[newsletter post!]

[saaaaaaave_me]

Hey, Chloe?

Comments

[mother_issues]

...

[saaaaaaave_me]

Do I need to state that the newsletter looked somewhat different when I hit 'print' or does that go without saying?

[mother_issues]

...I think it goes without saying, yeah.

...should we try to put up a retraction?

[saaaaaaave_me]

... our retraction would be what -- Tomo is not a girl?

[mother_issues]

More like 'the contents of this newsletter are only in part what we intended, and we didn't mean to offend anyone, especially Tomo or her boyfriend.';

[saaaaaaave_me]

How about 'Not at all what we intended' -- I proof read Bulma's article before putting the paper together, and I remember it being different.

[mother_issues]

That would work! Anything that keeps the yelling to a minimum is all right by me. I don't mind taking flack for my articles, when they're actually mine in some way....

[saaaaaaave_me]

Done.

Man, this sucks.

I can really sympathise with how you felt when Quan censored you now. That was my article.

[mother_issues]

Thanks, Clark.

It was a good article, too.

[saaaaaaave_me]

Yeah ... Simon thinks camp might be actively censoring any suggestion that people can be anything but deperessed here.

[mother_issues]

...I think Simon's overthinking things. The ACROSS article is pretty peppy.

[saaaaaaave_me]

I'm kind of wondering how Mr Minagawa is going to take that.

[mother_issues]

That's why we put the apology up front?

[saaaaaaave_me]

Yes, but because we apologise for the paper, that isn't going to make Mr Minagawa any happier about the possible subjugation of his cookies.

[mother_issues]

I suspect he's probably pretty capable of defending them.

[saaaaaaave_me]

Which is why I'm worried. I like Excel.