Page 1 of 1

Lox's old sig is proven right

PostPosted:Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:50 pm
by SineSwiper
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/natu ... 513.stm?33

(BTW, Lox, where is that sig of yours?)

PostPosted:Thu Aug 09, 2007 11:13 pm
by Kupek
What's proved? I see no new information in the article, and certainly no new experiments or studies.

PostPosted:Fri Aug 10, 2007 8:04 am
by Lox
I have absolutely no idea what sig you're referring to, Sine. :)

Though that doesn't mean that you're mistaken. It probably means I just don't remember my old sig. heh

PostPosted:Mon Aug 13, 2007 5:34 pm
by Oracle
I believe I once had a quote (quoting you, actually, Sine), refering to women programmers, or lack thereof. Don't know if that is what you are refering to.

PostPosted:Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:17 pm
by SineSwiper
Ahhh, I thought it was Lox. Why'd you remove it? I kinda liked that quote.

PostPosted:Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:03 pm
by Oracle
SineSwiper wrote:Ahhh, I thought it was Lox. Why'd you remove it? I kinda liked that quote.
Didn't I lose it when the board changed? I dunno, I know I didn't remove it intentionally.

PostPosted:Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:35 pm
by SineSwiper
Board changed? You mean several thousand years ago? Nah, you had it less than a few months ago.

PostPosted:Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:50 pm
by Zeus
SineSwiper wrote:Board changed? You mean several thousand years ago? Nah, you had it less than a few months ago.
Oh how I miss the old days.....