Re: Questions for Chibal
- From: The Wanderer <the.wanderer@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 16:54:04 +0000
On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:50:45 +0000, Tony wrote:
In uk.net.news.management, David Damerell <damerell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Quoting .m <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
of trust' either realised, or mentioned, that by having a block of
four (alright, three 'out', one not as much so) candidates, all
standing 'as a block', sharing the same service and (apparently) all
"friends" - that many would interpret this partly as a very 'public'
statement, or worse, a concerted attempt at some kind of (misguided)
coup?
So are you complaining that we _didn't_ try and carefully conceal the fact
that we all have accounts on the same machine?
No.
There's no pleasing some people.
This is true. I'm glad you realise that. Please consider it in the
context of the creation of urcm and consider what that might mean.
Hmm, a long ball down the wing.....
:-)
--
The Wanderer
Cunning linguists do it with words......
.
- References:
- Re: Questions for Chibal
- From: David Damerell
- Re: Questions for Chibal
- Prev by Date: Re: Questions for Chibal
- Next by Date: Re: Husting post -- Jonathan Amery
- Previous by thread: Re: Questions for Chibal
- Next by thread: Re: Questions for Chibal
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
