"Steve Leyland" wrote in
:

Once upon a time in a magickal land far far away the being called Puck
stirred from its slumber and pronounced to usenet:
: "Steve Leyland" wrote
: in :
:
:: In ,
:: Puck typed:
::: "Steve Leyland"
::: wrote in :
:::
:::: okay, I've already taken #1 on this already in my sig, but thought
:::: some of you might like inclusion on this new lits.
:::: all applications for "Lits Slut" numbers should be posted in this
:::: thread. you'll need to provide conclusive proof of lits sluttiness
:::: for consideration and kooks need not apply.
:::
::: Does one not need to utter words of W0nership before one can feature
::: in sigs? I have taken no greater pleasure than being TOS'd and
::: sig-featured in my brief, and wholly inaccurate, career as a
::: trollette. But right here, right now (Norman Cook, let's not go
::: there) I have nothing worthy. Soz.
::
:: my dear puck, it is a lits of lits sluts, not name-dropping sluts who
:: shagged norman cook.
:
: You didn't mention being slut-fussy, sweetie. Your sig implies quite
: the contrary anyway.

so you shagged him way back when he was a way uncool housemartin?

Being born in Hull doesn't make me ****ing desperate, deud. Slightly
mental, I'll give ya...

::: To top that off, I have no Flonkness.
::
:: and no sig, so why would you want this honour?
:
: It implicates ownership of one's ass. ******s who insist on Max
: Cliffording themselves in their own sig, however, will vehemently
: disagree.

just think annoyance value.

Oh I am.

: I, however, don't care. Kiss.

I do so like this attitude! clitty-lix.

So. Am I on/in/having teh lits or wot?