you have a good point that i agree with you on, but do you have to be so
mean about it?
zack
chapel hill, NC
On Thu, 27 Jan 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > i personally don't want him back in the band. i like his work
> > that he contributed, but he bailed on the rest of the band.
>
> oh, he bailed on SDRE? i guess he wasnt involved in the foos at all, eh?
> sdre broke up. nate went on to make music in the foos. so sdre gets back
> together and nate is suppose to say to grohl "hey, it was fun, but that EMO
> band i was in is getting back together...you know the one where i had a huge
> problem with the lead singer's christianity...well anyway Dave, im getting
> back together with them."
> is that how he was to avoid "bailing" on sdre?
>
> and the reason you dont want nate back in the band is because he bailed on
> them? so, if he were in the band you would be fine with it? like him if he
> is in sdre, dont like him in he isnt in sdre. right?
>
> damn, thats dumb. is it jeremy, dan, or will that is sucking your cock so
> you say this dumb shit?
>
> jeff.
>
>
>
