From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 14:18:09 -0800 (PST)
--- Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Not to mention
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 14:00:16 -0800 (PST)
I wrote:
snip-snip
...Another was that 'absolute certainty' about
Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And with all the silliness, I didn't know
whether or not you having a laugh at my expense.
Ah, no -- now one of the post-replies that never
got sent, having to do
I wrote:
snip-snip
...Another was that 'absolute certainty' about most
things/issues
-- and my conviction that I wouldn't be changing my
mind just because of experience* (oh, was I wrong!
:P
). The world seemed to be much more black-and-white
to me then, while now I discern multiple
--- Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Not to mention mother, ah, let me see here...ah,
gee, ah...yeah...
-Travis MOMMY'S boy Edmunds
Oops, didn't read all the posts in this thread before
responding! Great minds, perhaps? :)
Suh-thun Style Maru
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:49:34 -0600
Travis Edmunds wrote:
You're a meanie. But I guess it's all true, so...ah
From: Ray Ludenia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: BRIN L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:27:51 +1100
Travis Edmunds wrote:
You're a meanie. But I guess it's all true, so...ah...yeah...you're
- Original Message -
From: Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
From: Ray Ludenia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: BRIN L [EMAIL
Travis Edmunds wrote:
You're a meanie. But I guess it's all true, so...ah...yeah...you're a meanie
and I'm telling my mommy...
Or is it mommie? I dunno.
What's wrong with the normal English use of mummy? Don't tell me Canadians
have been corrupted into using Americanese? :-)
Regards, Ray.
At 04:27 AM 3/21/04, Ray Ludenia wrote:
Travis Edmunds wrote:
You're a meanie. But I guess it's all true, so...ah...yeah...you're a
meanie
and I'm telling my mommy...
Or is it mommie? I dunno.
What's wrong with the normal English use of mummy?
Nothing, if you are referring to Egyptian
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 04:27 AM 3/21/04, Ray Ludenia wrote:
Travis Edmunds wrote:
You're a meanie. But I guess it's all true, so...ah...yeah...you're a
meanie
and I'm telling my mommy...
Or is it mommie? I dunno.
What's wrong with the normal English use of mummy?
Nothing,
Travis Edmunds wrote:
You're a meanie. But I guess it's all true, so...ah...yeah...you're a meanie
and I'm telling my mommy...
Or is it mommie? I dunno.
I usually see it written as mommy.
There's also mom, mama and ma.
Julia
___
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:48:36 -0800 (PST)
Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And with all the silliness
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 14:33:53 -0800 (PST)
I have a favor to ask Deborah. Could you please give
me an overview
Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
snippage
serious You do realize that I was agreeing with
your statement WRT 'some people just may be
ignoring
this as childish?'
Honestly I didn't. I noted agreement in the first
paragraph, noted silliness
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:23:18 -0800 (PST)
Puerile. Junior-high schoolyard-ish.
[Note
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:22:59 -0500
At 03:11 PM 3/16/2004 -0330 Travis Edmunds wrote:
However true that may
Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip
So *I* propose that All insults of a personal
nature
must be just that - personal. Furthermore, primary
insult words of less than 3 syllables are
disqualified, unless they reflect the theme of the
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 02:32:42 -0500
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 09:22:59PM -0500, John D. Giorgis wrote:
Not just
--- Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 04:23 PM 3/16/04, Deborah Harrell wrote:
Example: Last week somebody trolled big-time;
sniplet I *thought* What a remarkable
case of cranio-rectal dystocia! ;}
That's a new one to me. I've heard intussception
and anastomosis
previously
Nick wrote:
I'm not suggesting that this will put this issue to rest, but I think
it's a good first response to list-unrest.
It's like the swear words that people find offensive; the bigger the deal
you make of them, the bigger the deal they actually are.
--
Doug
Off to the high desert for a
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:25:29 -0800
Nick wrote:
I'm not suggesting that this will put this issue to rest, but I
Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snippage
it still does not downplay in the least, the
fact that SOME people find swearing offensive...
I find the use of common swear-words unimaginative and
quite unimpressive...and a couple _are_ offensive to
me, such that I simply deleted several
From: Deborah Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
it still does not downplay in the least, the
fact that SOME people find swearing offensive...
I find the use of common swear-words unimaginative and
quite unimpressive...and a couple _are_ offensive to
me, such that I simply deleted
At 03:11 PM 3/16/2004 -0330 Travis Edmunds wrote:
However true that may be Doug, it still does not downplay in the least, the
fact that SOME people find swearing offensive. And if SOME people do find
swearing offensive (combined with swearing generally being frowned upon on
this list) then for
At 04:23 PM 3/16/04, Deborah Harrell wrote:
Example: Last week somebody trolled big-time; while I
ignored it on-line (as did 'most everyone, except for
a few noting troll!), I *thought* What a remarkable
case of cranio-rectal dystocia! ;}
That's a new one to me. I've heard intussception and
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 09:22:59PM -0500, John D. Giorgis wrote:
Not just continuously. But gratuitously. (cf Erik Reuter's response
to one of my posts this weekend.)
And if I said I am offended by talk of people being offended by certain
character sequences? Would you stop your whining?
--
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 07:52:31 -0800
From my point of view, people indeed have posted messages that fall outside
of our guidelines.
They
28 matches
Mail list logo
