Jim Cate wrote:

katysails wrote:

Jim, still not gettingIf I'm that stupid and my notes are that
insignificant, why is
this discussion string the most extensive on the ng,

SHADES OF LONG ISLANDWE HAVE A MACKEREL!!!!!!!!


But why are you wasting your time in this discussion, if what I'm saying
is that insignificant and doesn't have an element of truth?


Jim, you keep asking this question in one form or another, so it
appears you don't really see the answer. As I'm a kind and
generous soul, much more so than the rest of these
bottom-dwellers here, here's a bit of help for you.

This newsgroup has been notable for years in its exercise of
virtual cruelty, especially on the innocent, to the point where
even the FAQs are full of dire warnings. The cruellest of the
virtual cruelties is, of course, the goading of the
uncomprehending. When such goading has been done expertly, these
sadists can sit back, and apply only the lightest of touches,
while the suffering goad themselves into increasing frenzy, in an
almost self-perpetuating cycle, providing hours of entertainment
for the watchers, for minimal effort on their part. Do you now
see why most of the regulars in this group are here "wasting
their time in this discussion?"
--
Flying Tadpole

-------------------------
Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace!
http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com

COmpulsory sailing content
The Light Schooner http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/index.htm
SquareBoats! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sbhome.htm
Bolger Boats netted! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm

Flying Tadpole wrote:

Do you now
see why most of the regulars in this group are here "wasting
their time in this discussion?"


Jeeze Taddy! Why do you have to spoil our fun, you bucking for
the Mother Theresa award?

Cheers
Marty

"Flying Tadpole" wrote in message
...


Jim Cate wrote:

katysails wrote:

Jim, still not gettingIf I'm that stupid and my notes are that
insignificant, why is
this discussion string the most extensive on the ng,

SHADES OF LONG ISLANDWE HAVE A MACKEREL!!!!!!!!


But why are you wasting your time in this discussion, if what I'm saying
is that insignificant and doesn't have an element of truth?


Jim, you keep asking this question in one form or another, so it
appears you don't really see the answer. As I'm a kind and
generous soul, much more so than the rest of these
bottom-dwellers here, here's a bit of help for you.

This newsgroup has been notable for years in its exercise of
virtual cruelty, especially on the innocent, to the point where
even the FAQs are full of dire warnings. The cruellest of the
virtual cruelties is, of course, the goading of the
uncomprehending. When such goading has been done expertly, these
sadists can sit back, and apply only the lightest of touches,
while the suffering goad themselves into increasing frenzy, in an
almost self-perpetuating cycle, providing hours of entertainment
for the watchers, for minimal effort on their part. Do you now
see why most of the regulars in this group are here "wasting
their time in this discussion?"
--
Flying Tadpole

-------------------------
Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace!
http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com

COmpulsory sailing content
The Light Schooner http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/index.htm
SquareBoats! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sbhome.htm
Bolger Boats netted! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm

Tadpole, I don't think this guy is an innocent. Either he's a troll or he's
pimping for mac, no one could possibly be this gullible or stupid. He quotes
mac sales literature like it came from a burning bush. It was slightly
entertaining for a while but I notice when his statements get taken apart
like an overdone piece of chicken, he doesn't respond. I would guess he's a
pimp.
John Cairns

John Cairns wrote:


Tadpole, I don't think this guy is an innocent. Either he's a troll or he's
pimping for mac, no one could possibly be this gullible or stupid. He quotes
mac sales literature like it came from a burning bush. It was slightly
entertaining for a while but I notice when his statements get taken apart
like an overdone piece of chicken, he doesn't respond. I would guess he's a
pimp.
John Cairns

Well, I'm kind and generous, like I said, and I feel that even
the lowest should be given their chance to redeem themselves.
Besides, it _could_ have been Bobsprit trying out another script,
and if so, deserving of applause for the longest troll for a long
time, in which all have enjoyed themselves.

But given the non-responses, you may be right, and Jim the Deafer
is just a chicken past-its-date, going down. OTOH, would even a
Macgregor pimp suggst taking a Mac 100 miles off-shore???

--
Flying Tadpole

-------------------------
Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace!
http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com

Flying Tadpole wrote:


Jim Cate wrote:

katysails wrote:


Jim, still not gettingIf I'm that stupid and my notes are that
insignificant, why is
this discussion string the most extensive on the ng,

SHADES OF LONG ISLANDWE HAVE A MACKEREL!!!!!!!!


But why are you wasting your time in this discussion, if what I'm saying
is that insignificant and doesn't have an element of truth?



Jim, you keep asking this question in one form or another, so it
appears you don't really see the answer. As I'm a kind and
generous soul, much more so than the rest of these
bottom-dwellers here, here's a bit of help for you.

This newsgroup has been notable for years in its exercise of
virtual cruelty, especially on the innocent, to the point where
even the FAQs are full of dire warnings. The cruellest of the
virtual cruelties is, of course, the goading of the
uncomprehending. When such goading has been done expertly, these
sadists can sit back, and apply only the lightest of touches,
while the suffering goad themselves into increasing frenzy, in an
almost self-perpetuating cycle, providing hours of entertainment
for the watchers, for minimal effort on their part. Do you now
see why most of the regulars in this group are here "wasting
their time in this discussion?"

Tadpole,

Thanks for your heads-up. Actually, I knew what I was getting into when
I decided to defend the Macs on this ng, since this group has been
bashing them for a number of years.

Jim

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...
Tadpole,

Thanks for your heads-up. Actually, I knew what I was getting into when
I decided to defend the Macs on this ng, since this group has been
bashing them for a number of years.

Jim

You need to try a google search, we don't spend our time bashing macs, we
try to limit our discussion to sailing and sailboats, which naturally would
exclude macs. Occasionally, someone comes a trolling, lauding the merits of
macs, we educate them. We weren't talking about macs until you showed up, we
won't be talking about them after you leave. And one last thing, if you
thought your mac was as good a boat as you claim it is, you wouldn't feel
the need to convince us, remembering, we didn't ask you for your opinion on
the subject, you asked for ours.
John Cairns

That's right. We only bash them infrequently. The rest of the
time we ignore them.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"John Cairns" wrote in message
...

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...
Tadpole,

Thanks for your heads-up. Actually, I knew what I was getting into when
I decided to defend the Macs on this ng, since this group has been
bashing them for a number of years.

Jim

You need to try a google search, we don't spend our time bashing macs, we
try to limit our discussion to sailing and sailboats, which naturally
would
exclude macs. Occasionally, someone comes a trolling, lauding the merits
of
macs, we educate them. We weren't talking about macs until you showed up,
we
won't be talking about them after you leave. And one last thing, if you
thought your mac was as good a boat as you claim it is, you wouldn't feel
the need to convince us, remembering, we didn't ask you for your opinion
on
the subject, you asked for ours.
John Cairns

John Cairns wrote:

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...

Tadpole,

Thanks for your heads-up. Actually, I knew what I was getting into when
I decided to defend the Macs on this ng, since this group has been
bashing them for a number of years.

Jim


You need to try a google search, we don't spend our time bashing macs, we
try to limit our discussion to sailing and sailboats, which naturally would
exclude macs. Occasionally, someone comes a trolling, lauding the merits of
macs, we educate them.

Correction. You brainwash them, and drive them off.



We weren't talking about macs until you showed up, we
won't be talking about them after you leave. And one last thing, if you
thought your mac was as good a boat as you claim it is, you wouldn't feel
the need to convince us, remembering, we didn't ask you for your opinion on
the subject, you asked for ours.
John Cairns


Remember that I posted notes discussing several boats other than the
Mac, but they were of far less interest to the group. It's true that I
introduced this subject. (It's also true that no one has to read or
contribute to it.) But with over 600 notes posted under this topic
alone, not including the other Mac-related discussions, its obvious that
some on the ng are interested in it. And it's obvioiusly getting under
their skin. Being exposed to new truth that goes against tradition, and
questions what was considered sacred dogma can be painful, but its
ultimately good for the soul.

Jim