__/ [Paul] on Wednesday 21 December 2005 16:42 \__
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:31:02 +0100, "Stacey"
> <Remove-the-Y-stacey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>news:dobp8r$10ft$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> __/ [Paul] on Wednesday 21 December 2005 12:16 \__
>>>
>>>> Hi guys and dolls
>>>
>>>
>>> I prefer "boys and girls", but to each his/her own. *smile*
>>>
>>
>>I am not a girl no more.:-( But doll makes it sound a little more pretty or
>>something like that so I am ok with it. I am however not a bird or
>>chick.:-)
>>
>>Stacey
>
> Nor are you a blow-up doll either ;)
> If you were BB would be buying 1/2 a dozen <g>
>
> plh
> Paul
*LOL* I think he'll get around to reading this...
Roy
__/ [Paul] on Wednesday 21 December 2005 16:16 \__
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:36:06 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>__/ [Paul] on Wednesday 21 December 2005 12:16 \__
>>
>>> Hi guys and dolls
>>
>>
>>I prefer "boys and girls", but to each his/her own. *smile*
>
> Hello Gary Glitter, I thought you wer banged up atm <g>
Ouch! Don't say that. It depends on the way you say "boys and girls".
>>> Just found this little tool which could be handy for some.
>>> http://siteexplorer.search.yahoo.com/
>>>
>>> plh
>>> Paul
>>
>>How is that better than:
>>
>>http://www.archive.org/
>
> I didn't say that it was :/
>
> But what if archive.org is down for the day, or stops working like
> yourcache.com ?
Are archives ever critical enough to require access immediately? Archives are
by nature 'dusty' and thus non-time-critical. They offer no scoop. I guess
you are right nonetheless.
Roy
|
|
