― dave q, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― mark s, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Martin Skidmore, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― jess, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Andrew L, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― bnw, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Oliver, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Clarke B., Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― thom, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Nate Patrin, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
for my money, i'll go with Stones, though. grew up on em and just been in the mood for em a lot lately.
― al, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― geeta, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Stones, definitely, although it's a tight race.
Dear god, it's a neologism now.
― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
not half as funny as imagining the Beatles' version of Lord of the Rings.
― Justyn Dillingham, Sunday, 12 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Nate Patrin, Sunday, 12 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― clone304@hotmail.com, Sunday, 12 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― sundar subramanian, Sunday, 12 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tracer Hand, Monday, 13 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)