| Originally posted by mindseye@Dec 28 2004, 05:30 PM |
"....If the second link doesn't work for you, try copying the link and pasting it into a new browser window instead of just clicking on it."
I've always appreciated your computer savvy! Thanks for your suggestion.
I was able however to just hit "refresh" after doing the original (non -responsive) click and I brought up the second link.
Anyway, now having seen ALL the pix! I'm guess-ti-mating a 5 to 6 inch flaccid size for Mr. Wilson which makes me wonder (I suppose) does THAT size then make him (or other guys) all that impressively..... "hung" ?
Not meaning to open yet another debate about "what's BIG and what's not"...I just find it somewhat amusing sometimes about our various interpretations of large.
Somehow, in my own mind, while 5 or 6 inches soft is impressive (and over "average" statistically), it would be a flaccid size of 7 or 8 inches before I would deem the term "hung" as really appropriate. --Oh well.
(I've been around this forum too long! My judgment has gone askew!) :mellow: