Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Should the nameless stay nameless
From: SthRosner@aol.com
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:06:56 EST

In a message dated 3/8/02 10:27:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
jbcollier@powersurfr.com writes:

> It was bad enough going through the desert on a horse with no name...... 

John, having worked for two summers on a ranch in eastern Idaho on the west 
slope of the Grand Tetons as a boy, living now on the outskirts of Saratoga 
Springs NY, home of the greatest summer race meet in North America and having 
been around equines all my life, I know for a certain fact that in the 
history of the world, there has never been a horse without a name. Even the 
mustangs on the Great Plains of the Canadian, Mexican and American West had 
names. Even horses before the advent of bipeds had names. It was heartless of 
you to accuse any horse of being nameless.;)-

>.....not going to have conversations with someone called Photo Phreak!

would it be better as fotofreak? Sort of a latter-day frodo?  

>  Seriously though, we all use our real names here and I appreciate it. We 
are
>  not fourteen year olds taking a break from cruising porn sites. It is not
>  all about cameras; people, personalities and names are important.
>  
>  John Collier

Seriously, John, you are right as a general rule. There are justifiable 
exceptions to almost every rule. Further deponent knoweth not.

Seth        LaK 9
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Brian Reid <reid@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> (Re: [Leica] Should the nameless stay nameless)
Reply from Jim Brick <jim@brick.org> ([Leica] Re: Should the nameless stay nameless)