[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lurker [no otr]

To: RBGockley at aol_com
Subject: Re: lurker [no otr]
From: "VINCENT G. CICILLINI" <vcicilli at ONLINE_EMICH.EDU>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 21:38:00 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: over-the-rhine at actwin_com
In-reply-to: <24752836.361d2ac1 at aol_com>



On Thu, 8 Oct 1998 RBGockley at aol_com wrote:

> In a message dated 10/8/98 4:40:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jg900 at bright_net
> writes:
> 
> > > *shrug*   Pop is pop.   There's good pop and there's bad pop.
> >  
> >  Chris is right.   Coke is good; Pepsi is bad.  See?
> 
> no, no, no!  neither coke nor pepsi is "pop".  they're both *soda*.  say it
> with me.  soda.  soda.  see how nice it sounds?  soda.  <grin>
> 
> --rachel.
> 
	what if you grew up calling it soda pop?  (thanks, uncle dom!)

	fwiw, ciao--vc

np:  frank zappa  _studio tan_

References:

Re: lurker [no otr]

From: RBGockley at aol_com

Prev by Date: Re: U2 and nostalgia value (absolutely no otr)/ trendy music /rachel's threats
Next by Date: Re: Re: lurker
Prev by thread: Re: lurker [no otr]
Next by thread: coke, pop, and soda...
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread