On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 15:02:21 -0600, Charles F Frost <charles@f.frost>
wrote:
>In article <cehrda5hp4f9o5rkdh8v1jbh9k23nsvh63@4ax.com>, The Indexxer
><indexes@home.com> wrote:
>
>> I have none of the models you mention in my database of ATK-models,
>> maybe I have other stuff of them under different nyms.
>
>I just did a double-take on that and looked with binsearch, because
>I could have sworn that you posted a set of Nadia to fill a general
>request of mine a long time ago. And I was right: 11 Aug 2013,
>nzb attached.
Nice pictures, I don't remember that I had posted this set. I guess
you posted an original file and I checked my CD collection then.
>Another thought: I just remembered that for your magazine scans
>there's always .scanners-post. Anything wrong with that? I haven't
>been paying much attention lately, but I know that it's not dead yet.
>I'm assuming that .dorks (which is dead) wasn't & isn't for you because
>you're much better known than that. :-> But I'm not conversant with
>the etiquette of these things.
Scanners-post is the playing field for two scanners who focus on
vintage scans (which I define as very pre-2K). In the .d-group they're
playing a ridiculous Thanks-Welcome-game. I posted there for some
months but always had the feeling I'm just spoiling their game.
Dorks is dead but I was a regular poster there for quite a long time.
The group had more or less the same charter as scanners-post with the
exception that the work of scanners who posted elsewhere was not
welcome there. Concerning my scans this group would be OK for me.
The last posts took place in 2010 and were my scans ;) I'll post a few
series today just " to keep this group alive." This group could also
be used for posting other stuff (website pictures) which was off-topic
there. But I guess no-one would contradict as this group is defunct.
Dorks hasn't even spam posts.
Dexx.
|
|