Novemeber London #gb/Net Meet
Paul L. Allen
[Thread from demon.local X-posted into demon.service and uk.telecom where
it is relevant, demon.local dropped from follow-ups. For those without
knowledge of IRC, `ops' on a channel mean you can kick people from a channel,
ban them from the channel or give them ops. `Ircops' means
IRC-administrator powers which allow you to kill or ban people from servers,
amongst other things. A `bot' is a script running on an IRC client which
performs pre-programmed actions in response to events on IRC.]
In article <510060...@nbarker.demon.co.uk>
Neil Barker <Ne...@nbarker.demon.co.uk> writes:
> In article: <84807703...@heaven.demon.co.uk> Jason Crouch
> <ja...@heaven.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
> > >Indeed - before a certain gang of fuckwits....
> >
> > What's this story all about then?
>
> Right. This is *basically* what happened, largely last weekend.
>
> Michael Lawrie, aka Lorry, Tilda etc etc,
He uses Lawrie, Lorry, RmStar and occasionally o-oP and Pondscum. Tilda
is the bot. I think TRiG is another of his bots, but that usually only
hangs out on #uknet.
> setup a 'bot,
Called Tilda.
> running on BT's IRC server.
Connected *through* BT's IRC server, but running on one of his home machines
which is in his personal uknet.net domain.
Yes, the *same* uknet and the same Michael J Lawrie that are facing legal
action from Harrods for registering harrods.com. In the past, others have
registered domains that big companies would like to use when they get onto
the net with the intent of selling the big company the domain at an
exhorbitant price, but it should not be inferred that Lawrie has a similar
intent. Not even if you know about all the other domains registered by
uknet, like richer-sounds.com, baa.com, whsmiths.com, cadburys.com, etc.,
etc. I'm sure he had perfectly innocent reasons for registering each and
every one of those 20+ domains.
> This, amongst other things, had what became known as the 'shitlist'.
It learned, too. Anybody who de-opped or kicked the bot was added to the
shitlist. Anybody who de-opped or kicked one of the Lawrie gang (which
includes several Demon employees) was added to the shitlist because the
Lawrie gang re-op the bot whenever somebody tried to take it out.
> The function of this list was, again amongst other things, to
> automatically de-op certain people who joined #gb.
And to automatically op the Lawrie gang. Of course.
> Numerous arguments went on in #gb about this - it pissed a lot of people
> off.
The concensus amongst the majority of users of #gb was that it went against
channel policy and they weren't happy. The other day the two original
founders of #gb popped on to say much the same thing.
> Certain #gb regulars, virtually all Demon staffers, seemed to 'approve'
> of this 'bot and seemed to think it hilarious.
Most of them have leased lines too, which means they can stay permanently
connected to prevent normality returning to the channel. At least 3 of them
have ircop status, either on dismayl or on BTnet's server (because Lawrie
hands ircop status out like sweeties to his gang).
Hmmm, I wonder what view BT would take of a contractor handing out ircop
status to non-BT employees and even employees of rival ISPs - a non-BT
employee with ircops on BT's server could cause them massive amounts of bad
publicity by doing naughty things and with no accountability whatsoever to
BT.
In fact, one of Demon's employees with ircop status on BTnet's server
(courtesy of Lawrie) did just that when he was drunk, but the person he
/killed because they annoyed him (not a valid reason according to the IRC
rules) was persuaded to drop the complaint before it landed Lawrie, Demon's
employee and BT in the shit.
> Now if you or I were to run a bot on Demon's IRC server that did similar
> things, do you think this would be approved of let alone tolerated ? I
> think not.
The Demon server's sign-on message explicitly prohibits it. The BTnet
server used to. However, Lawrie, in his capacity as a contractor working
for BTnet, has recently (and no doubt entirely coincidentally) revised the
BTnet IRC terms of use. Those terms used to prohibit bots but now allow
them on channels which are `at risk.'
It is true that #gb is now at risk of a takeover by people with malicious
intent, but that is only because the bot is there in the first place.
> As ever, one particular #gb regular - one who can never accept that he
> just might be wrong, would not entertain any reasoned discussion of
> this, with the attitude of "I'm right, so fuck off. Next".
>
> This very same #gb regular then proceeded without warning to de-op the
> entire channel.
>
> The upshot of this, was that many of the other regulars then moved on to
> #alt-gb. I did not witness this next part but what then apparently
> happened is that a bit later, early in the morning when #alt-gb was not
> in use, #alt-gb was 'taken over'
Taken over by the very same person who de-opped #gb. The words `bollocks'
and `if the news team were working night and day trying to fix a severe
problem how come *he* had time to play games like this?' spring to mind for
no apparent reason.
> and put into a similar state to #gb.
What happened was we went to #alt-gb and found it had been taken over, so we
created #gb2 and moved there. As soon as he realized what was happening, he
de-opped #alt-gb in a fit of pique because nobody wanted to stay and talk
to him (no bloody wonder). He kept it in that state for 3 days before he
got bored.
> Next, #gb2 started to be used and this was the case for the next few
> days. Few if any, of the Demon staffers involved in this little display
> of childish petulance, participated in #gb2.
And it was a much better channel for that. Less oppressive. A place where
you could ask if anybody else was having problems with some part of Demon's
service without getting kicked. A friendly channel.
> In fact, it was quite hilarious a few days ago, to watch an op-less #gb
> get flooded with crap from the flood-bots that normally ops keep out....
Yeah, but was it a real attack or was it contrived? Because...
> On looking tonight, I now see that #gb appears to be 'back to normal',
> with channels ops....
Yep, somebody did something that is against the rules for server admins and
manipulated things to get ops back on #gb, presumably by a server split -
ircops are not permitted to use their powers to interfere in channel
disputes. Of course, if questioned, whoever did it would claim that the
server had to be taken down for essential maintenance and getting ops back
on #gb was purely coincidental. In fact, it wasn't the first such attack,
nor the first time that some ircop fiddled things to get ops back on #gb
(which was subsequently de-opped again).
And hey, guess what? Today the person who had been keeping #gb2 clear for
us was no longer there and one of the Lawrie gang was in charge, with Lawrie
gang people having ops and everyone else without ops. Perhaps another
`unintentional' side-effect of the `server maintenance.' So we went back to
#alt-gb because it was empty. I wonder how long that will last...
Now, IRC rules state that what happens on a channel is wholly determined by
the occupants. If Lawrie is determined to be king of the castle on #gb then
so be it. If Demon staff with leased lines decide they don't want to allow
the plebs onto #gb, then fine. However, when people create new channels to
avoid these stupid antics by Lawrie and his gang, it is extremely childish
(even if it is not disallowed) for the Lawrie gang to then take over those
channels. They have one channel (#gb). In fact they also have #uknet which
is the Lawrie gang's home base. They don't *need* any more channels and the
only reason they persist in taking over channels we use is purely out of
malicious spite - they get their kicks out of annoying people and are upset
that people won't go on #gb to be annoyed.
I'm surprised BT don't replace Bob Hoskins with Lawrie in their next round
of adverts. After all, he's already working hard at generating publicity
for them...
--Paul
David Brown
In article <CrA6-...@sktb.demon.co.uk>, "Paul L. Allen"
<p...@sktb.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>The Demon server's sign-on message explicitly prohibits it. The BTnet
>server used to. However, Lawrie, in his capacity as a contractor working
>for BTnet, has recently (and no doubt entirely coincidentally) revised the
>BTnet IRC terms of use. Those terms used to prohibit bots but now allow
>them on channels which are `at risk.'
Wow, Paul, you really have got it bad! (OK, so you already realise that
I am not one of Laurie's cronies). Whilst I accept the dislike of 'bots'
in general (and the reason for the prohibition), having been bounced off
#(censored) quite a few times, should not that prohibition not be
extended to all bouncing?
(BTW - I'm not bitter - I have a small number of names common to all
occurances and I doubt if any one of them will get abusive or 300kb e-
mails)
--
David Brown
mathew
In article <CrA6-...@sktb.demon.co.uk>, p...@sktb.demon.co.uk wrote:
> The concensus amongst the majority of users of #gb was that it went against
> channel policy and they weren't happy. The other day the two original
> founders of #gb popped on to say much the same thing.
>
> > Certain #gb regulars, virtually all Demon staffers, seemed to 'approve'
> > of this 'bot and seemed to think it hilarious.
>
> Most of them have leased lines too, which means they can stay permanently
> connected to prevent normality returning to the channel. At least 3 of them
> have ircop status, either on dismayl or on BTnet's server (because Lawrie
> hands ircop status out like sweeties to his gang).
>
I gave up using EFnet when Lorry became a server op, because I knew this is
exactly what would happen.
Anyone else who's fed up with Lorry's games is welcome to join eehPcM,
danius, Civ, bigaudio, _Al_, myself and a few others on DALnet's #gb
channel. Lorry has no server op access to DALnet, and because of the
ChanServ bot on DALnet, op wars and takeovers tend not to be very
effective.
DALnet is one of the alternate IRC networks, like UnderNet. You don't need
any special software; just use mIRC, Pirch or any other client to connect
to one of the DALnet servers. You can carry on using EFnet as well, if
you're a masochist; most clients (including the latest mIRC) allow you to
have multiple server connections open at once.
Here are a few DALnet servers:
name port location
liberator.dal.net 6668,7000 England, UK
hades.se.DAL.net 7000 Sweden
bielefeld.de.dal.net 6667,7000 Germany
xgw.dal.net 6668,7000 Finland
armidale.dal.net 6667,7000 Australia
cin.dal.net 6667,7000 Illinois USA
dragon.dal.net 6668,7000 Utah USA
farside.dal.net 6665-6669,7000 Washington, USA
glass.dal.net 6667,7000 Ohio USA
mindijari.dal.net 6668,6669,7000 California, USA
mystic.dal.net 6667,7000 Kentucky, USA
nether.dal.net 6667,7000 Michigan, USA
ohana.dal.net 6667,7000 Hawaii USA
phoenix.dal.net 6667,7000 Texas USA
skypoint.dal.net 6667,6668,7000 Minnesota USA
stlouis.dal.net 6667,7000 Missouri, USA
toast.dal.net 6667,7000 Nebraska, USA
toronto.dal.net 7000 Canada
uncc.dal.net 6667,7000 North Carolina USA
voyager.dal.net 6667,7000 California, USA
kechara.ma.us.dal.net 7000 Mass USA
davis.ca.us.dal.net 7000 Calif USA
cyberverse.ca.us.dal.net 7000 Calif USA
taxi.ny.us.DAL.net 7000 New York USA
spider.ca.us.DAL.net 7000 Calif USA
dreamscape.ny.us.DAL.net 7000 New York USA
mathew
Michael Lawrie
Paul L. Allen (p...@sktb.demon.co.uk) wrote:
:
<drivel deleted>
:
You forgot to mention, that as well as being the earthbound incarnation of
Satan himself, I am also the person who pays the little men who follow you
around all day, reporting your actions to the Government.
Lord chief turnip,
The Lawrie Gang.
Hugh Davies
Blimey.
IRC *is* the CB of the 90s...
-------------------------------------------------------------
Hugh Davies, Bedfordshire, England.
"The road to Paradise is through Intercourse."
http://www.axalotl.demon.co.uk
E. Y. Bannard
Well, if folks find the situation not to their taste then they can
always use alternate networks - I'd point out though that unless people
move en masse then the chances of re-establishing a channel elsewhere
are remote.
I'd be interested in Michael's comments as to why, according to many
reports, he's implemented r-lines on bt.net for so many provider
accounts - is there a good reason for restricting people's freedom of
action in this way?
Edward Yorke-Bannard
CobraMist on Dal
Nicholas J. Dear
me...@pobox.com (mathew) wrote:
[snip]
>I gave up using EFnet when Lorry became a server op, because I knew this is
>exactly what would happen.
>Anyone else who's fed up with Lorry's games is welcome to join eehPcM,
>danius, Civ, bigaudio, _Al_, myself and a few others on DALnet's #gb
>channel. Lorry has no server op access to DALnet, and because of the
>ChanServ bot on DALnet, op wars and takeovers tend not to be very
>effective.
I'm moving nets too now. Matt, I should have listened to that night
shouldn't I...
N.
--
Nicholas J. Dear
nd...@areti.net
URL: http://www.areti.com/nick/
Life (Def): A sexually transmitted disease with 100% fatality rate
Jon Ribbens
It does have an exceedingly annoying 'NickServ' robot though.
____
\ // Jon Ribbens // 10MB virtual-hosted // www.oaktree.co.uk
\// j...@oaktree.co.uk // web space for 49UKP //
Paul Civati
In article <848733477s...@horizon.co.uk>,
a...@horizon.co.uk (Richard Ashton) writes:
> There do not seem to be any limits/controls on this person, is he
> really only a contractor ?
Well, according to the signature he uses on work related mail:
Michael Lawrie, Systems and applications manager, BTNet Network Operations
-Paul-
--
Paul Civati =O= Home: pa...@xciv.org =O= http://www.xciv.org/
London UK =O= Home: pa...@xciv.demon.co.uk =O= Slackware is.
Dave Williams
Richard Ashton (a...@horizon.co.uk) wrote:
: Please explain the following changes.
:
: From the Pre Bot days the Message of the day from irc.bt.net
: [snip]
: So you authorized your own bots on British Telecom's server ?
Actually, that policy change was made several weeks before Michael's
"own bots" appeared on the server, and other bots (for example the
one which resides on the #moochers channel, and certainly is nothing
to do with Michael) have been residing on that server for some time.
Just a minor pointette.
D.
--
Dave Williams da...@clues.com
pgp public key available : finger da...@clues.com for details
Sherilyn
Michael Lawrie has said on channel that the tilda bot "experiment"
has reached an end. I take this as a confirmation that the bot's
unpopularity had made its imposition on the channel impossible.
On a brighter point, Michael has also announced that he no longer
works for BT. According to public (but not necessarily reliable)
sources, his contract has ended and not been renewed.
We can only hope that BT has come to its senses.
Sheri
Bill Sharp
and even better news is that he may be moving to demon, or so he says.
given demon's recent treatment of it's customers and the attitude of
some of their employees, this doesn't really surprise me.
b.
--
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, It is by the beans of Java
that thoughts acquire speed, The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes
a warning, It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Neil J. McRae
In article <meta-ya02318000...@newshost.long.harlequin.co.uk>,
mathew <me...@pobox.com> wrote:
>I gave up using EFnet when Lorry became a server op, because I knew this is
>exactly what would happen.
Yup indeed, Although its now IRCNet. EfNet is another network which
I'm thinking about setting up a UK server for.
Neil.
--
Neil J. McRae. Alive and Kicking. E A S Y N E T G R O U P P L C
ne...@EASYNET.NET NetBSD/sparc: 100% SpF (Solaris protection Factor)
Free the daemon in your <A HREF="http://www.NetBSD.ORG/">computer!</A>
Neil J. McRae
In article <3299a947...@news.zetnet.co.uk>,
Bill Sharp <w...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>and even better news is that he may be moving to demon, or so he says.
>given demon's recent treatment of it's customers and the attitude of
>some of their employees, this doesn't really surprise me.
>
WAHAHAHA. If this is true, and I doubt it very much, then it might mean
BTnet start giving us service again!
My comiserations to my former colleagues at Demon! Quick theres still
time.
Regards,
daryl
Sherilyn <sher...@sidaway.demon.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
>On a brighter point, Michael has also announced that he no longer
>works for BT. According to public (but not necessarily reliable)
>sources, his contract has ended and not been renewed.
>
>We can only hope that BT has come to its senses.
Mr Lawrie will always be with us unfortunately, in one guise or another,
even if he has to become law...@parkhurst.gov
--
Daryl: http://www.fareham.demon.co.uk/
Insanity: A rational adjustment to an insane World.
It is love, not reason, that is stronger than death.
Mark Evans
Jon Ribbens (j...@oaktree.co.uk) wrote:
: mathew <me...@pobox.com> wrote:
: > DALnet is one of the alternate IRC networks, like UnderNet.
:
: It does have an exceedingly annoying 'NickServ' robot though.
Actually EFnet did have such a system running a while ago.
If it's like the EFnet one it requires specific server support.
Mark Evans
Hugh Davies (hu...@axalotl.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Blimey.
:
: IRC *is* the CB of the 90s...
Except that you can't hand out 500K linears like sweeties
and if people do try to use them they need to know
what they are doing.
It is really a human problem that those who most want
positions of power (Channel op, IRC op in this context)
can well be those least posessing the wisdom to use
it.
Gary Cooper
In article <57ck0c$6...@cherry.news.easynet.net>
ne...@EASYNET.NET "Neil J. McRae" writes:
> Yup indeed, Although its now IRCNet. EfNet is another network which
> I'm thinking about setting up a UK server for.
Please *do*, Neil. Being cut-off from N. America (and *please*
let's not have an "Oh, no you're not" chant from the #gb Glee Club
again - you *know* what I mean) is a *bloody* nuisance, given the
relative paucity of US servers that will accept connections from Brits.
--
Gary Cooper
Dave Williams
Friday (fri...@cobalt.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: > Please *do*, Neil. Being cut-off from N. America (and *please*
: > let's not have an "Oh, no you're not" chant from the #gb Glee Club
: > again - you *know* what I mean) is a *bloody* nuisance, given the
: > relative paucity of US servers that will accept connections from Brits.
: Try irc.bofh.co.uk.
One wonders whether Hewlett Packard, Bristol, or UKERNA are aware that
someone's set up a "commercial" irc server on what, from the web pages,
is meant to be a sponsored academic research network? (Interesting project,
actually ; see www.bwe.net.uk for details - reasonably readable pages).
3 ash-fpa0.router.demon.net (194.159.252.252) 3.452 ms 2.973 ms 3.058 ms
4 gw.linx.ja.net (194.68.130.20) 4.646 ms 4.951 ms 4.188 ms
5 smds-gw.thouse.ja.net (193.62.157.241) 4.152 ms 3.897 ms 4.414 ms
6 smds-gw.bris.ja.net (193.63.203.79) 12.7 ms 10.985 ms 11.207 ms
7 uwe-gw-1.bwe.net.uk (194.82.125.242) 14.277 ms 11.759 ms 12.3 ms
8 irc.bofh.co.uk (164.11.100.27) 13.487 ms 11.858 ms 13.143 ms
Mark Hudson
Hugh Davies <hu...@axalotl.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<575fh8$1...@axalotl.demon.co.uk>...
> Blimey.
>
> IRC *is* the CB of the 90s...
Yes, but you couldn't get RSI-related problems from excessive use of a CB
radio, could you?
Mark
Neil J. McRae
In article <848970...@wordshop.demon.co.uk>,
Gary Cooper <coo...@wordshop.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <57ck0c$6...@cherry.news.easynet.net>
> ne...@EASYNET.NET "Neil J. McRae" writes:
>
>> Yup indeed, Although its now IRCNet. EfNet is another network which
>> I'm thinking about setting up a UK server for.
>
>let's not have an "Oh, no you're not" chant from the #gb Glee Club
>again - you *know* what I mean) is a *bloody* nuisance, given the
>relative paucity of US servers that will accept connections from Brits.
>
good response about it, I hope to have time next week.
Andy Howarth
On 29 Nov 1996, Mark Hudson wrote:
> Yes, but you couldn't get RSI-related problems from excessive use of a CB
> radio, could you?
Oh, I rather think that very much depends upon what sort of channels you
frequent....
--
______
\ /Andy "BearFlea" Howarth - a.r.h...@herts.ac.uk
\ / an...@dacron.nildram.co.uk
\/NBCS: B2g f- w- c++ k s+ r- Tel: 0956 117023
Gary Cooper
In article <57mo15$l...@cherry.news.easynet.net>
ne...@EASYNET.NET "Neil J. McRae" writes:
Re: Efnet server
> Well there is good news on this. It *IS* going to happen, I've had
> good response about it, I hope to have time next week.
Nice to know someone listens... :)
--
Gary Cooper
David G. Bell
In article <01bbdde2$e1e8d320$2632...@thor.open.ac.uk>
M.C.H...@open.ac.uk "Mark Hudson" writes:
>
>
> Hugh Davies <hu...@axalotl.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
> <575fh8$1...@axalotl.demon.co.uk>...
> > Blimey.
> >
> > IRC *is* the CB of the 90s...
>
> Yes, but you couldn't get RSI-related problems from excessive use of a CB
> radio, could you?
Never heard of microphone finger?
Worst case I heard of was a guy who held the mic-switch down while he
broadcast 'Bohemian Rhapsody' on channel 14. Somebody had a DF rig, and
made sure he wouldn't use that finger for a while.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Paul Civati
In article <57hhkn$1...@basil.clues.com>,
da...@clues.com (Dave Williams) writes:
>: Try irc.bofh.co.uk.
>
> One wonders whether Hewlett Packard, Bristol, or UKERNA are aware that
> someone's set up a "commercial" irc server on what, from the web pages,
Commercial in so far that the domain ends in .co.uk.
> is meant to be a sponsored academic research network?
Quick, send off those letters of complaint.
Cookie Monster
: > Please *do*, Neil. Being cut-off from N. America (and *please*
: > let's not have an "Oh, no you're not" chant from the #gb Glee Club
: > again - you *know* what I mean) is a *bloody* nuisance, given the
: > relative paucity of US servers that will accept connections from Brits.
: Try irc.bofh.co.uk.
Yes, irc.bofh.co.uk is up and running, and connected to EFnet. Demon
users should get good rates to us, now that the JAnet LINX connection
has been upgraded.
Thanks,
Chaz Bocock (ro...@eschaton.net + IRC Admin - irc.bofh.co.uk)
Neil J. McRae
In article <849365624s...@horizon.co.uk>,
Richard Ashton <ne...@horizon.co.uk> wrote:
>Ears near the ground tell me OFTEL will be emloying Michael Lawrie
>soon.
I would doubt this very much. Michael has a habit of covering up one
failure, in this case BT, by telling us about how well things are currently
going for him. To this date he has allegedly stated that he has offers from 4
different, now 5, companies. I know for a fact that 2 of them wouldn't
hire him for all the tea in China.
I kind of think hes a little pathetic really. I'm almost pity him.
Hopefully one day he will learn.
daryl
a...@horizon.co.uk (Richard Ashton) wrote:
>whois bad-people.net
>Host: rs.internic.net
>
>Bad People Empire (BAD-PEOPLE-DOM)
> PO Box 1, Northside
> KY
>
> Domain Name: BAD-PEOPLE.NET
>
> Administrative Contact:
> Fenelon, Pete (PF746) pe...@BAD-PEOPLE.NET
> 0973-100-150
> Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
> Lovett, Ade (AL1271) a...@BAD-PEOPLE.NET
> 0973-100-150
> Billing Contact:
> Lawrie, Michael (ML2307) mic...@BAD-PEOPLE.NET
> 0973-100-150
Oh, what a surprise, Ade and Lawrie together in blissful togetherness.
Not sure why Pete's there, maybe he's completed the LawAde indoctrination
course and is now a fully fledged cunt also.
Gary Cooper
In article <32acf5c1...@news.demon.co.uk>
da...@fareham.demon.co.uk "daryl" writes:
>
> Oh, what a surprise, Ade and Lawrie together in blissful togetherness.
> Not sure why Pete's there, maybe he's completed the LawAde indoctrination
> course and is now a fully fledged cunt also.
Well, there's really no need to comment on the entity
that calls itself 'aDe' is there? Not when he's bequeathed
us Newsborg.
--
Gary Cooper
daryl
Coo...@wordshop.demon.co.uk (Gary Cooper) wrote:
>Well, there's really no need to comment on the entity
>that calls itself 'aDe' is there? Not when he's bequeathed
>us Newsborg.
He giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other. Our Lord.
Ben Dooks
daryl (da...@fareham.demon.co.uk) scribbled:
> a...@horizon.co.uk (Richard Ashton) wrote:
>
>
> >whois bad-people.net
> >Host: rs.internic.net
> >
> >Bad People Empire (BAD-PEOPLE-DOM)
> > PO Box 1, Northside
> > KY
> >
> > Domain Name: BAD-PEOPLE.NET
> >
> > Administrative Contact:
> > Fenelon, Pete (PF746) pe...@BAD-PEOPLE.NET
> > 0973-100-150
I hope this isn't the same pete fenelon who (is/was) at
York Uni, and regualrily frequented york.talk and york.talk.computers.
> > Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
> > Lovett, Ade (AL1271) a...@BAD-PEOPLE.NET
> > 0973-100-150
> > Billing Contact:
> > Lawrie, Michael (ML2307) mic...@BAD-PEOPLE.NET
> > 0973-100-150
>
> Oh, what a surprise, Ade and Lawrie together in blissful togetherness.
> Not sure why Pete's there, maybe he's completed the LawAde indoctrination
> course and is now a fully fledged cunt also.
Uncalled for.
--
Ben Dooks, b...@doggysoft.co.uk | We'll take our hearts outside. Leave
http://www.fluff.demon.co.uk/ | our lives behind, and watch the stars go out.
http://www.oaktree.co.uk/ |
daryl
b...@fluff.demon.co.uk (Ben Dooks) wrote:
>Uncalled for.
Agreed, the part about Pete anyway. As a result of a chat with him last
night, I've decided to cancel the post. Apologies made. The actions of
the other two have to be seen to be believed, the sooner they lose their
position of responsibility the better, it doesn't suit them.