Re: What I emailed the newspaper LLB do you have something evil against RLH

Posted by LLB on April 17, 2002 at 19:27:52:

In Reply to: Re: What I emailed the newspaper LLB do you have something evil against RLH posted by Avid Reader on April 17, 2002 at 19:09:47:

No ulterior motives here; simply following up. W/the exception of one C+, RLH has received nothing but good grades at AAR, including a DIK.

The newspaper article reported one thing. The author says something entirely different. So why not go back to the newspaper and ask how come?

RLH apparently emailed the newspaper yesterday and I emailed them today. The only difference is that what I emailed them is her original post here refuting, paragraph by paragraph, the article in the newspaper. If she's correct, than the newspaper should print a retraction. If they stand by their story, than we'll have presented both sides to the fullest.

That's my job.

LLB

Follow Ups:

• Why Corey 22:33:15 04/17/02 (9)
  • Re: Why LLB 08:25:28 04/18/02 (0)
  • Never let facts get in the way of a good story NT Michelle 23:17:33 04/17/02 (7)
    • reread your title. LLB is getting the facts from all the people Jill Rosenberg 11:44:27 04/18/02 (0)
    • And why is llb soliciting comments from Nora Roberts, who can’t even be bothered posting herself? Could it be to Cath 23:38:58 04/17/02 (5)
      • Re: And why is llb soliciting comments from Nora Roberts, who can’t even be bothered posting herself? Could it be to LLB 08:23:20 04/18/02 (4)
        • Re: And why is llb soliciting comments from Nora Roberts, who can’t even be bothered posting herself? Could it be to CathyG 10:38:17 04/18/02 (3)
          • Re: idaho statesman krisd 01:30:06 04/21/02 (2)
            • Re: idaho statesman Carla Kelly 19:48:42 04/21/02 (0)
            • Re: idaho statesman Sandy Heaton 13:16:24 04/21/02 (0)

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: No ulterior motives here; simply following up. W/the exception of one C+, RLH has received nothing but good grades at AAR, including a DIK. : The newspaper article reported one thing. The author says something entirely different. So why not go back to the newspaper and ask how come? : RLH apparently emailed the newspaper yesterday and I emailed them today. The only difference is that what I emailed them is her original post here refuting, paragraph by paragraph, the article in the newspaper. If she's correct, than the newspaper should print a retraction. If they stand by their story, than we'll have presented both sides to the fullest. : That's my job. : LLB