If you are stimulated by new ideas and if you can think for yourself
rather than simply accept what rec.boats.cruising dishes out, I think
you will find this post of interest. One of the first facts we should
face is that I find none of rec.boats.cruising's lame posts to be mine.
For example, I would have substituted "mentally deficient" for
"dendrochronological" and "muddleheaded" for "roentgenographically."
What rec.boats.cruising is incapable of seeing is that this makes me
fearful that I might someday find myself in the crosshairs of its tawdry
jabs. (To be honest, though, it wouldn't be the first time.) I can
reword my point as follows. In order to maintain harmony with my
conscience I must fight the good fight.

Although this has been overlooked or ignored by the established Usenet
community, if rec.boats.cruising can one day enshrine irrational fears
and fancies as truth, then the long descent into night is sure to
follow. Rec.boats.cruising's posts will have consequences -- very
serious consequences. And we ought to begin doing something about that.
At the risk of shocking you further, I shall point out that I, not being
one of the many execrable alarmists of this world, don't want to build
castles in the air. I don't want to plan things that I can't yet
implement. But I do want to speak out against behavior and speech that
is intended to undermine serious discussion and cruising topic analyses
and replace them with a diverting soap opera of polyloquent, covinous
idiocy because doing so clearly demonstrates how it commonly raises
ineffective people to honored positions. It then ensures that these
people stay in those positions because that makes it easy for it to
muster enough force to throw away our freedom, our honor, and our
future. It has been brought to my attention that rec.boats.cruising
advertises its hypocritical morality solely to shift attention away from
its many vices. While this is certainly true, contrary to my personal
preferences, I'm thinking about what's best for all of us. My conclusion
is that what's best for all of us is for me to tell you how it is vs.
how it should be.

Don't let yourself be persuaded by self-satisfied, merciless nudniks who
secretly want to silence critical debate and squelch creative
brainstorming. The doom-and-gloom, it's-too-late, censorship, killfile,
netnanny crowd always plays right into rec.boats.cruising's hands. But
you knew that already. So let me add that rec.boats.cruising frequently
avers its support of democracy and its love of freedom of speech but
often acts the complete opposite. But one need only look at what
rec.boats.cruising is doing -- as opposed to what it is saying -- to
understand its true aims. If you've ever watched television or read a
book, odds are that you already know that rec.boats.cruising is
absolutely useless.

Because we continue to share a common, albeit abused, atmospheric
envelope, it's really not bloody-mindedness that compels me to throw
down the gauntlet and challenge rec.boats.cruising's janissaries to find
the common ground that enables others to halt the adulation heaped upon
the most sophomoric pests you'll ever see. Peggie Hall comes to mind
when discussing this. It's my sense of responsibility to you, the
reader. I'm not a superficial person. I'd like nothing more than to
extend my hand in friendship to rec.boats.cruising's subscribers and
convey my hope that in the days to come we can work together to further
knowledge like a rising star beyond the utmost bound of human thought.
Unfortunately, knowing your propensities, I realize you'd rather
redefine unbridled self-indulgence as a virtue, as the ultimate test of
personal censorship, because that's what rec.boats.cruising wants.

For all of the foregoing reasons, I can confidently claim that
rec.boats.cruising's faculty for deception is lame at best, it really
must be considered different in kind as well as in degree. Hard as some
of you try it is evident your knowledge of boats is severely lacking
Either rec.boats.cruising has no real conception of the what cruising is
all about, or it is merely intent on winning some debating pin by trying
to pierce a hole in my logic with "fiction" that's taken out of context.
Rec.boats.cruising thinks it has answers to everything. I wish I could
suggest some incontrovertible chain of apodictic reasoning that would
overcome this misconception, but the best I can do is the following: I
don't believe that it is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted.
So when rec.boats.cruising says that it's trolling when it is just a
different opinion it defines the stunted ability to understand different
views should be embraced to further understanding rather than be
squelched because it makes somebody uncomfortable knowing what they hold
as fact may, indeed be fiction, I see how little it understands my
position. Rec.boats.cruising uses the word "mechanicocorpuscular"
without ever having taken the time to look it up in the dictionary.
Newsgroups that are too lazy to get their basic terms right should be
ignored, not debated. While this post hasn't provided anything in the
way of a concrete plan of action, it may help us focus our thinking a
little better so we can work out a plan. For now, we must carve
solutions that are neither fatuous nor sick. The very first goal on the
agenda must be a sincere desire to embrace open-mindedness and truth.
Step number one is to admit pretending isn't reality. So stop pretending
you cruise and admit you only talk about it.

Wilbur Hubbard