Re: [issues] Re: Responsible Adolts. WARNNG: RANT

1999-10-26 Thread Dakota Surmonde
On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, srl wrote: > Okay, first, I didn't mean to start a flame-fest. Can we bring it back > down to a reasonable level? I don't think anyone here is flaming. Why don't you think it's a reasonable level and what would be? > and it's fine if they want that, but i feel like too oft

Re: [issues] Re: Responsible Adolts. WARNNG: RANT

1999-10-26 Thread srl
Okay, first, I didn't mean to start a flame-fest. Can we bring it back down to a reasonable level? On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Simon Britnell wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 15:02:50 -0400 (EDT) > srl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I kinda find it offensive for anyone to more-or-less openly seek someon

Re: [issues] Re: Responsible Adolts. WARNNG: RANT

1999-10-26 Thread Dakota Surmonde
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Simon Britnell wrote: > Some people *want* that - on both sides. I don't understand it, but > some people seem to like that white picket fence stuff. Yeah. I've noticed that too. I guess I don't see the point in getting annoyed over that. If they *want* their relationships

[issues] Re: Responsible Adolts. WARNNG: RANT

1999-10-25 Thread Simon Britnell
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 15:02:50 -0400 (EDT) srl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I kinda find it offensive for anyone to more-or-less openly seek someone to be hir > maintainer-of-all-things-domestic-and-emotional. Some people *want* that - on both sides. I don't understand it, but some people seem t