|Author:||Daividh (guest, 220.127.116.11)|
|Date:||September 18, 2002 at 10:07:05 PM|
|Reply to:||names by ATTN: daividh|
I'm still looking for the "rude" in my response. Can't find it so far. Opinionated? Yep. Obnoxious? Maybe. Rude? Not that time.
You asked what we think of those names and I gave you several specific comments relating to irregular spelling, name placement, plus a little editorializing (my opinion, take it/leave it) on inappropriate name gender and overpopulation.
Didn't you happen to notice my comment, "Other than that, the names are fine"? Obviously not. If you have unstated "reasons" you're highly sensitive about as to why these names are special to you, fine. Go ahead and use the names, joyously, but don't ask what people think about them on this site unless you can tolerate an occasional difference of opinion. Thin skins don't last long around here.
|Because this message is archived you cannot respond to it.|
|Messages in this thread:|