RE: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-07 Thread John Coyle
No,no,no, Anthony - go to the back of the class! 'She' was written by H. Rider Haggard. John Coyle Brisbane, Australia On Thursday, February 07, 2002 5:49 PM, Anthony Farr [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Rumpole was quoting the honorific given to the leader of a lost civilisation > in the

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-07 Thread Cotty
>Hey, I'd never thought of She (who must be) Obeyed for S.O. I'll have to >remember than one. (The phrase is from Rumpole of the Bailey, isn't it?) I don't know Mark, but now that you mention it, that sounds very likely... Cotty (born to serve) __

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-06 Thread Anthony Farr
Rumpole was quoting the honorific given to the leader of a lost civilisation in the novel "She" (at least the sixties movie with Ursula Andress playing She went by that name) which was written by Rudyard Kipling AFAIK. Regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMA

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-06 Thread Cotty
>What the hell is an "SO"? Significant Other. Partner. Spouse. Other half. Mate. (S)He who must be obeyed. Financial Adherence Tactician Concerning Overspending Weakness (FATCOW). Cotty (PS not really that last one. Please. No. Show mercy - oh God, she's smiling - please don't smile. Oh no..

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-06 Thread Bob Blakely
Could this qualify as suffering for the sake of art? Regards, Bob... "Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-06 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I once found myself at a dinner where everyone was divorced. I remarked, "You don't really know someone till you marry them." To which another guest replied, "No: You don't REALLY know someone till you divorce them." [EMAIL PROTECTED] --

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-06 Thread Robert Harris
Bob Blakely wrote: > What the hell is an "SO"? Usually "significant other" -- a non-specific reference to wife, girl/boy friend, lover, etc. Bob - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit th

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-06 Thread UniqueToo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Significant Other (usually meaning live-in mate, boyfriend, girlfriend, wife, husband, spouse or other) Julie - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pent

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-06 Thread Ken Archer
In today's world of no committment, SO stands for significant other. On Wednesday 06 February 2002 10:44 am, you wrote: > Roger that. Folks still have to assess things for themselves and pick > their battles, decide what constitutes winning and execute the ones > they can win. > > What the hell i

Re: OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-05 Thread Ken Archer
This is too late for anyone who has been through a divorce. But for those who haven't, the best way to divide property IMHO is to let either party divide it into halves and then let the other party in the divorce select which half they want. This is on good authority because I have had a lot

OT: Should one get pissy over photos in a divorce? (was Who owns a photo?)

2002-02-05 Thread Bob Blakely
I've never liked the term "mean spiritedness". Some folks toss it out for any old thing. It seems to imply (to me) some permanent defect of character (Their spirit or essence is mean), and among our politicians, this is exactly what they are implying by way of attempted slander. When a politicia