Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- From: usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Woody)
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 23:50:48 +0100
Nigel Eastmond <eastmond.news1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <f1346o$duq$1@xxxxxxxx>, "Since when?" <guess@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Nigel Eastmond" <eastmond.news1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eastmond.news1-98E70E.22522729042007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
E.
I am essentially an 'outsider'. But I have used this NG since oh, 1992
or so. It's just I don't have the time to post frequently. Frequent
posting is often the key to an NG.
Nige. telling fibs
This group didn't exist in 1992.
Ask Rowland when it formed - he was here then,
It was late nineties.
Really? Erm .. I was at Liverpool. It must have been 1995-1999.
It wasn't here when I left for the states in 96, and it was when I got
back in 98. Just proof that something other than diana dying and labour
getting in happened in that time.
--
Woody
www.alienrat.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- From: Elliott Roper
- Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- References:
- Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- From: Kit
- Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- From: Ian Robinson
- Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- From: eastender
- Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- From: Nigel Eastmond
- Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- From: Since when?
- Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- From: Nigel Eastmond
- Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- Prev by Date: Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- Next by Date: Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- Previous by thread: Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- Next by thread: Re: Is this group really as clique as it appears?
- Index(es):