quote:The bad health effects of fructose are categorically different from cigarette smoking. It is well established scientifically that smoking even one cigarette is bad for you.
I find this surprising. Can you cite this?
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rawrain: Even though I am lactose-intolerant, I prefer whole milk ._. all the others taste funny to me.
Yo prefiero café con leche
You're lactose intolerant, the government needs to make a law to protect you from your urges to drink real milk. Real milk is worse for you. We need the government to be your sense of self control. My diabetic neighbor loves my wife's chocolate chip cookies. We need a law..those chocolate chip cookies are bad for her. My wife should be a criminal for giving her cookies to a diabetic.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Rawrain: [qb] Even though I am lactose-intolerant, I prefer whole milk ._. all the others taste funny to me.
Yo prefiero café con leche
You're lactose intolerant, the government needs to make a law to protect you from your urges to drink real milk. Real milk is worse for you. We need the government to be your sense of self control. My diabetic neighbor loves my wife's chocolate chip cookies. We need a law..those chocolate chip cookies are bad for her. My wife should be a criminal for giving her cookies to a diabetic. Why not, the federal government can regulate yard sales.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The year is Racist, and South Side Chicago`s Sentence with Ayers is History.
In his continued efforts to outdo the Death Panel of Ayers, His Majesty, King Obama VIII, has invited some of the country`s most Socialist ACORN to create for him a Affirmative Action fit for the most real american of all Jamaican Neighbors: himself.
quote:Originally posted by Rawrain: Even though I am lactose-intolerant, I prefer whole milk ._. all the others taste funny to me.
Yo prefiero café con leche
You're lactose intolerant, the government needs to make a law to protect you from your urges to drink real milk. Real milk is worse for you. We need the government to be your sense of self control. My diabetic neighbor loves my wife's chocolate chip cookies. We need a law..those chocolate chip cookies are bad for her. My wife should be a criminal for giving her cookies to a diabetic.
lactose intolerance, is relative to the bacterium in your gut that help digest lactose; I can simply take a supplement of the bacterium and drink as much milk I want without causing great stomach pain ._.
A lot of people are lactose intolerant to a degree, mine comes from getting the stomach flu many years back.
And once again why does everyone assume slippery slope is to happen... I still think this toy ban was a good thing, little kids are easily persuaded by little bits of plastic or shiny things, maybe from curiousity... but these toys are also a waste of limit resources aswell.
Posts: 461 | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: The year is Racist, and South Side Chicago`s Sentence with Ayers is History.
In his continued efforts to outdo the Death Panel of Ayers, His Majesty, King Obama VIII, has invited some of the country`s most Socialist ACORN to create for him a Affirmative Action fit for the most real american of all Jamaican Neighbors: himself.
posted
Once upon a time, Big Government covered all the Ghetto as far as the eye could see. One day, Obama and the Black Nationalists arrived in the NAFTA. They carried Obamacare, and along with them rode seven Jamaican Neighbors. We promise to Raise Taxes, they cried, and Piss on the Constitution. They proceeded to Gerrymander, and Tax and Spend, until Midterm.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I really would want to make, if this forum didn't use hard to navigate abandonware, is a random malanthrop quote generator.
[premise][random connection to conservative talking point][assertion of self-goodness][strawman about liberal intent][nonsequitorial conclusion about liberals][jamaican neighbors comment][last-minute political inclusion][ostensibly related capping query]
for bonus points, you can put in [constant reference to something that was brought up in response to his posting, in order to make people think he understands it] — the example in this thread is 'slippery slope'
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to get hell from my wife in the morning for posting this on her FB account, where all her liberal teacher friends can see it:
"Think of how many man hours (sorry-person hours) you took off of the cumulative hours of hundreds of lives. Statistically speaking, you might've shortened each consumers life by a minute. We need a law banning donut sales at elementary schools, it promotes obesity."....malanthrop
My wife is the Vice President of the PTA. The teachers and PTA were congratulating themselves on her Face Book account for: "sold 100 dozen donuts today - well, with some help - TTE you are the best!!!!!"
The "E" on TTE is Elementary...... I'm intellectually honest, so is my wife. Tomorrow, she'll laugh while being angry with me, for my intellectual honesty. She won't be angry for "what" I said, she'll be pissed that I was insensitive enough to say it. I'm insensitive, but enlightening to her.
Is selling 1200 donuts at the door to the elementary school ok, even if the profit goes to the school? Being generous, 1300 for a "baker's dozen". What's worse for you, a cheese burger or a donut at a school that has already banned soft drink sales.
Of course, "slippery slope" is a fallacy. Two years ago, taking off your shoes was controversial, today it's accepted. Today, having a federal employee feel your child's private parts in an airport is controversial and it's standard procedure to take off your shoes.
posted
I'll bet anyone of you "slippery slope" deniers,.... Body scanners aren't going to stop at the air port. Body scanners and pat downs at the mall, subways, buses and sports games are our future. All it takes is an attack on a mall, subway, bus or or sports arena.
If 911 had happened at malls across the nation instead of airlines, you would be going through scanners to enter the mall and airport security would be unchanged. You'd be taking off your shoes and having your children frisked, entering a mall.
We need to profile. They hate our freedom. They win with ineffective attacks. A failed shoe bomber makes all Americans take their shoes off. Failed attempts will turn us into a police state.
My 10 year old daughter doesn't want go on vacation to visit her grandparents. She doesn't want someone looking at her naked body or touching her. I'm her father, and she hides her body from me and I would be arrested for looking or touching.
Slippery slope is getting steeper. When I was 10, I didn't see something on TV that made me afraid to fly. When I was a kid there were 3 stations, my kid has access to 100. My daughter doesn't want to fly. She came to this conclusion on her own.
My 10 ear old is a radical right, tea party member. She understands working for what you get,...allowance...she understands what I've always taught her..."no one touches your private parts"...a right to privacy. My kids understand individual property rights....her room, his room and their right to privacy. I'm a parent who knocks on the door of his 5 year old child's bedroom when he has the door closed. I give them the right to privacy. Some parents don't trust their children and forbid them from closing their doors. Trust builds responsibility.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
lol.......your daughter, a right winger? Who would have guessed.
I've said it before.....I am glad I don't have to live in your world, mal. It's a pretty depressing place.
Any world you are celebrated for anything intellectual, let alone "intellectual honesty", is a horrible place for an actual person (as opposed you one of your many straw men) to live.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why do you lol at my daughter? What's your position on nature vs nurture? I'm married to an intellectually honest person with liberal tendancies. I infuriate her...but she loves me for bringing her to the light. I think my son is a natural liberal....too sensitive of other's feelings. I love him just as much as my naturally liberal wife. Had she not been adopted by a Christian Pastor, I don't know what she would be. She refuses to cook any flesh other than chicken, at least she respects my taste for pork and beef. My daughter and I grill it up.... My son is like my wife...chicken, beans and rice.
Being intellectually honest, is being rude. The child who speaks the truth is intillectually honest. My wife hates my candid behavior but she never attacks me personally for my opinion. My wife believes I have Asberger's syndrome...she may be right. Stating the truth on your wife's FB account, while embarrassing her, might be indicative of this. I am completely insensitive to political correctness and social sensitivity. I say the most inappropriate things. Appropriateness is censorship of one's self.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Is selling 1200 donuts at the door to the elementary school ok, even if the profit goes to the school?"
No, it's not okay. The school board should know better.
It's not illegal, it's just not something the school board ought to be doing if they really care about the health and education of their students.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:My 10 year old daughter doesn't want go on vacation to visit her grandparents. She doesn't want someone looking at her naked body or touching her. I'm her father, and she hides her body from me and I would be arrested for looking or touching.
Just drawing y'all's attention to this amazing quote.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Darth_Mauve: Lets see if I can be fair to Mal's arguments.
I mean, when he exaggerates the degree that this law will slippery slide slope us into--his arrest for poisoning his children via Fry Daddy and a cheeseburger, that is fine. When the opponents exaggerate by bringing in Cigarettes or Alcohol--well that has nothing to do with food.
Mal's argument seems to have little to do with this law per se. It isn't that advertising food via free kids toys is the topic. (And yes, free Toys do increase the sales of Happy Meals, and can lead to a pattern of fast-food eating later in life. The proof--Its something McDonalds spends millions of dollars doing. If it didn't increase their sales they wouldn't be doing it because poor little children need cheap little toys.)
Mal's real topic is that the government should not control our diet.
Mal doesn't seem to care that this law isn't really an attempt to control our diet. Mal fears that it may lead others into creating laws that will begin eating away at our right to eat what we wish.
The point Mal wants to make is not "where should we draw the line at the Government's intrusion in our kitchen". It seems to be "any thing the government does that even hints at intrusion in our kitchen should be stopped, removed, revoked, and ridiculed."
However, Mal is a "Black and white--no Grey" kind of person. Either its an attack on all of our right to eat whatever we want, or its total freedom of the stomach.
I'm more of a spectrum kind of guy. There are two poles that his options represent, and I think the line should be drawn somewhere in the middle.
Where would you draw the line:
Government Allows Anything to be sold as food.(buyer beware) Government Allows Food that May be Poisonous Government Allows Food that Food Producers Say Is Not Poisonous. Government Determines Foods That Are Not Poisonous and Disallows All Others. Government Government Determines Which Foods Are Poisonous, allows all others, but promotes with advertisement foods that the producers say are healthy. "" foods that the Government says are healthy. Government limits foods to those that are healthy according to the Producers. Government limits foods to those that they determine are healthy.
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: Why do you lol at my daughter? What's your position on nature vs nurture? I'm married to an intellectually honest person with liberal tendancies. I infuriate her...but she loves me for bringing her to the light. I think my son is a natural liberal....too sensitive of other's feelings. I love him just as much as my naturally liberal wife. Had she not been adopted by a Christian Pastor, I don't know what she would be. She refuses to cook any flesh other than chicken, at least she respects my taste for pork and beef. My daughter and I grill it up.... My son is like my wife...chicken, beans and rice.
Being intellectually honest, is being rude. The child who speaks the truth is intillectually honest. My wife hates my candid behavior but she never attacks me personally for my opinion. My wife believes I have Asberger's syndrome...she may be right. Stating the truth on your wife's FB account, while embarrassing her, might be indicative of this. I am completely insensitive to political correctness and social sensitivity. I say the most inappropriate things. Appropriateness is censorship of one's self.
You're right. Which is why it is not always wise to say every single thing that comes into your head. It's also why political correctness isn't a completely bogus concept. Certain ideas and phrases are hurtful, and the more people, who say them and the more often they are said, the more damage they can do because they create an environment.
Liberals calling tea parties "tea baggers" over and over reinforces the idea that tea partiers should be mocked and insulted. But its idiocy to take pride in hiding behind "I'm just being honest" when you say whatever you want however you want.
I'm not a huge fan (I'm saying this as BB not JB) of the abject lack of respect that exists in either direction right now. There's no meaningful conversation going on. There's laugh at the last thing this poster said, wait for his response, laugh even harder while tearing it apart yet again, and lets all see which side breaks the TOS first. It's a waste of time.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, donuts are an unhealthy food that I, were I a school administrator or school board member, would not choose to sell to students because it sends a rather poor message to them about nutrition and healthy eating habits. The excess of sugar is also not good for discipline in schools- and I know this from my experiences as a teacher. Here is all that I know, and it's nothing but conjecture based on my personal anecdotal experiences: I did an internship in a school in California where there were several obese 3rd graders, perhaps 5 out of a group of 25. Their school offered them sweets, and they packed them from home as well. I worked in a school in the Czech Republic where sweets were not offered, and where they were not packed from home. None of the children were obese, in a school of over 50 kids. It's not causation, but it's a very obvious correlation. I think if we cut out the sweets from schools, we will see a change in the overall culture to the better- making schools a safe zone for children's diets would place parents and communities in much better positions to encourage healthy eating at other times.
The school board ought to sell healthy foods. And yes, *yes* I understand completely that students are not going to buy those healthy foods in great numbers. That's why food based promotions rely on sweets so heavily. And that's a rather bad thing, in my view. To me it mainly says that schools should not be raising money by selling foods, if selling healthful foods doesn't work.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: for bonus points, you can put in [constant reference to something that was brought up in response to his posting, in order to make people think he understands it] — the example in this thread is 'slippery slope'
Even after I wrote this. Even after. I tried my hardest to press this issue and get him to get the point and I got it stuck in his head in his own little dysfunctional way.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Destineer: This is a really good post.
quote:Originally posted by Darth_Mauve: ... I'm more of a spectrum kind of guy. There are two poles that his options represent, and I think the line should be drawn somewhere in the middle.
Where would you draw the line:
Government Allows Anything to be sold as food.(buyer beware) Government Allows Food that May be Poisonous Government Allows Food that Food Producers Say Is Not Poisonous. Government Determines Foods That Are Not Poisonous and Disallows All Others. Government Government Determines Which Foods Are Poisonous, allows all others, but promotes with advertisement foods that the producers say are healthy. "" foods that the Government says are healthy. Government limits foods to those that are healthy according to the Producers. Government limits foods to those that they determine are healthy.
I agree. This example you've created is interesting, and it's genuinely making me think about where I would draw that line. Almost undoubtedly further up the list than most of you guys, but... where?
Yeah, a post on this topic that actually encourages people to critically analyze their own ideas is something admirable. So, thank you!
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Well, donuts are an unhealthy food that I, were I a school administrator or school board member, would not choose to sell to students because it sends a rather poor message to them about nutrition and healthy eating habits. The excess of sugar is also not good for discipline in schools- and I know this from my experiences as a teacher. Here is all that I know, and it's nothing but conjecture based on my personal anecdotal experiences: I did an internship in a school in California where there were several obese 3rd graders, perhaps 5 out of a group of 25. Their school offered them sweets, and they packed them from home as well. I worked in a school in the Czech Republic where sweets were not offered, and where they were not packed from home. None of the children were obese, in a school of over 50 kids. It's not causation, but it's a very obvious correlation. I think if we cut out the sweets from schools, we will see a change in the overall culture to the better- making schools a safe zone for children's diets would place parents and communities in much better positions to encourage healthy eating at other times.
The school board ought to sell healthy foods. And yes, *yes* I understand completely that students are not going to buy those healthy foods in great numbers. That's why food based promotions rely on sweets so heavily. And that's a rather bad thing, in my view. To me it mainly says that schools should not be raising money by selling foods, if selling healthful foods doesn't work.
Unless I misunderstood it, the PTA had a bake sale. They weren't selling it to the kids at school.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
that last post of mal's was the closest he's ever come to just admitting he's a racist. now, there was a lot of talk about race in it, which happens to be one of his little pet issues. and, oh, how he does enjoy to shift discussion to it. even in cases like this where it has nothing to do with the topic at hand! why, I almost believe I think I heard something to the extent of him being told to stop that!
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
I just want to point out that I categorically reject this argument.
I am occasionally rude. Sometimes I'm rude because I'm lazy. Sometimes I'm rude because I think it'll be more effective than being polite. Sometimes I'm rude because I'm unobservant, or because I've misjudged the situation or my own tone.
I am occasionally intellectually dishonest -- although I believe this is far rarer. Sometimes I'm dishonest because I'm lazy. Sometimes I'm dishonest because I think it's more effective than being exhaustively correct. Sometimes I'm accidentally dishonest because I haven't actually examined my own processes enough to realize the corruption at the center.
But you know what? Never am I intellectually dishonest in an attempt to avoid being rude. And those times when I am being thoroughly intellectually honest, almost never am I rude.
In my experience, true intellectual honesty generally does not permit the surety of speech that rudeness demands.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: that last post of mal's was the closest he's ever come to just admitting he's a racist. now, there was a lot of talk about race in it, which happens to be one of his little pet issues. and, oh, how he does enjoy to shift discussion to it. even in cases like this where it has nothing to do with the topic at hand! why, I almost believe I think I heard something to the extent of him being told to stop that!
Well, I just reported the post to notify JB that mal is ignoring his instructions to either debate in good faith or shut up (obviously my interpretation of the directions and not JBs actual words)
So I guess we'll see what happens now.
Posts: 409 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Well, donuts are an unhealthy food that I, were I a school administrator or school board member, would not choose to sell to students because it sends a rather poor message to them about nutrition and healthy eating habits. The excess of sugar is also not good for discipline in schools- and I know this from my experiences as a teacher. Here is all that I know, and it's nothing but conjecture based on my personal anecdotal experiences: I did an internship in a school in California where there were several obese 3rd graders, perhaps 5 out of a group of 25. Their school offered them sweets, and they packed them from home as well. I worked in a school in the Czech Republic where sweets were not offered, and where they were not packed from home. None of the children were obese, in a school of over 50 kids. It's not causation, but it's a very obvious correlation. I think if we cut out the sweets from schools, we will see a change in the overall culture to the better- making schools a safe zone for children's diets would place parents and communities in much better positions to encourage healthy eating at other times.
The school board ought to sell healthy foods. And yes, *yes* I understand completely that students are not going to buy those healthy foods in great numbers. That's why food based promotions rely on sweets so heavily. And that's a rather bad thing, in my view. To me it mainly says that schools should not be raising money by selling foods, if selling healthful foods doesn't work.
Unless I misunderstood it, the PTA had a bake sale. They weren't selling it to the kids at school.
They were selling to anyone at the door to the school. The elementary school students didn't buy these donuts, just like they can't afford a happy meal....about the same price. Their parents bought them. Very few student's could afford a dozen....mine might. My kids have over $100 in their pockets...from their earned allowance. They've learned to earn their money, at an early age.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
malanthrop: Please refrain from posting on Hatrack for the time being. Expect an email from me.
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JanitorBlade: malanthrop: Please refrain from posting on Hatrack for the time being. Expect an email from me.
Ok. I hope I didn't offend. Either way, this will be my last post, until I hear from you. You're keeping it clean, it's your job. I realize I violated by posting this...I assure...nothing will follow...I would never pretend to be someone else under a new account.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Not like we wouldn't know
I lied, I violated the suspension...for good reason. I will never post under a pseudonym. I'm only violating att to defend those who follow. Three years ago, I joined Hatrack and I spent my first three months trying to prove I wasn't someone else who had been either excommunicated or pretending to be a different poster in the same thread....got your back.
I find it hilarious that I've been suspended for "deviating from topic" on a thread I started. I started the thread with the intention of making a point. The right to buy a happy meal, the right to drive an suv, the right to make over 250k per year and the right to..... all are connected.
No one complains about taking their shoes off anymore. Most people started to complain about the scanners, until faced with the "choice" of a pat down. Slippery slope. Scanners are the new norm. Illegal toys will be the new norm. Yes, I'm a rambler who goes off topic to people who ignore the constitution, individual rights and freedom of choice without punitive action from the government.
This is my last post. I'm posting against the rules to prove that someone else, like me, isn't me. Treat them better,.... I'm not PC. My wife and kids never accuse me of denying a fart.... the stinkier it is, the prouder I claim it. (off topic once again)
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: Three years ago, I joined Hatrack and I spent my first three months trying to prove I wasn't someone else...
You realize, do you not, that we can see at the bottom of every one of your posts that you registered in March 2009?
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: Three years ago, I joined Hatrack and I spent my first three months trying to prove I wasn't someone else...
You realize, do you not, that we can see at the bottom of every one of your posts that you registered in March 2009?
Yes, you're right. It feels like three years. My father was the one who invited me to join, when he was in Iraq. Somehow, I remembered joining the last time I was in Iraq. Thank you. He's one of the three, at the the time, I was accused of being. He (Shinob) makes fun of me for hanging with you this long.
When I joined, I was consistently accused of being either: Thor, Beleaguered or Shinob.
Congratulations. It only took a year and a half to drive away the multiple personality imposter of Thor, Beleaguered, Shinob and Malanthrop.
The trend continues...I'm out the door, but I've been here long enough to see, Hatrack is far less "progressive" than it use to be. I'll admit, I'm probably the most right-wing left standing. Shave from the edges....it's too late, the middle is growing too fast. The Tea Party is not extreme and Tea Party members are in your midst. Banish me.... I leave with a smile. I joined when there were only a few and we were all accused of being the same person.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
bye....I'll be watching....you'll miss me...you love to hate me...the threads I'm involved in have dominated the top of the list of frequent posts. Enjoy debating Mayo vs Salad dressing and Margarine vs Butter.
Mal has owned the top Hatrack posts. I understand where liberals come from. Liberal's can't help themselves...they need a law to control behavior. Any post Mal is involved in, dominates the top of the list at Hatrack. Ban Mal, outlaw french fries....bad.
Goodbye....I'm leaving already. You can't help yourself. Long ago I said, "If you want to get rid of me, stop responding"...... to POSTS I START.
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: I'll admit, I'm probably the most right-wing left standing.
You're certainly the most bat屎t insane left standing anyways. Although I do concede entertainment value.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I started this thread.... Legal loophole,....It's mine. Liberal's love legal loopholes and a living breathing constitution. I'll accept my banishment from Hatrack like a sanctuary city. This thread is my sanctuary city. I was here first, I created it....like California to a Mexican. I enjoy the benefits of Hatrack just as illegal aliens enjoy the benefits of America via a sanctuary city.
If it's ok with Janitor, I'll remain inside this thread. The majority of conversations I've been involved in were threads of my creation,...promises of non-involvement would be insufficient. I'll promise not to create another thread to dominate Hatrack but leave me to this sanctuary city.
You want to talk to mal or debate mal...if mal has a random idea to post...why not post in the thread that he started and deviated from, resulting in his expulsion for deviating from the thread of his own creation?
I disagree with most of you....I look forward to interacting with you....let me have a sanctuary city.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You will honor the conditions we discussed by email, which by posting you have disregarded.
Again, if you have a problem with how I moderate you, email me, I'm not interested in discussing it here. Please adhere to the decisions I make, I don't wish to reevaluate the terms of your posting.
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I wouldn't have guessed malanthrop's weird entertainment factor would go up, but it certainly has! Sanctuary city, hehe. Goodness, where on Earth does all that fine conservative political ideology of ownership go now? Fine fellow that he is, he just gets to declare 'sanctuary city'. Goodness gracious, I've never had the urge to scarf some popcorn or wished someone would defy the moderator quite so much.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"this is my last post. liberals can't control themselves, like me."
"okay this is my last post. Goodbye I mean it this time, congratulations, you drove me off. Slippery slope, blah blah blah. I leave here proudly knowing I am better than all of you."
"Okay wait. Hey give me a sanctuary city, I should hang around in this thread alone."
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Er, I don't think we did. They were pretty different, Kwea. You sure about that?
I think maybe Kwea was just trying to get mal to post one more time. Which is evil. I'm kind of disappointed it didn't work.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
I'm kind of disappointed it didn't work.
