| re: Jim Steinman |
|
Posted by:
 |
Pudding 10:09 pm UTC 02/02/08 |
| In reply to: |
re: Jim Steinman - Belmont 02:02 pm UTC 02/02/08 |
|
The LOL (Lots Of Laughs or Laughing Out Lout) at the end of the sentence should've been a clear indication that I was being sarcastic and having a bit of fun. Ah well, I'll try harder next time :o(
There's some real touchy people on the board :o(
> Jim has an extremely low profile. Its not like he has
> movie star status (well, he could but I dont think he
> really wants it). He was once described as "The Unknown
> Super Star". Which he still is. I'm pretty sure you
> already knew that to a certain exten because I HIGHLY
> doubt your that stupid. Actually, I dont even think your
> stupid. Just a bit irritating. I'll let you have your fun
> though. I dont really care.
>
>
>
> > > He is also the most known unknown.
> >
> > What the fuck are you talking about? that makes no sense
> > whatsoever....LOL
> >
> > Jim's my favourite songwriter, not sure he's the best EVER
> > though.
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
re: Jim Steinman - Belmont 02:02 pm UTC 02/02/08 |
| Next: |
re: Jim Steinman - bpmolder 12:07 pm UTC 02/03/08 |
|
| Thread: |
|