Re: c.d.theory glossary
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 01:11:08 +0200
Message-ID: <4085ae0e$0$563$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 01:11:08 +0200
Message-ID: <4085ae0e$0$563$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Timothy J. Bruce wrote:
> No, I merely suggested that some might think I was trying to be obtuse and
> contrarian simply for the sake of being contrarian.
I did not have that impression.
> Hope your feelings aren't hurt,
Thank you, no - at least not by your posts :-/ What I'ld like to see, getting serious in a pleasurable way, is going to take a whole lot more than just a little glossary.
Thank you for your concern. Received on Wed Apr 21 2004 - 01:11:08 CEST