[news.groups] Tom's disturbed libido

jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (02/11/90)

In article <5697@blake.acs.washington.edu>, maddox@blake.acs.washington.edu (Tom Maddox) writes:
 
> 	That wasn't sarcasm.  Just a cruel commentary on your and Peter's 
> net grope.  As to unwell . . . if I were engaging in erotic byplay with da 
> Silva, I'd look to my own health before diagnosing that of others.


Uh, Tom?  If you think making a play on the word "squirrel" is 'erotic',
you need *major* help.


-- 

                     Thank you for not coercing.

maddox@blake.acs.washington.edu (Tom Maddox) (02/12/90)

In article <3LO1TTxds8@ficc.uu.net> jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff "nuts about Peter's
buns" daiell) writes:


>Uh, Tom?  If you think making a play on the word "squirrel" is 'erotic'

	If that were the case, I would indeed need help.  But I was referring 
to two squirrels making kissy-face over the net (especially odd, since you 
apparently work right next to one another, but I guess the need for a truly 
public circle-jerk overcame your discretion).

	Just remember, though, that Peter has a wife who may or may not take
kindly to this sort of global display.  Then again, maybe it was the da Silva
poster forger who had the wife; so forget it:  you two go right ahead and make
whatever public displays of affection you find necessary.  Besides, Trish was 
right: I shouldn't let my weak stomach keep you from expressing your love.