Community Chat

[VanSleepy]

Post #24 is Tinkrbl on my screen.  I've seen other posts mentioning that the numbering is off sometimes ??

[Say Nay]

---

@VanSleepy wrote:

Post #24 is Tinkrbl on my screen.  I've seen other posts mentioning that the numbering is off sometimes ??

---

Post numbering depends on how one's preferences are set. 

[Say Nay]

@straykatz Your avatar is adorable!!

[Tinkrbl44]

---

@VanSleepy wrote:

Post #24 is Tinkrbl on my screen.  I've seen other posts mentioning that the numbering is off sometimes ??

---

 I've never heard that before  .... my comments are on post #24. and I don't understand how this was confusing to anyone .... seems pretty straightforward to me.

[Tinkrbl44]

---

@redhead78 wrote:

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@MarieIG wrote:

As long as it is not going for an illegal purpose, or hurting someone else, I have no desire to dictate to others how to spend their money.  I also see quite a stimulus to the economy going on as a result of this wedding.  Also, the article indicated that there might be sponsors contributing to the wedding. 

Money is going to florists, bakers, chefs, security guards, limo drivers, seamstresses, wait staff, television crews, the venue owner (hall) and its employees, jewelers, the suppliers of the linens, rugs (which will all need to be cleaned later, etc.  The guests are spending on their own clothes and the women are probably going to the beauty parlors for their hair, makeup and nails.  People are probably coming in from out of town, paying for their travel expenses, hotels, babysitters, etc.  I see money trickling down to working people, which, in my opinion, is a good thing.

(P.S., conversely, I am not a fan of couples going into debt for a wedding: my own was very small.) 

---

Very well stated !!

I tried to say the same thing in post #24, but you said it even better.

---

Tinkrbl44:

Post #24 was contributed to an O.P. named "Red Convertible Girl" !

Have you just revealed that you are also the O.P. named "Red Convertible Girl" here on this forum ????????

---

I don't understand .... the name of this thread's  OP is Straykatz, and my post is #24 .... sorry, but not sure what you're talking about.

[redhead65]

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@redhead78 wrote:

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@MarieIG wrote:

As long as it is not going for an illegal purpose, or hurting someone else, I have no desire to dictate to others how to spend their money.  I also see quite a stimulus to the economy going on as a result of this wedding.  Also, the article indicated that there might be sponsors contributing to the wedding. 

Money is going to florists, bakers, chefs, security guards, limo drivers, seamstresses, wait staff, television crews, the venue owner (hall) and its employees, jewelers, the suppliers of the linens, rugs (which will all need to be cleaned later, etc.  The guests are spending on their own clothes and the women are probably going to the beauty parlors for their hair, makeup and nails.  People are probably coming in from out of town, paying for their travel expenses, hotels, babysitters, etc.  I see money trickling down to working people, which, in my opinion, is a good thing.

(P.S., conversely, I am not a fan of couples going into debt for a wedding: my own was very small.) 

---

Very well stated !!

I tried to say the same thing in post #24, but you said it even better.

---

Tinkrbl44:

Post #24 was contributed to an O.P. named "Red Convertible Girl" !

Have you just revealed that you are also the O.P. named "Red Convertible Girl" here on this forum ????????

---

I don't understand .... the name of this thread's  OP is Straykatz, and my post is #24 .... sorry, but not sure what you're talking about.

---

Tinkrbl44:

I read ya, but now I can't explain it to you. I went back to check #24 where I first saw it and questioned if it was you, and now my computer shows #24 is posted by "Wilma" !!!!

I don't imbibe, so don't think I am crazy please.

I'm sorry, I can't explain my first post now either.

I hope it isn't my lack of sleep rather something pecularly wrong with this new format. What else can I figure ?

Sorry gal.

[Tinkrbl44]

---

@redhead78 wrote:

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@redhead78 wrote:

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@MarieIG wrote:

As long as it is not going for an illegal purpose, or hurting someone else, I have no desire to dictate to others how to spend their money.  I also see quite a stimulus to the economy going on as a result of this wedding.  Also, the article indicated that there might be sponsors contributing to the wedding. 

Money is going to florists, bakers, chefs, security guards, limo drivers, seamstresses, wait staff, television crews, the venue owner (hall) and its employees, jewelers, the suppliers of the linens, rugs (which will all need to be cleaned later, etc.  The guests are spending on their own clothes and the women are probably going to the beauty parlors for their hair, makeup and nails.  People are probably coming in from out of town, paying for their travel expenses, hotels, babysitters, etc.  I see money trickling down to working people, which, in my opinion, is a good thing.

(P.S., conversely, I am not a fan of couples going into debt for a wedding: my own was very small.) 

---

Very well stated !!

I tried to say the same thing in post #24, but you said it even better.

---

Tinkrbl44:

Post #24 was contributed to an O.P. named "Red Convertible Girl" !

Have you just revealed that you are also the O.P. named "Red Convertible Girl" here on this forum ????????

---

I don't understand .... the name of this thread's  OP is Straykatz, and my post is #24 .... sorry, but not sure what you're talking about.

---

Tinkrbl44:

I read ya, but now I can't explain it to you. I went back to check #24 where I first saw it and questioned if it was you, and now my computer shows #24 is posted by "Wilma" !!!!

I don't imbibe, so don't think I am crazy please.

I'm sorry, I can't explain my first post now either.

I hope it isn't my lack of sleep rather something pecularly wrong with this new format. What else can I figure ?

Sorry gal.

---

Okay .... then there must be a gremlin in the network, no biggie .... but, please, find another color .... the green is almost impossible to read.

[VanSleepy]

@redhead65 you must have your setting to "newest post first" or however it's worded.  Your numbering is different and will change with each new post.  Others have it set to oldest post first, and the individual post numbers will stay the same.  

[redhead65]

Thanks Van Sleepy. Sorry, it is something I haven't yet paid any attention to, however, you have solved my problem and I know I'm not going bonkers....maybe !

Thanks so much. BTW, I altered my preferences on the settings after I figured out how to do it.

(I long for the simpler days of the original forum.)