okay, kay, I believe my post about replying in my pet peeves thread last night have had pushed you over the edge, sorry about that. because I was waiting for at least for five people's responses, I was not only referring to you, kay.

and yes, it is very frustrating for some yet, sorry about whose are doing that to you but I think you need to understand some of us too. I've sent you a few friendly PMs, (asking for a new siggies, how can we set up a new thread together), only a few, 6 or less I believe, since I got back almost a half year ago - you never respond at least one of them ever since. then you sent a PM right after I posted up that pet peeve, I was opening the link but you cancelled it. honestly, I was surprised but I don't understand why you're doing this.

well I mean, how could you expect us to think nothing is going on when someone never speaks? if I've ever got your PM once, I wouldn't complain. we all are one, we all care about each other - correspondence & things were fine until when someone doesn't get a word in return, we just don't understand why. and are allowed to guess. really, communication is a basic requirement in any friendships. (a health book in my class said so, lol).

kay, if you didn't liked what I said, you could have talked it out with me. I'd be pleased to too. I'd hate to see a conflict between two pet talkers. especially those owners who both has a similar dog that goes crazy over tennis balls!

slick, disabled? that wouldn't really work, you disabled my appreciation once. kay hosts a lot of threads here too.

..gina