#31
allroy wrote:
Sam, there’s no need to turn homophobic. Asking you to become a female redhead is just a way of improving your personality.
Hmmm, maybe it’s your name that does it. I always have to think of Sam, our beloved merch queen. ;)
Posted on Sun, 16 January 2005 at 01:54
#32
mr self destruct wrote:
Posted on Sun, 16 January 2005 at 01:58
#33
allroy wrote:
But I guess he doesn’t kiss as good as Sam (the merch queen, nit you, mr sore lips).
I wonder if anyone still watches our little conversation. ;)
Posted on Sun, 16 January 2005 at 02:02
#34
mr self destruct wrote:
Well, if anyone is, let’s hope it’s not the woman you’re trying to woo. If indeed (s)he is a woman :p
Posted on Sun, 16 January 2005 at 02:05
#35
allroy wrote:
Nope, she’s offline watching tv with a gay friend of hers (about 130 miles away from me, before you come up with an indecent answer).
Posted on Sun, 16 January 2005 at 02:12
#36
mr self destruct wrote:
Back to the original topic: welcome, our 2000th member, to the multicultural, multitalented, and multisexual world of Therapy? :p
Posted on Sun, 16 January 2005 at 02:16
#37
allroy wrote:
And if you didn’t dare to sign up just because of the presence of two madmen here, then now is the right time for you as I’m going to bed now and leave you alone with the multisexual part of the board. ;)
Posted on Sun, 16 January 2005 at 02:22
#38
Divers (Simon) wrote:
So who is the 2000th member have they come forward yet? if they don’t do we have a rollover?
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 02:34
#39
allroy wrote:
It’s Bettie and she already has a lover on this board betraying his girlfriend with her.
Some tv station should make a soap opera out of WoM’s stories. ;)
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 07:24
#40
Divers (Simon) wrote:
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 07:54
#41
Idlevice2 wrote:
This was already mentioned elsewhere, but Bettie’s user ID is 2136. Has anyone worked out why this is yet?- Is she NOT actually member 2000?
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 09:44
#42
allroy wrote:
allroy somewhere else wrote:
The user id in a database doesn’t necessarily reflect the number of users stored in it. :cool:
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 09:51
#43
Idlevice2 wrote:
Ah, being an A-level ICT student, I should have known that. Doesn’t that mean that some users have been deleted (maybe tests or something…)?
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 11:18
#44
allroy wrote:
Probably. They should dump the whole database and set it up again to have the user id reflect the actual number of users.
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 11:22
#45
zipless wrote:
allroy wrote:
They should dump the whole database and set it up again
feel free to start.
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 13:06
#46
allroy wrote:
mysqldump —opt -c -t -u teethgrinder -imincharge wallofmouths > backup.sql
;)
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 13:11
#47
deadsetgav wrote:
10 Println(“allroy is king”)
20 Goto 10
Posted on Mon, 17 January 2005 at 16:27
#48
Idlevice2 wrote:
Posted on Tue, 18 January 2005 at 17:09
#49
mrs h wrote:
So was it Bettie, or what?
Posted on Tue, 23 January 2007 at 18:06
