HOME | MAIN BOARD | TWITTER | LOGIN | REGISTER | SEARCH | FLAT MODE

not logged in

re: an apology to Jim - no reply required

Posted by:
Klasien 04:35 am UTC 01/11/12
In reply to: re: an apology to Jim - no reply required - LordRahl 01:23 am UTC 01/11/12


yes, dear,

that no reply thing was meant for you.


So what? You've never said or posted anything you wish you hadn't?
I've had to take a good look at myself lately and decided I didn't like who I was becoming. But what is done is done. All I can do is apologize and move on. Time and my actions will tell whether I can change.

Or perhaps you guys are right and I simply am an attention-seeking kid.

-K-
Warning: may contain traces of bitch.

>
> huh?
>
>
>
> > Dear Jim,
> >
> > I just wanted to take up 2 seconds of your time to
> > apologize for the comment I posted yesterday in reply to
> > Scaramouche's Batman post.
> > I had no right and no reason for what was intended as a
> > tongue-in-cheek comment that came out totally wrong.
> >
> > I should know better than to think I have the right to
> > speak to you in that manner and really regretted making
> > the comment from the moment I read it back and realised
> > exactly what I had said and how it would be interpreted.
> >
> > I wish you nothing but the best, both personally and
> > professionally, obviously for reasons both noble and
> > selfish, and hope that the occasional ramblings from fans
> > who consider you and (or perhaps through) your music to be
> > among the most important influences and people in their
> > lives do not stop you from 'staying in the trenches' with
> > us.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Klasien
> >


reply |

Previous: re: an apology to Jim - no reply required - LordRahl 01:23 am UTC 01/11/12
Next: re: an apology to Jim - no reply required - LordRahl 12:34 pm UTC 01/12/12

Thread:



HOME | MAIN BOARD | LOG OFF | START A NEW THREAD | EDIT PROFILE | SEARCH | FLAT MODE