Re: Windows Media Player vs...Nashton
|Subject||Re: Windows Media Player vs. iTunes|
|Date||10/08/2013 17:09 (10/08/2013 12:09)|
On 2013-10-08 8:13 AM, Sandman wrote:
SandmanFunny for me, sad for you.
In article <email@example.com>, Nashton <firstname.lastname@example.org>wrote:SandmanNashtonSandmanMichael shows off his poverty again. Can't afford $1 songs :)Nashton
Don't you have to pay more than 50% of what you earn to the government of your shithole?
Nashton math again. :-D
So is the answer yes, or no?
Why answer, when it's funnier to see you make a fool of yourself? :-DNashtonSandman
And I did pretty well with my math skills. I certainly did better than you, web page boy. ;)
A sure way to make Nashton run FAR FAR away from the thread, with his tail between his legs:How's that landscape camera you spent a FORTUNE on, that wasn't even intended for the purpose you purchased it for? The one made for landscapes that you thought was good as a daily shooter?
Nashton 11/29/2006 01:38:28 PM <email@example.com>
"12 PC formatted iPods were bought at Wallmart. 5 of the 15 were Mac formatted, 10 were PC formatted."
Great math there!! :)
Almost as "good" as your ability to spell simple words
Maccies: More money (from their lines of credit) than brains!
Windows Media Player vs. iTunes gluey 10/07/2013 15:10
Re: Windows Media Player vs. iTunes Sandman 10/07/2013 15:54
Nashton 10/08/2013 02:08
Lewis 10/09/2013 23:24