Oh, the tangled webs we weave...

[Mia62]

I'm also confused by the announcement that PMs are off... while making sure everyone can reach you on yahoo. Is the immediacy of yahoo more or less likely to foster gossip?

Are you able to reach me on yahoo?

I have nine people on my yahoo...out of many replies in this thread...less than 5 of those who replied are able to reach me by my yahoo email or IM.

That is the point...it is my choice who I talk to in IMs or email...which btw is totally different than any email attached to Lit.

 

[Calamity Jane]

Good god, I now know why I've never tried to converse on one of your threads.

Are you the only person ever to announce that PMs are off?

Lavy's done it, I know others have done it. It seems that all of them say "PMs are off, but you can reach me by email or yahoo or MSN or whatever". I'm curious about why that is different.

Yes you can set up Yahoo so only certain people can reach you, but can't you also ignore PMs that come from people you don't want to associate with, or who you know are telling you something you wish you didn't know?

 

[lobito]

I'm trying to be nice, so I'll only say I can't beleive this crap thread is til going on.

 

[Mia62]

Good god, I now know why I've never tried to converse on one of your threads.

Are you the only person ever to announce that PMs are off?

I can only speak as to my experience. If I answer a question, it relates to my perceptions. If you want to know why lavy or someone else turned off their PMs...then ask them...sorry, until then all I have to offer is my point of view.

 

[Vinny]

Hi

 

[Mia62]

Hi

Hi sweetstuff.

Also, one other possible explanation for your question, pcg...could be that even though someone has turned off their PMs but remains available through emails, etc is because they may just be planning to spend less time here or will be too busy to do much more than answer emails but they will still be available and not totally offline??? I don't know...I am just offering another explanation.

 

[Vinny]

The lady above me is so sexy

 

[lobito]

plans are made to be broken

couldn't resist

can't this thread just die?

 

[LadyG]

Mornin' Mia!

 

[Kymberley]

I'm trying to be nice, so I'll only say I can't beleive this crap thread is til going on.

For a while there it was actually really funny "Parenting Tips". Then it got re-hi-jacked and is now boring again.

 

[Mia62]

For a while there it was actually really funny "Parenting Tips". Then it got re-hi-jacked and is now boring again.

That is why everyone let it slip to page 3...but hey, I am sure that lobito thanks you for resurrecting it.

 

[Kymberley]

oh damn

That is why everyone let it slip to page 3...but hey, I am sure that lobito thanks you for resurrecting it.

did I miss some new Lit rule that bars you from going past page one to find a thread to post on?

Someone has got to be more efficient in sending out rule changes to those of us who don't spend our entire lives sitting here watching for a thread to come back from the dead, just so they can attack the last person who resurrected it.

You came back here last night assuming that the comment about running was directed to you. It wasn't sweety! Not everything that is posted on Lit is about you. Go back and read where the hi-jacking took place and see what a fool you made of yourself upon your return and assumption.

 

[Cheyenne]

Re: oh damn

did I miss some new Lit rule that bars you from going past page one to find a thread to post on?

Nope, no such rule.

I go back to page 6 or 7 sometimes if I see a good topic that was started during that day but dropped back at about the time the day shift went home from work. I'll bump it later in the evening for those of us on second shiftto get a crack at it. Sometimes those threads die again, sometimes they spark new lively discussion.