Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:57 pm
I'm not the only one with a sexy avatar, Waddley.Waddley Hasselhoff wrote:Is it just me or did your avatar get even sexier, Yekith?
Kevin's Watch
Official Discussion Forum for the works of Stephen R. Donaldson
https://kevinswatch.com/phpBB3/
Pantheon 2.0 - Rules and Comments Thread
Page 54 of 206
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:01 pm
Yeah, Bhakti's wood is pretty hot, too.
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:03 pm
I think Nor Yekith was referring to Nor Hasslehoff.Waddley Hasselhoff wrote:Yeah, Bhakti's wood is pretty hot, too.
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:11 pm
Dunno what's so sexy about
<------------- that.
The way it looks, it really could be just a sketch on a tanish/pinkish piece of paper.
<------------- that.
The way it looks, it really could be just a sketch on a tanish/pinkish piece of paper.
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:12 pm
But Nor knows the truth.Waddley Hasselhoff wrote:Dunno what's so sexy about
<------------- that.
The way it looks, it really could be just a sketch on a tanish/pinkish piece of paper.
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:20 pm
For the first and last time, I agree with Yek. Simply knowing what it is makes all the difference. Now, if we knew it was truly on a different part of your anatomy, we'd be entirely helpless!!
And thanks for the Wood comment.
And thanks for the Wood comment.
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:24 pm
I only just got the 'wood' comment. Clever, Wadds!
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:27 pm
You're welcome, Bhakti.
You're slow, Lore.
(Joke, joke! Love you!!)
You're slow, Lore.
(Joke, joke! Love you!!)
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:31 pm
Waddley Hasselhoff wrote:You're welcome, Bhakti.
You're slow, Lore.
(Joke, joke! Love you!!)
Not that; just clean-minded enough not to assume rudeness! 
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:33 pm
What?! There was no rudeness at all!
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:36 pm
Rudeness, naughtiness . . . must we debate semantics?Waddley Hasselhoff wrote:What?! There was no rudeness at all!
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:38 pm
Yes.
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:59 pm
Bah!
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:04 am
You see? We disagee again already.Loremaster wrote:Rudeness, naughtiness . . . must we debate semantics?Waddley Hasselhoff wrote:What?! There was no rudeness at all!
Very much not rude! Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:04 am
*sings*
Can you feeeeeeeel, the looooooooove tonight....
Can you feeeeeeeel, the looooooooove tonight....
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:06 am
Bhakti should be renamed to 'Bonkti'.
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:03 am
That would certainly be appropriate!Bhakti should be renamed to 'Bonkti'.
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:15 am
Now now, my Love, you know it's all in jest. After all...
Ah, but I'd better not mention that!
After all...Ah, but I'd better not mention that!
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:47 am
So what are we thinking of for the deadline?
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:32 am
Whatever anyone needs is fine by me.