Thread View: alt.cellular.nokia.groupgraphics
8 messages
8 total messages
Started by Kevin
Sun, 02 Mar 2003 11:05
和弦手機比較！
Author: Kevin
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2003 11:05
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2003 11:05
27 lines
2372 bytes
2372 bytes
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C2E0EE.A10087C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="big5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=
=BD=D0=B0=DD=A4=B0=9A=AC=A4=E2=BE=F7=AA=BA=A9M=A9=B6=B9a=C1n=C1n=AD=B5=A4=
=F1=B8=FB=AC=FC=A1H
------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C2E0EE.A10087C0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="big5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dbig5">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2> =20
=BD=D0=B0=DD=A4=B0=9A=AC=A4=E2=BE=F7=AA=BA=A9M=A9=B6=B9a=C1n=C1n=AD=B5=A4=
=F1=B8=FB=AC=FC=A1H</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C2E0EE.A10087C0--
Re: ©M©¶¤â¾÷¤ñ¸û¡I
Author: Dr Phill
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 03:24
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 03:24
18 lines
2147 bytes
2147 bytes
NF wrote: > > I agree totally > > -- > Cheers > -nick > > "Kevin" <kevincmk@tm.net.my> wrote in message > news:3e61e2e2$1_1@news.tm.net.my... > �аݤ���������M���a�n�n������H How can anyone possibly agree. There are far too many variables for anyone to come up with that "basic" conclusion. Surely NF, you would have to accept that Kevin has over simplified an extremely complicated area. Even if his theories were shown to be correct in certain circumstances, it still hasn't been tested. And to say you agree totally, is somewhat premature. Seriously.
Re: ©M©¶¤â¾÷¤ñ¸û¡I
Author: Dr Phill
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 03:57
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 03:57
31 lines
2607 bytes
2607 bytes
NF wrote: > > I agree with Dr. Phill Nick, you can't have it both ways. Firstly, you say that you "totally agree" with the wildly generalisatins that Kevin posted, and yet now you say you agree with me. What's going on man? Please explain you change of heart? > "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message > news:3E62CAD7.8B0ACBC0@oprah.com... > > NF wrote: > > > > > > I agree totally > > > > > > -- > > > Cheers > > > -nick > > > > > > "Kevin" <kevincmk@tm.net.my> wrote in message > > > news:3e61e2e2$1_1@news.tm.net.my... > > > �аݤ�s�������M���a�n�n������H > > > > How can anyone possibly agree. There are far too many variables for > > anyone to come up with that "basic" conclusion. Surely NF, you would > > have to accept that Kevin has over simplified an extremely complicated > > area. Even if his theories were shown to be correct in certain > > circumstances, it still hasn't been tested. And to say you agree > > totally, is somewhat premature. Seriously.
Re: ©M©¶¤â¾÷¤ñ¸û¡I
Author: Dr Phill
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:10
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:10
50 lines
3349 bytes
3349 bytes
So you were trying to wound me? What have I ever done to you? What's REALLY going on here Nick?????? NF wrote: > > sar-casm > n. > > 1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound. > 2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is > intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule. > 3. The use of sarcasm. See Synonyms at wit1. > > -- > Cheers > -nick > > "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message > news:3E62D29D.8E867919@oprah.com... > > NF wrote: > > > > > > I agree with Dr. Phill > > > > Nick, you can't have it both ways. Firstly, you say that you "totally > > agree" with the wildly generalisatins that Kevin posted, and yet now you > > say you agree with me. What's going on man? Please explain you change > > of heart? > > > > > > > > > "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message > > > news:3E62CAD7.8B0ACBC0@oprah.com... > > > > NF wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I agree totally > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Cheers > > > > > -nick > > > > > > > > > > "Kevin" <kevincmk@tm.net.my> wrote in message > > > > > news:3e61e2e2$1_1@news.tm.net.my... > > > > > �аݤ�s�������M���a�n�n������H > > > > > > > > How can anyone possibly agree. There are far too many variables for > > > > anyone to come up with that "basic" conclusion. Surely NF, you would > > > > have to accept that Kevin has over simplified an extremely complicated > > > > area. Even if his theories were shown to be correct in certain > > > > circumstances, it still hasn't been tested. And to say you agree > > > > totally, is somewhat premature. Seriously.
Re: �M��������I
Author: NF
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:18
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:18
10 lines
1531 bytes
1531 bytes
I agree totally
--
Cheers
-nick
"Kevin" <kevincmk@tm.net.my> wrote in message
news:3e61e2e2$1_1@news.tm.net.my...
�аݤ���������M���a�n�n������H
Re: �M��������I
Author: NF
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:52
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:52
27 lines
2177 bytes
2177 bytes
I agree with Dr. Phill -- Cheers -nick "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message news:3E62CAD7.8B0ACBC0@oprah.com... > NF wrote: > > > > I agree totally > > > > -- > > Cheers > > -nick > > > > "Kevin" <kevincmk@tm.net.my> wrote in message > > news:3e61e2e2$1_1@news.tm.net.my... > > �аݤ�s�������M���a�n�n������H > > How can anyone possibly agree. There are far too many variables for > anyone to come up with that "basic" conclusion. Surely NF, you would > have to accept that Kevin has over simplified an extremely complicated > area. Even if his theories were shown to be correct in certain > circumstances, it still hasn't been tested. And to say you agree > totally, is somewhat premature. Seriously.
Re: �M��������I
Author: NF
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 05:06
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 05:06
46 lines
2945 bytes
2945 bytes
sar-casm n. 1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound. 2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule. 3. The use of sarcasm. See Synonyms at wit1. -- Cheers -nick "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message news:3E62D29D.8E867919@oprah.com... > NF wrote: > > > > I agree with Dr. Phill > > Nick, you can't have it both ways. Firstly, you say that you "totally > agree" with the wildly generalisatins that Kevin posted, and yet now you > say you agree with me. What's going on man? Please explain you change > of heart? > > > > > "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message > > news:3E62CAD7.8B0ACBC0@oprah.com... > > > NF wrote: > > > > > > > > I agree totally > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Cheers > > > > -nick > > > > > > > > "Kevin" <kevincmk@tm.net.my> wrote in message > > > > news:3e61e2e2$1_1@news.tm.net.my... > > > > �аݤ�s�������M���a�n�n������H > > > > > > How can anyone possibly agree. There are far too many variables for > > > anyone to come up with that "basic" conclusion. Surely NF, you would > > > have to accept that Kevin has over simplified an extremely complicated > > > area. Even if his theories were shown to be correct in certain > > > circumstances, it still hasn't been tested. And to say you agree > > > totally, is somewhat premature. Seriously.
Re: �M��������I
Author: NF
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 05:36
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 05:36
66 lines
3493 bytes
3493 bytes
I dont know!!! Help me Dr Phil!!! -- Cheers -nick "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message news:3E62D5C9.AE90DB67@oprah.com... > So you were trying to wound me? What have I ever done to you? What's > REALLY going on here Nick?????? > > NF wrote: > > > > sar-casm > > n. > > > > 1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound. > > 2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is > > intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule. > > 3. The use of sarcasm. See Synonyms at wit1. > > > > -- > > Cheers > > -nick > > > > "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message > > news:3E62D29D.8E867919@oprah.com... > > > NF wrote: > > > > > > > > I agree with Dr. Phill > > > > > > Nick, you can't have it both ways. Firstly, you say that you "totally > > > agree" with the wildly generalisatins that Kevin posted, and yet now you > > > say you agree with me. What's going on man? Please explain you change > > > of heart? > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Dr Phill" <no_relation@oprah.com> wrote in message > > > > news:3E62CAD7.8B0ACBC0@oprah.com... > > > > > NF wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree totally > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > -nick > > > > > > > > > > > > "Kevin" <kevincmk@tm.net.my> wrote in message > > > > > > news:3e61e2e2$1_1@news.tm.net.my... > > > > > > �аݤ�s�������M���a�n�n������H > > > > > > > > > > How can anyone possibly agree. There are far too many variables for > > > > > anyone to come up with that "basic" conclusion. Surely NF, you would > > > > > have to accept that Kevin has over simplified an extremely complicated > > > > > area. Even if his theories were shown to be correct in certain > > > > > circumstances, it still hasn't been tested. And to say you agree > > > > > totally, is somewhat premature. Seriously.
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads