🚀 go-pugleaf

Oh, OK.  That's alright then.

In article <6m6kmp$psi$1@news-1.news.gte.net>, darksoft@gte.net (darksoft) 
wrote:
>In article <48wh1.10091$dn.12050410@news.rdc2.occa.home.com>,
> monie@homeREMOVETHIS.com (Monica) wrote:
>>You might want to read a bit closer.  He said a 1/3 less (meaning $666).  
>>
>>Just thought I'd help clarify.
>>
>>Fabio
>>
>>
>>In article <6m50m5$nsa$1@news-1.news.gte.net>, darksoft@gte.net (darksoft) 
>>wrote:
>>>In article <01bd98cf$7097f120$020a19cf@steve>, "nospam" <nospam@nowhere.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>Rick <south_park111@yahoo.com> wrote in article <6m4g8n$o6j@netaxs.com>...
>>>>> yep, you're right, a P166 MMX is a outdated P.O.S.. You stupid crackhead
>>>>> 
>>>>Since I've never used crack or other illegal drugs, your comment makes no
>>>>sense.  But neither does the crap you are trying to foist on the
>>>>uneducated.  Asking $1000 for an old P166MMX system and calling it an
>>>>"awesome" system is madness.  But the processor isn't the main point.  Most
>>>>of the rest of the components are cheap junk.  I could build a brand new
>>>>system 100 times better than that for 1/3 less than what you're asking. 
>>>>Get real.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I'll take one of those full-blown $333 machines then. Where can I pick it up?
>
>Yeah, but I want one for $333.... I'm cheap :)