Les Pauls

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Les Pauls

OMG. No one? Duncan Administrator Simon F, said in two posts on 1-17-15 in the thread about WLH vs '59 Tone:

BTW Simon F is an admin on the website he is not an official mouth piece for SD as he is not an employee so dont make it out like he is.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Les Pauls

Simon is not participating in this thread but you are. You are the one that came in here to make it about you cause you thought that G175 was singling you out. You are the one that wants to turn this into an inquisition and its not it started as a request a simple suggestion that apparently unnerved you cause like i said earlier you smell particularly guilty.

Guilty of what? Duncan makes the rules here, not the members.

 

[Archer250]

Re: Les Pauls

Man, I see the same regulars always turning out for the most pointless arguments on this forum! You guys should give it a rest!

I just did a double take.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Les Pauls

The problem is that some individuals get into rotaries and spin themselves dead (and everybody else) based on things that somebody else did not actually say.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Les Pauls

The problem is that some individuals get into rotaries and spin themselves dead (and everybody else) based on things that somebody else did not actually say.

Like Simon, right? I looked that one up.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Les Pauls

Like Simon, right? I looked that one up.

He said "can" and you treated it as "will".

But that isn't the main point. The main point is that you go into a self-circle about it and mess up useful discussion, and I mean all over the forum.

 

[allbutromeo]

Re: Les Pauls

This is what this thread has devolved into.

 

[St_Genesius]

Re: Les Pauls

I'm just replying so that this is easier for me to find later. Y'all are adorable.

Pray, continue.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Les Pauls

I'm just replying so that this is easier for me to find later. Y'all are adorable.

Pray, continue.

Pretty educational so far, huh?