|
|
Post by numbuheightbitstar on Aug 9, 2005 6:11:22 GMT
But he has. I don't know where Numbah 13 heard that though. Then how do you know Tom confirmed anything? |
|
|
|
Post by Shwoo on Aug 9, 2005 6:15:26 GMT
Because she emailed him, and his reply was what I quoted. She posted it here. I guess she could've been making it up or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by numbuhdoublezero on Aug 10, 2005 7:48:10 GMT
Ok, first u may think I'm annoying but please do not add reply on old threads. And second I think too that it's Dickson. I do think you`re kind`a annoying! Can you, please, stop telling us that?! It`s better to reply on old thread, than make your own about it. Cause, then, there would be 2 threads about it. And, when this new thread would become old, and no one couldn`t reply to it, then they would make a new thread about it. There would be 3 threads about it, alrady. And so on, and so on.......... Do you get it?! |
|
|
|
Post by numbuheightbitstar on Aug 10, 2005 8:29:25 GMT
Ok, first u may think I'm annoying but please do not add reply on old threads. And second I think too that it's Dickson. I do think you`re kind`a annoying! Can you, please, stop telling us that?! It`s better to reply on old thread, than make your own about it. Cause, then, there would be 2 threads about it. And, when this new thread would become old, and no one couldn`t reply to it, then they would make a new thread about it. There would be 3 threads about it, alrady. And so on, and so on.......... Do you get it?! I agree. There's nothing wrong with reviving an old thread and people should stop making such a big deal about it. People say reviving an old thread "gets annoying." How? What, did people enjoy seeing those other old, dead threads on the front page? Did it interrupt them from their other favorite couples discussion topic? Seriously, it's like you said: better to revive an old thread, than make three seperate topics about the same subject. |
|
