begin oe_protect.scr
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> __/ [ Mark Kent ] on Monday 21 August 2006 14:30 \__
>
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> __/ [ Roy Culley ] on Saturday 19 August 2006 23:42 \__
>>>
>>>> begin risky.vbs
>>>> <1575172.eN7Y9ry7y7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>> It kinda bugs me. *smile*
>>>>
>>>> I enjoy your posts Roy but it bugs me when you go to the effort of
>>>> writing '*smile*' when a simple smiley will do. It makes you look a
>>>> little 'naive'. :-)
>>>
>>> Really? I have always been doing that. I have always perceived the
>>> symbolic form as somewhat 'open to interpretation' or immature. Maybe I
>>> just associate it with youngsters in ICQ and MySpace ("omg!!!!!!!! tis is
>>> kewl!! ;-)"). Anyway, I spotted a mistake/typo in my last message. Should
>>> have been 'bootscreen' or 'bootsplash', not 'bootloader', even though grub
>>> and lilo are modifiable too (not easily). I once read an howto on ways of
>>> changing the image and further customising that screen (which a Linux user
>>> may only see a few times a year).
>>
>> Smileys are fine, to be honest, and tend to confer a deeper sense of
>> meaning.
>
> I think I'll stick with verbal ones. *smile*
It's your choice :-)
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Dammit Jim, I'm an actor, not a doctor.
|
|
