"Nancy2" <nancy-doo... at (no spam) uiowa.edu> wrote in message

news:110eb3c3-1c03-4d44-a01d-9757a3b8cf36 at (no spam) 26g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 31, 1:57 pm, Kris Baker <parallelcoo... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:





On Jul 25, 5:31 pm, jackie <jacqueline.hi... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Jul 23, 1:01 pm, "Kris Baker" <parallelcoo... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

"David Nebenzahl" <nob... at (no spam) but.us.chickens> wrote in message

news:4a68b565$0$6354$822641b3 at (no spam) news.adtechcomputers.com...

On 7/23/2009 11:42 AM Kris Baker spake thus:

"jackie" <jacqueline.hi... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:223e930d-e456-4bce-911a-cdb61ecb1b92 at (no spam) j9g2000prh.googlegroups..com...

I am very sorry about not responding. I had a death in my family
to
deal with. I hope the images I sent earlier got through.

The protocol is to upload the images to your webspace, then
come here and give us the URLs.

Probably the easiest place to do this is Flickr. Just go there
(http://www.flickr.com), sign up for a free account (very simple),
then
upload pictures.

She's a gmail user, so she could use Google's image
hosting, too. Or her ISP's. It's all free now.

Kris

With the help of a very patient friend, we have created the LINK that
has been needed in order to gain the assistance I requested. Please
take a look, let me know what you think.
this first group of pics was the trial run of the extent of detail
needed, the next group is improved. Thank you for bearing with me
through all this, your help is GREATLY appriciated!

http://picasaweb.google.com/jacqueline.hidde/OldStuff?feat=directlink-

Well, Jackie

The LINK was posted, you had responses....and you didn't have
the courtesy to even reply?

I think I was right the first time.

Kris

I would surmise she didn't like the answers.

N.

----------------------------------------------------------

Probably so, but does anyone have answers she'd like?

She's the one who pre-defined them as "antiques",
not us....so I'm sure she's disappointed to find out
that none are.

I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, because then I
could learn something ;)

Kris- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

not us....so I'm sure she's disappointed to find out
that none are.

On Jul 31, 1:48 pm, "Kris Baker" <parallelcoo... at (no spam) ggmail.com> wrote:

She's the one who pre-defined them as "antiques",
not us....so I'm sure she's disappointed to find out
that none are.

I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, because then I
could learn something ;)

I guess maybe you guys are just to educated when it comes to
antiques. I am not stupid by any means. I have tryed to put time into
a website and I have accepted invites for chat. But, maybe not soon
enough for this group the stuff that is up on my website is just
minor. I have so much more stuff to get out there. If any of you are
interested please let me know.

On 8/1/2009 6:03 AM jackie spake thus:

On Jul 31, 1:48 pm, "Kris Baker" <parallelcoo... at (no spam) ggmail.com> wrote:

She's the one who pre-defined them as "antiques",
not us....so I'm sure she's disappointed to find out
that none are.

I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, because then I
could learn something ;)

I guess maybe you guys are just to educated when it comes to
antiques. I am not stupid by any means. I have tryed to put time into
a website and I have accepted invites for chat. But, maybe not soon
enough for this group the stuff that is up on my website is just
minor. I have so much more stuff to get out there. If any of you are
interested please let me know.

First of all, honey, nobody's calling you stupid. Ignorant, maybe (which
is different from stupid--look it up), and maybe not very gracious.

But you really ought to have picked up that those here who know a lot
about antiques (Kris, et al) really aren't impressed by the first lot of
stuff you posted, and therefore aren't likely to be interested in the "so
much more stuff" you have.