@ummthatguy to [email protected]English • edit-21 year agoSemantic arguments, part 2 (Hard Mode: No Pulaski... *and no Julian for lack of spots)imagemessage-square35arrow-up193arrow-down13file-text
arrow-up190arrow-down1imageSemantic arguments, part 2 (Hard Mode: No Pulaski... *and no Julian for lack of spots)@ummthatguy to [email protected]English • edit-21 year agomessage-square35file-text
minus-square@ummthatguyOPlinkEnglish12•edit-21 year agoYeah, him too. Look, I had 6 spots and several shows to cover. Not to mention his lack of ethics in dating his patients.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish7•1 year agoFair enough, I would have given any name that wasn’t on the list, I mean, Tom Paris was a doc for a short bit, right? (My collectors plate has it in a footnote)
minus-square@marcoslinkEnglish4•1 year agoWell, if I was deemed a criminal by the act of existing, I wouldn’t care a lot about ethics either.
Yeah, him too. Look, I had 6 spots and several shows to cover. Not to mention his lack of ethics in dating his patients.
Fair enough, I would have given any name that wasn’t on the list, I mean, Tom Paris was a doc for a short bit, right? (My collectors plate has it in a footnote)
Field medic with basic training.
Inflammable means flammable? What a starship.
deleted by creator
Well, if I was deemed a criminal by the act of existing, I wouldn’t care a lot about ethics either.