| re: Thanks (and Jacqueline) |
|
Posted by:
 |
rockfenris2005 07:55 am UTC 07/03/09 |
| In reply to: |
re: Thanks (and Jacqueline) - Pudding 07:48 am UTC 07/03/09 |
|
I'm not who she thinks I am.
1. Howard Siegel. I did that for the good of this forum so we could discuss Jim without all these stories that he's supposed to be Richard O'Brien. (And then I said I lied because several people practically verbally walloped me, calling me a lunatic even tho I'd already had contact with Howard over copyright matters with Jim.)
2. The picture of the rude lady. I posted that because I was beyond incensed with Markus' post and I still don't know why he is so different to the lovely person he was before.
3. The emails that other people told me about and quoted to me and THEY WERE NOT MINE. Funny how several people also tried to hack into my email around that time period.
I think these are the problems she has with me and I've explained it so many times but I don't think it's getting through. All I did before that was admire her work and offer her a part in mine.
We all respect Jacqueline. Nobody's antagonistic toward her, especially me.
> > possibly things I wasn't even responsible for.
>
> Get off the cross wankypants Jesus needs the wood.
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
re: Thanks (and Jacqueline) - Pudding 07:48 am UTC 07/03/09 |
| Next: |
re: Thanks (and Jacqueline) - Pudding 08:43 am UTC 07/03/09 |
|
| Thread: |
|