On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 15:01:15 +0000, one tin soldier wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 08:42:23 -0600, "mr.bill" <mrbill@invalid.ls>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 04:41:25 +0000, one tin soldier wrote:
>>
>>>Fallen Angels still confuses me. I would *like* to have
>>>one complete set, but which reflects completion against
>>>both CD's and n@@dles' CSVs, but have not yet put it all
>>>together to see what may be lacking. (As you are aware,
>>>there is some discrepancy between the two.)
>>
>>I should have images that match both csv's. Both are correct really, as
>>the site reissued a few pix to get the logo off the model's face. N@@dles
>>indexed the better looking of the two, while CD indexed the only one
>>available at the time.
>
>As I thought, which is why I want both versions as well.
>
>>>What image do you lack from Fallen Angels?
>>
>>fa-25a-29.jpg
>
>Sorry, don't have that one (and I've done a bit of looking).
>
>>>I lack las-019-088.jpg from Assorties and lsp-001-113.jpg
>>>from Little Pirates.
>>
>>Got them coming.
>
>Thank you!
>
>>>>Lolitas on Holiday was totally misnamed, but otherwise contained good
>>>>images. I believe it was incomplete.
>>>
>>>It was. For whatever reason, I lack 113 images from LoH.
>>
>>Junked up, as I recall, with garbage after the jpg image on account of a
>>website disk crash and attempted recovery.
>>
>>>I've no idea which group would be appropriate for requesting
>>>LoH fills, and I know better than to ask which group <bfg>.
>>
>>Why not drop your miss_wrong in the midst of the hurricane?
>
>Perhaps when the activity there abates somewhat?
>
>--
>ots
I left a private msg suggesting an alternative site. I'll watch there for
your miss_wrong then?
--
mr.bill
|
|