Stepps Warlord
SBAIRRINGTON at TCMAIL.FRCO.COM
SBAIRRINGTON at TCMAIL.FRCO.COM
Fri May 19 14:38:17 PDT 1995
Received: from redwood.frco.com by tcmail.frco.com with SMTP
(IMA Internet Exchange v1.04) id fbd0adc0; Fri, 19 May 95 16:17:16 -0500
Received: from rosewood.frco.com by redwood.frco.com (8.6.9/redwood.1.12)
id QAA31612; Fri, 19 May 1995 16:18:37 -0500
Received: by rosewood.frco.com (8.6.9/fisher.1.11)
id QAA14573; Fri, 19 May 1995 16:16:13 -0500
Received: from matrix.eden.com(199.171.21.1) by rosewood via smap (V1.3mjr)
id sma019178; Fri May 19 16:16:11 1995
Received: (majordom at localhost) by matrix.eden.com (8.6.12.1/8.6.5) id QAA05478 fo
r ansteorra-outgoing; Fri, 19 May 1995 16:09:54 -0500
Received: from [129.116.184.8] (lilith.ots.utexas.edu [129.116.184.8]) by matrix.
eden.com (8.6.12.1/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA05455 for <ansteorra at eden.com>; Fri, 19
May 1995 16:09:49 -0500
Message-Id: <v01510104abe2b6d8908c@[129.116.184.8]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 16:09:51 -0500
To: ansteorra at eden.com
From: litch at eden.com (R. Michael Litchfield)
Subject: Re[2]: Stepps Warlord
Sender: owner-ansteorra at eden.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ansteorra at eden.com
-------------- next part --------------
I would suggest that you contact the Autocrat for a definitive definition
of "nuclear". That's who wrote the ad. Assuming something simply builds
your own bloodpressure. You have a right to complain, but only if you have
accessed the source of the problem first.
Ulrike
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re[2]: Stepps Warlord
Author: litch at eden.com (R. Michael Litchfield) at smtp
Date: 5/19/95 4:09 PM
> The only time I have charged individuals of the same family is when they
>are trying to bring in cousins, in-laws, etc. that don't live in the same
>house.
That's nice, I'm glad you are not a scum sucking reactionary worm, but i am
concerned with an event annoucement, a public statement by a group I am
involved with, which certainly seems to indicate a mindset antithetical to
my own.
> Your choice of spouse is your own. I don't see where two or three people are
>going to pay the max anyway. Please, unless I'm way off base, there doesn't
>seem to be a need for the chip on your shoulder.
The annocement I read certainly seemed to indicate that they were going to
give a benefit to people who fit thier paradigm of a family and I find that
paradigm
to be overly restrictive and supportive of a mentality I despise. If they
didn't mean to sound like a bunch of dittohead clowns then they should have
used different words.
>Ulrike
-michael
More information about the Ansteorra
mailing list