Flame » in reply to Community is for community related business.

The whole thread (38 posts)

• Answers to Jody’s Questions on CE - Johannes - 11/11/2007 2:15:39 AM
  • Since this garbage is just a repost of a post on CE can it just be deleted - ARRELL - 11/11/2007 4:02:39 AM
    • Bullies aren't confined to junior high schools, are they. - Bowser - 11/12/2007 5:46:43 AM
      • LOL! so you thought it belonged on Community?! - ARRELL - 11/12/2007 6:06:07 AM
        • re: LOL! Now that is CANT ;-) !!!!! (n/t) - Johannes - 11/14/2007 7:50:45 PM
        • The issue isn't correctness, it's abuse. - Bowser - 11/12/2007 3:20:19 PM
          • Tough! - ARRELL - 11/12/2007 5:31:29 PM
            • The times they change. Until you came back abuse hasn't been tolerated. - Bowser - 11/12/2007 6:25:32 PM
              • re: Thank you Bowser - Johannes - 11/15/2007 12:41:39 AM
              • A couple of points - Buck Galaxy - 11/13/2007 6:54:48 AM
    • Why do you think that'll work now, when it hasn't in the past? - Fox - 11/11/2007 3:31:43 PM
  • Since we don't have a trash can ... Can we move this nonsense to Flame ? - RNE - 11/11/2007 3:44:14 AM
    • At least move it off Community. (n/t) - TB - 11/11/2007 7:28:20 AM
      • re:.What is wrong with you guys????? - Johannes - 11/11/2007 9:19:17 PM
        • Community is for community related business. - alcaray - 11/12/2007 12:58:44 AM
          • re: So the new rule is that no one is to answer any questions on the Community Board. - Johannes - 11/13/2007 2:20:59 AM
            • You've been told several times that pseudoscience goes on off-topic. - alcaray - 11/13/2007 10:52:49 AM
              • re: Are you saying that all answers to any questions should be on Off Topic, - Johannes - 11/14/2007 7:41:18 PM
                • There is a lot in this thread that qualifies as flame. Mostly this is RL's doing. - alcaray - 11/14/2007 11:55:37 PM
                  • How odd that its on flame.... - ARRELL - 11/15/2007 12:32:37 AM
                    • The question is not who asked to move it. The question is who created the content that required the move to flame. (n/t) - alcaray - 11/15/2007 1:51:37 AM
                    • re:How odd indeed. - Johannes - 11/15/2007 1:17:13 AM
        • Nothing - RNE - 11/11/2007 10:35:47 PM
          • re:That is actually a good flame :-) (n/t) - Johannes - 11/13/2007 2:28:38 AM
        • Face it, Johannes... - ARRELL - 11/11/2007 9:30:00 PM
          • re: Your answer is a very clear indication that - Johannes - 11/11/2007 9:48:38 PM
            • ROTFLMAO!!! Thanks! I needed a giggle... :) (n/t) - ARRELL - 11/11/2007 11:06:04 PM
              • re:Obviously you have difficulties in understanding what you read, for that reason - Johannes - 11/12/2007 5:33:50 AM
                • re: re:Obviously you have difficulties in understanding what you read, for that reason - gbaikie - 11/12/2007 9:08:50 AM
                  • re: I made an error - Johannes - 11/13/2007 3:41:29 AM
                    • re: I made an error - gbaikie - 11/13/2007 6:21:58 AM
                      • re: My evidence is circumstantial, yours is a guess. (n/t) - Johannes - 11/14/2007 2:52:46 AM
                  • re: re:Thank you for your answer. - Johannes - 11/12/2007 5:17:52 PM
                    • re: re:Thank you for your answer. - gbaikie - 11/12/2007 7:00:28 PM
                  • Oops - gbaikie - 11/12/2007 9:22:50 AM
                • I and others did the math for you... - ARRELL - 11/12/2007 6:04:11 AM
                  • re: gbaikie understood the question, how come you did not? (n/t) - Johannes - 11/12/2007 5:19:48 PM
                    • We all understand that you dont understand what you are talking about... - ARRELL - 11/13/2007 8:34:50 PM