The Bandwidth-Wasting Luke-Please-Close Thread!

Tangela · Post by **Tangela** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:04 pm

Loomis wrote:Hey, does anybody ever get the urge to just take off their pants, run around their place of work yelling "It's better this way!!!".

Maybe it's just me.

Ignore me. Maybe I'll go away.

Unlikely though

You're weird!!!

Loomis · Post by **Loomis** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:35 pm

Tangela wrote:
Loomis wrote:Hey, does anybody ever get the urge to just take off their pants, run around their place of work yelling "It's better this way!!!".

Maybe it's just me.

Ignore me. Maybe I'll go away.

Unlikely though
You're weird!!!

It is comments like that I've learned to ignore.

Satoshi · Post by **Satoshi** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:11 pm

indianajdp wrote:Hey! Quit getting off-topic
We're supposed to be ignoring this thread...how do you expect us to do that when you start talking about your new glasses????

Hey! Quit staying off-topic

We're supposed to be ignoring this thread...how do you expect us to do that when you start talking about me talking about my new glasses????

Lol anyways, my eyes are better now, just thought you'd all like to know that so you could sleep well tonight. My new contacts get here sometime next week and I'm gonna start using a new solution which has been said to burn people's eyes really badly. How fun!

BTW, Loomis, I agree with Tangela for once (*gasp!*), you're weird.

(But we still love ya of course

)

Escapay · Post by **Escapay** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 9:36 pm

Dear lord, what did I start????

Escapay

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:47 pm

Escapay wrote:Dear lord, what did I start????

You don't want to know: ignorance is bliss.

Satoshi · Post by **Satoshi** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:51 pm

Jack wrote:
Escapay wrote:Dear lord, what did I start????
You don't want to know: ignorance is bliss.

And Cypher likes fake steak. (and Satoshi likes rhymes)

P.S. Luke, you should update the banner with Brother Bear, Lion King 2, Aladdin, and something else (Incredibles?). Just my opinion anyways.

Loomis · Post by **Loomis** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 6:54 am

Satoshi wrote:
BTW, Loomis, I agree with Tangela for once (*gasp!*), you're weird. (But we still love ya of course )

Hey, what did I do. I only said I like to take off my pants off at work and scream "It's better this way!".

It is not like I told you what I do with the peanut butter...

catNC · Post by **catNC** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 7:07 am

MMMMM peanut butter... one of my favorite pregnancy foods!!
Please Loomis, if anyone asks about the peanut butter, don't tell. Don't ruin peanut butter for me!!! Obviously I can't ignore anything. If I didn't like peanut butter anymore, I'd have to dip pickles in ice cream or something and this is just too weird!

Satoshi, if you're going to be using a peroxide based solution, make sure the lenses soak for at least 6 hours until they are totally neutralized. You might even want to rinse your lenses with saline after they've soaked. If it's not a peroxide solution, I don't know why it would sting... anyway, I used to be a contact lens tech for a couple years... so that's my advice on that.

Sorry, I've lost my mind.. I do that A LOT recently, I was supposed to be ignoring this thread. I get things all screwed up now that I'm pregnant!

Loomis · Post by **Loomis** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 7:37 am

catNC wrote:MMMMM peanut butter... one of my favorite pregnancy foods!!
Please Loomis, if anyone asks about the peanut butter, don't tell. Don't ruin peanut butter for me!!!

It is funny you should mention pregnancy and peanut butter in the same breath, because what I actually do with the peanut butter is... SORRY WE REGRET TO ANNOUNCE THIS PORTION OF THE MESSAGE CAN'T BE DISPLAYED DUE TO INTERNAL ERRORS. WE APOLOGIZE FOR ANY PROBLEMS THIS MAY HAVE CAUSED...and that's really the only way to get it out of all the crevices afterwards.

Phew. I guess I HAVE revealed too much. Please ignore this thread.

Satoshi · Post by **Satoshi** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:23 pm

catNC wrote:Satoshi, if you're going to be using a peroxide based solution, make sure the lenses soak for at least 6 hours until they are totally neutralized. You might even want to rinse your lenses with saline after they've soaked. If it's not a peroxide solution, I don't know why it would sting... anyway, I used to be a contact lens tech for a couple years... so that's my advice on that.

Lol thanks. Yeah I was told they had to soak for at least 6 hours (or else the eye-burning thing will happen). They said I don't rinse them or anything before I put them in though. They said to go straight from soaking to my eyes.

It's very windy outside. Wind is cool. Unless it blows a leaf in your eye ow.

catNC · Post by **catNC** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:54 pm

Satoshi, you don't *have* to rinse them, but some people find that it still stings a little bit.. if it does just take some saline or some of your old solution you were using and rinse them.

We are doing soooo good at ignoring this thread. I'm proud of us!

jambo*rafiki · Post by **jambo*rafiki** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 4:25 pm

This has turned into a bit of a "say whatever you want" thread (of course if we renamed it as such, no one would IGNORE it, and therefore no one would post. So, here's what I want to say . . .

IT'S TRUE! IT'S TRUE! OLD RAFIKI DOES KNOW THE WAY!!!!
Whew. I feel better now. And Loomis . . . remember . . . if you need psychiatric help, I'm here for you!

Loomis · Post by **Loomis** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:09 pm

jambo*rafiki wrote: And Loomis . . . remember . . . if you need psychiatric help, I'm here for you!

Believe it or not, a few of my close friends have actually studied psychology, and they can't work me out to save themselves...

indianajdp · Post by **indianajdp** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:55 pm

By a vote of 245 - 7.3, Loomis has been [BANNED] for repeated violation of UD.COM statue #23-838. For those unfamilar with the lingo it has to do with repeated violation of penal codes and peanut codes.

Loomis · Post by **Loomis** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 6:38 pm

indianajdp wrote:By a vote of 245 - 7.3, Loomis has been [BANNED] for repeated violation of UD.COM statue #23-838. For those unfamilar with the lingo it has to do with repeated violation of penal codes and peanut codes.

Yes, but I challenge that.

Under international law, specifically, the 1999 Paris Convention on the Rights and Proviliges of Loomis on the Internet, it states in Article 1(1):

"All laws concerning the restriction of speech on Loomis on the Internet, including UD.com, shall fall under the auspice of Australian national law".

s52(1) of the Loomis Practices Act (LPA) (Cth), states that:
"Loomis is a law unto himself".

Thus, I feel as though I can succesfully challenge that and mention penut butter as mushc as I desire on this board

Just Myself · Post by **Just Myself** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 7:47 pm

This is the most half assed topic I've ever seen.

Ignore it.

Sekaino Jasmine · Post by **Sekaino Jasmine** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 8:39 pm

As long as we're all posting about absolutely nothing...

I WILL DOMINATE THIS PLANET! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ahem, just ignore me...no, wait! Don't! Please?

Oh, and where can I find this 1999 Paris Convention on the Rights and Proviliges of Loomis on the Internet? It sounds interesting.

Satoshi · Post by **Satoshi** » Thu Feb 19, 2004 10:14 pm

Sekaino Jasmine wrote:Oh, and where can I find this 1999 Paris Convention on the Rights and Proviliges of Loomis on the Internet? It sounds interesting.

Err..well....umm....*whispers* it only really exists in his fantasy world, in his head. It's not real. *makes sure no one heard him* Don't tell him though, the news would shatter him, precious, shatter him-m-m.

On another note, isn't it a tasty day for tamales?

I'm not schizophrenic, *whispers* and neither am I.

Too much cheese is a very bad thing people. So conserve your cheese usage, and stop the powers that be from smiting us all with their smite-boards.

michelle · Post by **michelle** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 1:40 am

indianajdp wrote:By a vote of 245 - 7.3, Loomis has been [BANNED] for repeated violation of UD.COM statue #23-838. For those unfamilar with the lingo it has to do with repeated violation of penal codes and peanut codes.

Sorry to butt in here fellas, but statue #23-838 actually covers the violations of the cheese code and its related by-products. Excluding cream cheese which has its own statue (ref:#23-839).

The statue you're looking for is #23-848.

The things you learn in schools today do come in handy, just like pi! Oh and trigonometry.

Loomis · Post by **Loomis** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:19 pm

Secret Disney Man wrote:This is the most half assed topic I've ever seen.

I thought I was using my whole ass!

Sekaino Jasmine wrote:Oh, and where can I find this 1999 Paris Convention on the Rights and Proviliges of Loomis on the Internet? It sounds interesting.

I believe the UN keeps a copy of all international treaties and conventions. It may or may not be posted on www.un.org yet, I don't know. Don't listen to Satoshi - it is a real treaty!!!

michelle wrote:Sorry to butt in here fellas, but statue #23-838 actually covers the violations of the cheese code and its related by-products. Excluding cream cheese which has its own statue (ref:#23-839).

The statue you're looking for is #23-848.

I think I have repeatedly violated that on this forum over the last few years. Then again, the Loomis Laws apply, and I am immune.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

The Bandwidth-Wasting Luke-Please-Close Thread!