1. Pat 2. Trogdor
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
((((((Pat)))))) ((((((Trogdor))))))
Posted by Toretha (Member # 2233) on :
Posted by ikantspel (Member # 5752) on :
I'll sue! It's the right of hug junkies to hug who they want, whether they want to be hugged or not. This is in clear violation of their first amendment rights. (You knew someone was going to say it ) Oh, and can I get on that list?
[ October 07, 2003, 10:46 PM: Message edited by: ikantspel ]
Posted by Pat (Member # 879) on :
(((TomDavidson)))
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
@ Tom
Weren't you one of the ones who didn't see the value in e-hugs? So this is just to be contrary? Or have you had a change of heart?
[whisper] Oh, and thanks. I couldn't do that (I said I wouldn't, after all), but I so wanted to! [/whisper]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
BECAUSE I don't see the value of E-hugs, neither do I see the harm in them. I'm truly a sociopathic E-hugger.
Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
Tom...you kill me. On controversial threads, where I don't see your posts, I KNOW you're out there...lurking. I KNOW you have an opinion and that you'll choose the perfect way to voice it. You never fail and it always makes me smile. HA!! That was great. Pat should have known that he was just setting himself up to be hugged.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote: I'm truly a sociopathic E-hugger.
Posted by Pat (Member # 879) on :
It was funny, alright, but it wasn't THAT funny.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Aww, poor Pat. *fights urge to hug Pat*
*pat pat*
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
3. Mack.
Pat: --I--
Posted by Pat (Member # 879) on :
Oh mack, you know I --I-- you too.....
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :