[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!

To: tv@obbard.com
Subject: Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!
From: Maurice Rickard <maurice@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:43:52 -0400
In-reply-to: <CaO9MIA$uUC7EwF+@marquee.demon.co.uk>
References: <20010521161733.89740.qmail@web13201.mail.yahoo.com> <p05001905b72ef6489fea@[192.168.1.102]> <CaO9MIA$uUC7EwF+@marquee.demon.co.uk>
Reply-to: tv@obbard.com
Sender: tv-owner@obbard.com

At 6:09 PM +0100 5/21/01, Keith Allison wrote:

Come on, admit it - you've been spending all this time tuning up...


Bong, bong, bong...  Oh, little cloud...  bong, bong, bong...

Is this thing on?

Bong, bong, bong...

--
Maurice Rickard
http://mauricerickard.com/
--------------
To post: Mail tv@obbard.com
To unsubscribe: Mail majordomo@obbard.com with message "unsubscribe tv"

References:
- Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!
  - From: Jay Pontrelli <jaypontrelli@yahoo.com>
- Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!
  - From: Maurice Rickard <maurice@mac.com>
- Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!
  - From: Keith Allison <keith@marquee.demon.co.uk>

Prev by Date: Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!
Next by Date: Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!
Previous by thread: Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!
Next by thread: Re: (TV) Philip, there has to be a statute of limitations on responding to my posts!
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread