It is clear that our banter is upsetting a number of people( as well a boring me ), so I propose a peace treaty in the interest of the newsgroup's general well-being.
I suggest the following terms:
1. Neither party claims any kind of victory. 2. Neither party responds to the other's posts. 3. Neither party refers to the other in any posts. 4. Neither party posts anything intended to provoke, insult or upset the other party.
It is clear that our banter is upsetting a number of people( as well a boring me ), so I propose a peace treaty in the interest of the newsgroup's general well-being.
I suggest the following terms:
1. Neither party claims any kind of victory. 2. Neither party responds to the other's posts. 3. Neither party refers to the other in any posts. 4. Neither party posts anything intended to provoke, insult or upset the other party.
What you guys need is a common enemy,,,,,You're both major [censored]!
"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Duncan Heenan"
Quoted message said:
Dear Mr Smith,
It is clear that our banter is upsetting a number of people( as well a boring me ), so I propose a peace treaty in the interest of the
newsgroup's
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
general well-being.
I suggest the following terms:
1. Neither party claims any kind of victory. 2. Neither party responds to the other's posts. 3. Neither party refers to the other in any posts. 4. Neither party posts anything intended to provoke, insult or upset the other party.
"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Duncan Heenan"
Quoted message said:
Dear Mr Smith,
It is clear that our banter is upsetting a number of people( as well a boring me ), so I propose a peace treaty in the interest of the
newsgroup's
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
general well-being.
I suggest the following terms:
1. Neither party claims any kind of victory. 2. Neither party responds to the other's posts. 3. Neither party refers to the other in any posts. 4. Neither party posts anything intended to provoke, insult or upset the other party.
I await your response.
We both deserve what we get.
Victory is mine.
martin
Well , I tried. People can draw their own conclusions.
What you guys need is a common enemy,,,,,You're both major [censored]!
Our common enemy is elitism... and drug testing... Our two common enemies are elitism and drug testing... and bad coaching...
Quoted message said:
"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Duncan Heenan"
Quoted message said:
Dear Mr Smith,
It is clear that our banter is upsetting a number of people( as well a boring me ), so I propose a peace treaty in the interest of the
newsgroup's
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
general well-being.
I suggest the following terms:
1. Neither party claims any kind of victory. 2. Neither party responds to the other's posts. 3. Neither party refers to the other in any posts. 4. Neither party posts anything intended to provoke, insult or upset the other party.
"Martin W. Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Duncan Heenan"
Quoted message said:
Dear Mr Smith,
It is clear that our banter is upsetting a number of people( as well a boring me ), so I propose a peace treaty in the interest of the
newsgroup's
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
general well-being.
I suggest the following terms:
1. Neither party claims any kind of victory. 2. Neither party responds to the other's posts. 3. Neither party refers to the other in any posts. 4. Neither party posts anything intended to provoke, insult or upset the other party.
I await your response.
We both deserve what we get.
Victory is mine.
martin
Well , I tried. People can draw their own conclusions.