| re: I Wouldn't Call It A "Conspiracy" |
|
Posted by:
 |
Smeghead 03:11 pm UTC 09/06/09 |
| In reply to: |
I Wouldn't Call It A "Conspiracy" - steven_stuart 02:50 pm UTC 09/06/09 |
|
History of Blogging? Jim barely blogged at all. The only reason he started the Blog was to comment on Bat 3. People who love to Blog blog more than he did when he was actually blogging.
> > > I reckon the "being asked to temporarily stop blogging"
> > > conspiracy is the biggest load of the bollox in this whole
> > > universe.
> >
> > Maybe so... but that is the word I have from very reliable
> > sources.
>
> My reliable sources tell me the same thing.
>
> Even without the reliable sources, it should be obvious to
> everyone who has followed Jim's history of blogging that
> he loves to blog and that he must have stopped blogging
> for a good reason.
>
> Although, I wouldn't call it a "conspiracy".
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
I Wouldn't Call It A "Conspiracy" - steven_stuart 02:50 pm UTC 09/06/09 |
| Next: |
re: I Wouldn't Call It A "Conspiracy" - steven_stuart 12:51 am UTC 09/09/09 |
|
| Thread: |
|