"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
s.com...
On Oct 24, 10:29?am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 24, 10:10?am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Oct 24, 8:43?am, "DANCING WITH THE LOSERS"
wrote:
"JoeSpareBedroom" aka Doug Kanter wrote in
... I asked you
yesterday to list the various professions in YOUR family. No
answer yet. Why are you ashamed to tell us?
Did you tell everyone that you're a grocery store clerk, and your
son
stays
stoned 24/7, Doug Kanter errr Joe?
I thought not!
At lest you can show them your dancing skills!
http://www.jibjab.com/starring_you/receipt/984147
http://www.jibjab.com/starring_you/receipt/1493891
--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
Dancing with the losers? I can't imagine a bigger loser than some
clown who follows people around newsgroups just to plague him or her
with attack posts.
We have quite a few of those here as "regulars."- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Not as many as there were at one time.
Other regulars seem to have made some personal adjustments and there
is a less encouraging environment for this type of stuff. People who
used to scrap very bitterly over even the tiniest issues now more
commonly comminicate in a polite manner. Everybody wins when nobody
cares who "wins".
Notice how juvenile something like an attack post really looks when
it's
an anomaly and not the primary theme of the group? Amazing, IMO.
This one was apparently a reaction to something unbelievably silly:
There
was a discussion about how toxic chemicals might affect children. That
was
followed by the mention of a pediatrician telling me about data on kids
with
abnormal levels of something in their bodies. The response:
"And I told you your pediatrician is probably an idiot. An appeal to
authority works only if the "authority" IS an authority. Pediatricans (in
general) are more driven by emotion and political correctness than
objective
fact."
I suspect the OP is one and the same person. Is that surprising?- Hide
quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Doug, this is another example of why it might be a good reason to edit
your "send to" line down to include only the group(s) where a
discussion is relevant.
Chuck, there are only two ways my messages ever end up in more than one NG.
1) Very ra A technical question that actually belongs in two newsgroups,
usually computer related.
2) I respond to a message without noticing that someone else has addressed
it to multiple groups. I don't check. I doubt many people do unless it
becomes an issue. The aforementioned discussion was NOT addressed to
multiple groups.