you? -- that these achingly pathetic attempts at "humor" leave people who don't understand k00k-speech just shaking their heads in baffled amazeent. I mean, jeebus Pro, that line above isn't even remotely funny, and the fact that I am a co-holder of a patent for a self-recovery device for snowmobiles doesn't exactly reflect poorly on me. All that your post demonstrates is that you've been scurrying up and down the Intraweb trying to dig up whatever personal data about me you can find. You're getting creepy now. Now, we were talking about all the patents you hold. Please post the registration numbers. PS: What's my wife's name, Pro? Where do I live? -- Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:34:34 GMT, cl > wrote:
> >"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote: >> >> As for your attempt to troll me with "how ever," that expression began >> as "how so ever," if I recall correctly. In addition to smushing stuff >> together, English tends to drop things that are no longer useful. >> >Kevin, you are so smushing. Has anyone ever told you so? > See, CAL, that's not remotely funny. As a joke, it makes absolutely no sense; as a flame, it makes even less. It resembles nothing so much as a autoresponse from a 'bot. As Stacia has already told you, it really isn't sufficient to just grab a couple of key words from the thread and then toss them into a poorly structured and incorrectly punctuated sentence or two, hoping that someone will mistake their meaning for wit. If you aren't even going to try, where's the entertainment value in poking you with pointy sticks? -- Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
on 2004-12-16 at 07:43 > wrote:
>If you aren't even going to try, where's the entertainment >value in poking you with pointy sticks? now, now, KevingS, he's trying to be *helpful*. don't confuse him by expecting him to be fun'ni, too. -- shelly http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in
: > On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:37:58 -0700, Kevin S. Wilson > > wrote: > >>On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:37:52 -0500, >>wrote: >> >>>On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:07:23 -0700, Kevin S. Wilson > wrote: >>> >>>>On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:42:56 GMT, Rose Marie Holt > wrote: >>>> >>>>>In article >, cl > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Even if I were a haas, how exactly would that change >>>>>> how you are? >>>>> >>>>>Autotranslator: I know I you are but what am I >>>> >>>>If you say so. I'm still trying to figure out how him >>>>being a type of avocado would change anything, unless >>>>maybe his writing would improve. >>> >>>You know the derivation of the word "avocado," right? >>> >>No. Enlighten me, enlightened one. > > Sheesh, you're a lazy bastid. > > "modification of Spanish 'aguacate', from Nahuatl 'ahuacatl' > avocado, testicle" I thought it was the same word as "lawyer", but then I 'spose both derivations are pretty much the same, reely. All the best, John. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:34:34 GMT, cl > wrote: > > > >"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote: > >> > >> As for your attempt to troll me with "how ever," that expression began > >> as "how so ever," if I recall correctly. In addition to smushing stuff > >> together, English tends to drop things that are no longer useful. > >> > > >Kevin, you are so smushing. Has anyone ever told you so? > > > See, CAL, that's not remotely funny. As a joke, it makes absolutely no > sense; as a flame, it makes even less. It resembles nothing so much as > a autoresponse from a 'bot. > > As Stacia has already told you, it really isn't sufficient to just > grab a couple of key words from the thread and then toss them into a > poorly structured and incorrectly punctuated sentence or two, hoping > that someone will mistake their meaning for wit. > > If you aren't even going to try, where's the entertainment value in > poking you with pointy sticks? > Your right, it wasn't funny. I still got 3 paragraphs from you just by depositing 11 words. -CAL |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
John D Salt <jdsalt_AT_gotadsl.co.uk> writes:
wrote: >> > wrote: >> >>>>>If you say so. I'm still trying to figure out how him >>>>>being a type of avocado would change anything, >>>> >>>>You know the derivation of the word "avocado," right? >>>> >>>No. Enlighten me, enlightened one. >> >> "modification of Spanish 'aguacate', from Nahuatl 'ahuacatl' >> avocado, testicle" >I thought it was the same word as "lawyer", but then I 'spose >both derivations are pretty much the same, reely. Ahem. I said, "HEY!" Be nice to the dead for a change, people. Or at least try. Sheesh. Stacia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
John D Salt <jdsalt_AT_gotadsl.co.uk> writes:
wrote: >> > wrote: >> >>>>>If you say so. I'm still trying to figure out how him >>>>>being a type of avocado would change anything, >>>> >>>>You know the derivation of the word "avocado," right? >>>> >>>No. Enlighten me, enlightened one. >> >> "modification of Spanish 'aguacate', from Nahuatl 'ahuacatl' >> avocado, testicle" >I thought it was the same word as "lawyer", but then I 'spose >both derivations are pretty much the same, reely. Ahem. I said, "HEY!" Be nice to the dead for a change, people. Or at least try. Sheesh. Stacia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
John D Salt <jdsalt_AT_gotadsl.co.uk> writes:
wrote: >> > wrote: >> >>>>>If you say so. I'm still trying to figure out how him >>>>>being a type of avocado would change anything, >>>> >>>>You know the derivation of the word "avocado," right? >>>> >>>No. Enlighten me, enlightened one. >> >> "modification of Spanish 'aguacate', from Nahuatl 'ahuacatl' >> avocado, testicle" >I thought it was the same word as "lawyer", but then I 'spose >both derivations are pretty much the same, reely. Ahem. I said, "HEY!" Be nice to the dead for a change, people. Or at least try. Sheesh. Stacia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:04:51 GMT, cl > wrote:
>Your right, it wasn't funny. I still got 3 paragraphs from you just by >depositing 11 words. You are >< this close to morphing into Terry Austin. If I were you, I'd be very, very afraid. We'll know you've arrived at that level of k00kdom when you beginning repeating such statements over and over. I'll resist the temptation to read ahead in the thread to see if you already have begun doing so. -- Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| TJ sucks, imo. | General Cooking | |||
| Ok this sucks | General Cooking | |||
| ATT sucks | Barbecue | |||
| Rice still sucks | General Cooking | |||
| Ignorance Sucks! | General Cooking | |||
Linear Mode
