rw wrote:
snip
There are god-knows-how-many people reading this stuff, and
the odds are that at least one of them is nuts.

Methinks it would be faster to point out the sane ones.
--
TL,
Tim
who is posting this courtesy of his employer's bandwidth.
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

On 6/20/05 2:24 PM, in article , "Tim J."
wrote:

rw wrote:
snip
There are god-knows-how-many people reading this stuff, and
the odds are that at least one of them is nuts.

Methinks it would be faster to point out the sane ones.

Yes, but it's not polite to point! Wouldn't want to anger anyone by breach
of etiquette...

Bill
(trying to help)

William Claspy wrote:
On 6/20/05 2:24 PM, in article ,
"Tim J." wrote:

rw wrote:
snip
There are god-knows-how-many people reading this stuff, and
the odds are that at least one of them is nuts.

Methinks it would be faster to point out the sane ones.

Yes, but it's not polite to point! Wouldn't want to anger anyone by
breach of etiquette...

RW! pointing BILL IS POSTING FROM HIS EMPLOYER'S ACCOUNT!!

Sorry, Bill, but as part of the usenet police brigade, I felt it my duty
to point out your little faux pas. Letters have been written and are on
their way to your employers. It'll be a cold day in hell before you post
any of that Olde English poetry crap again. ;-)
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

On 6/20/05 3:03 PM, in article , "Tim J."
wrote:

William Claspy wrote:
On 6/20/05 2:24 PM, in article ,
"Tim J." wrote:

rw wrote:
snip
There are god-knows-how-many people reading this stuff, and
the odds are that at least one of them is nuts.

Methinks it would be faster to point out the sane ones.

Yes, but it's not polite to point! Wouldn't want to anger anyone by
breach of etiquette...

RW! pointing BILL IS POSTING FROM HIS EMPLOYER'S ACCOUNT!!

Sorry, Bill, but as part of the usenet police brigade, I felt it my duty
to point out your little faux pas. Letters have been written and are on
their way to your employers. It'll be a cold day in hell before you post
any of that Olde English poetry crap again. ;-)

That's actually part of the understanding I have with the university. My
usenet access remains switched on as long as I occasionally nag people on
grammar and post tidbits of poetry.

Sorry. :-(

:-)

Bill
(Besides, RW doesn't seem to care much about either, so it does not invoke
his wrath to do so :-)

William Claspy wrote:
On 6/20/05 3:03 PM, in article , "Tim J."
wrote:


William Claspy wrote:

On 6/20/05 2:24 PM, in article ,
"Tim J." wrote:


rw wrote:
snip

There are god-knows-how-many people reading this stuff, and
the odds are that at least one of them is nuts.

Methinks it would be faster to point out the sane ones.

Yes, but it's not polite to point! Wouldn't want to anger anyone by
breach of etiquette...

RW! pointing BILL IS POSTING FROM HIS EMPLOYER'S ACCOUNT!!

Sorry, Bill, but as part of the usenet police brigade, I felt it my duty
to point out your little faux pas. Letters have been written and are on
their way to your employers. It'll be a cold day in hell before you post
any of that Olde English poetry crap again. ;-)


That's actually part of the understanding I have with the university. My
usenet access remains switched on as long as I occasionally nag people on
grammar and post tidbits of poetry.

and you should see how he treats our emeritus faculty member!

--
chris
"my point? #@&*! you, that's my point." -- Bucky Katt

rw wrote:

Tim J. wrote:


I, for one, find it touching that you care so much about another's
disposition. Of course, that should be obvious. ;-)


I wouldn't shed a tear if Wolfgang got slammed because, frankly, he
almost deserves it. But my message is for everyone.

DON'T USE YOUR EMPLOYER'S ACCOUNT TO POST TO USENET!

This goes especially for people who get into controversial stuff, like
politics and insults and tippet size. :-) You can get into big trouble.
There are god-knows-how-many people reading this stuff, and the odds are
that at least one of them is nuts.


no...odds are there are at least two of us.

jeff

Willi wrote:



I don't think that will be happening anytime soon. Wolfgang has managed
to **** off quite a wide range of people that attend the Western Clave
including our esteemed Clave master. Although some have merely expressed
a dislike or feelings of pity for him, others have expressed downright
disgust and even hatred.

Willi


too bad... each to his/her own, though the "pity" thing is a real hoot.

jeff

Frank Reid wrote:

Good thing you don't hold any grudges... :)

As evidenced by the kind words directed at me in a.b.p.f. :-)

I'm done now.....just make sure you're fair in the future.....


Since I wasn't around during the dunking, you were nominated by IJ and
Jeffy. Because we only had two nominations (well, three, but the rules
committee vetoed one of them), you're inclusion was pretty much automatic.
Granted, the sit downs were nominal (as opposed to the winner's water
angel), but nominations, even nominal nomination, are not taken lightly by
the august body of the rules committee.


he not only deseved it, but he should get the sphincter necklace as
well. his cha-cha & deep knee bend pirouettes in the stream, followed
by his bump and dump on the stream bank was pure and chaplinesque. as
reids go, it was art and set a new standard.

jeff

"Jeff Miller" wrote in message
news:tiJte.26096$%Z2.6624@lakeread08...
Frank Reid wrote:

by his bump and dump on the stream bank was pure and chaplinesque. as
reids go, it was art and set a new standard.

jeff

CHAPLINESQUE !!!hELL THE GUY HAD MIXED OUR WATER BOTTLES WITH RUM AND
COKE---90% RUM AND 10% COKE
How else could you use a fifth of rum with three cokes? He is a much
better fisherman than a bartender
IJ

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:08:03 GMT, rw
wrote:

Tim J. wrote:

I, for one, find it touching that you care so much about another's
disposition. Of course, that should be obvious. ;-)

I wouldn't shed a tear if Wolfgang got slammed because, frankly, he
almost deserves it. But my message is for everyone.

DON'T USE YOUR EMPLOYER'S ACCOUNT TO POST TO USENET!

This goes especially for people who get into controversial stuff, like
politics and insults and tippet size. :-) You can get into big trouble.
There are god-knows-how-many people reading this stuff, and the odds are
that at least one of them is nuts.


I had one nutter who couldn't read headers complain to my ISP (also,
at that time, the company I was employed by) that I was forging
headers, since she was too effin' dumb to read quote marks. One of
the support people got all excited about it when he got the complaint,
so I wandered over and showed him exactly what she was dimwittedly
complaining about and how trivial it was. He was still concerned that
the bosses might have hysterics. I took in a printout of the
complaint, my posts, etc. to the bosses and one laughed with me and
the other said that it was all too trivial to bother him with and
asked me to find a recent contract, which he was worried about.

Most admins are pretty accustomed to nutters, as they've had long
experience in the ISPs and, before that, the BBS world.

If a concerted campaign started, they might advise using a separate
account from then on. Depends on the organization and the admin. A
small business could easily become upset at a barrage of complaints,
even going so far as to fire the employee 'responsible.' Most small
businesses have weird, if any, IT departments. It's unlikely an ISP
run by someone with long experience or an .edu would pay much
attention.

But it is a good precaution to have a separate posting / emailing
account most times. One can always get a Yahoo account or get a
dialup cheapie from home and use that address on all posts.

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)