"John H" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 13:21:46 -0400, "JimH" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 20:57:31 -0400, "JimH" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 17:38:56 -0400, "JimH" wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/4jno9


That was not nice, Jim. Funny, though!

Are you spamming candy bars now? Shame on ya!
--
John H



I am indeed spamming candy bars....sorry.

Remind me though.....even though I had a tour of the factories, and
their
products are consumed on boats, did I write a fluff article about the
product and include the manufacturers name, number and email address
here
in
this NG? Sorry if I forgot to do so because I own some stock in Mars
Bars
(the tastiest candy this side of the moon) and my brother in law has
part
ownership in the M&M's company who also produce the snickers, m&m,
skittles
and starburst candies. I would definitely run into some cash residuals
if
I
did.

Now for a serious question.......Considering that candy is eaten while
on
a
boat, including M&M products, should candy bar and boat manufacturer
spamming now be allowed here? I really do love Mars bars. ;-)

BTW: If you want to buy a franchise click he http://www.mms.com/

Ask for Frank, my brother. ;-)


I'd be careful with candy bars and boats. If you dropped a Snickers
overboard,
and the Coast Guard was near, that would sure appear to be a 'raw
sewage
dumping' violation!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

You are thinking of a Baby Ruth bar.....like in Caddy Shack...not
Snickers.

Snickers satisfies but does not pollute. ;-)


I *think* I meant 'Peter Paul Mounds'!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

Baby Ruth was the candy in the classic scene in Caddy Shack. Looks more
real than a mounds bar.
;-)