retrowavelength <retrowavelength@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:jd-dnXdZ6s_YlljGnZ2dnUU7-KmdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>
>> =ybegin part=1 line=128 size=42401 name=data_dagmar from wiki.JPG
>> =ypart begin=1 end=42401
>>
>> Attachment decoded: data_dagmar from wiki.JPG
>> =yend size=42401 part=1 pcrc32=6f827889
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>
> Now THAT'S interesting! I must reconsider the implications. Because at
> this time I'm not convinced that our Set 2K Ruth Egnor is the same
> person as this Ruth Egnor. Thoughts?
>
> --rwl
I don't think the 2K model is this Ruth Egnor. I also don't think that
she is Joan Blondell.
For me, that means either 1) she is just another model who someone tagged
with an incorrect name, or 2) there are two Ruth Egnors.
And all of that helps in no way whatsoever. But it is interesting.
|
|
![Favorite](javascript:myfavor('http://nzbot.com/article/alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.vintage/16194', 'Re: Dagmar aka Virginia Ruth Egnor - - - - - - - - - - -- [22/41] - "data_dagmar from wiki.JPG" yEnc (1/1)')){kind=link}