Rotel 1066 Review Thread ** OOPS!**

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by RAF, Mar 5, 2002.

  1. RAF

    RAF Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As perfect as I like to think that I am [​IMG] I goofed this morning. In an attempt to "unstick" the **Official Rotel 1066 Review Thread** from the top of the section I accidentally deleted it from the forum. After checking with the owners here I find that there is no way to restore a deleted thread without a massive reloading of the database from a backup, losing hundreds, if not thousands of interim messages in the process.
    In other words, no go.
    I'm sorry that this thread is no long available, although I believe that it had served its purpose once we cleaned out all the commentary and it was time to let it sink down through the message threads. Also, all the action seems to be taking place in the Rotel 1066 Discussion thread HERE anyway. That thread appears to have a robust, ongoing dialogue and anyone who wishes to post a review there for continuity is welcome to do so.
    Let the "conspiracy police" have a field day with this one but the truth of the matter is, as Uncle Leo said to Jerry Seinfeld
     
  2. Legairre

    Legairre Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2000
    Messages:
    815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    AH HA I knew it. Just kidding RAF [​IMG]. With all the crap you've put up with from us lately. The least we can do is not complain about this. I have a copy of the review I posted. I'll just throw it in the other thread.
    Also I don't think we lost anything except for the scoldings(that we deserved) :b. It looks like Neville's reviews were already in the other thread.
    Legairre
     
  3. RAF

    RAF Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks, Legairre. I felt bad about losing your opinions and I knew that Neville already had posted them in the discussion thread. I'm glad you had a copy of the original to place in the Rotel thread. I think that just about covers it.

    Take care.
     
  4. Will

    Will Guest

     
  5. Will

    Will Guest

    Guess it's still at the top of the charts for a reason... ?
     
  6. Sankar

    Sankar Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1999
    Messages:
    315
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  7. RAF

    RAF Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  8. rodneyH

    rodneyH Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    funny how the Rotel reviews keep magically getting lost, ummmm, any correlation to the pro-outlaw situation here?? TIC
     
  9. RAF

    RAF Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes. Outlaw paid me $1,000,000 to erase any Rotel thread.
    [​IMG]
    Seriously, if you've been paying attention here, we had a major system crash that took out entire sections (including Receivers/Prepros etc.) a while back. I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
     
  10. Sankar

    Sankar Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1999
    Messages:
    315
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  11. rodneyH

    rodneyH Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    robert, that is why is said "tic", you guys take a lot of flack, so I thought i would lighten it up a bit
     
  12. RAF

    RAF Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, Sankar. Duly noted (and corrected in my post).
    And, rodneyH, I got your "tongue in cheek" reference and really wasn't directing my follow up remark (after my fantasy comment) at you in particular, although in reading it over I see that it might be misinterpreted as a "weren't you paying attention" comment. Probably a poor choice of wording.
    My remarks were meant for those who might just be passing through and who might take things here a bit too seriously. I agree that some people need to lighten up and I fully support your position on this. Unfortunately, sometimes words are overly dissected here and you have to be a Philadelphia lawyer to try to sort everything out.
    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page