Well Guys;

We got our "Bar Fight" Bar Slut and all!!!!
Stand back Scot, give Scout room, he's doing fine. He's got a guy named
Wally and the two of them are cleaning house,

So far the Slut's relatives have kept their heads down and on this third
day of April I haven't seen anything of CN?

"Thom Stewart" wrote


and on this third
day of April I haven't seen anything of CN?


Need to either check your eyeglasses or your WebTV, old boy!

Need to lose the obsession.

CN

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

Need to lose the obsession.

What Thom needs to lose his delusion of importance and weight his opinion
may carry.

He seems very full of himself lately.

CM

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message news:6EY3e.128248$ZO2.126259@edtnps84...

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

Need to lose the obsession.

What Thom needs to lose his delusion of importance and weight his opinion may carry.

He seems very full of himself lately.

CM

It's ironic that Thom confers upon you and I attributes which he is displaying in
spades lately. If he wasn't so strident and cocksure, I might think there is a method
to his madness.

Nah! He ain't that smart and he's not that good a writer. He's just losing his grip on
reality, I'm afraid. He needs our prayers. Senile dementia has as one of its onset
symptoms an inflation of importance and concern with self.

CN

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Well Guys;

We got our "Bar Fight" Bar Slut and all!!!!
Stand back Scot, give Scout room,

OK, I'll just stand back here behind these rum bottles.

Scotty

CN,

I thought sure you were tagged. I'm glad I was Wrong.

OT to the greatest man on the planet(G)

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

"John Cairns" wrote

snipped snippet worst part about the spoofs is they are definitely not
funny nor witty nor vaguely clever.

John Cairns

And you are?

John: Jerry Seinfeld
Neal: Al Gore

Max

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...



"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
John,

I do believe you will find a lot of the group agreeing with you about
the "whining baby"

Just wish I was sure it wasn't Neal posting from her 'puter.

I'm not sure his cruise isn't to Oklahoma rather than Bahamas.

Oh well, I'm proud of the way the Group stirred up BS and circulated
fresh air into the mess that a few created

Ole Thom


Seems to me YOU are the one always whining about something or
another lately, Thom. Ever hear the expression, "People who live
in glass houses should not throw stones?"

CN

With respect to the Unified Church of the Microwave Whiner, you are the
Pope, Neal.

Ever hear the expression, "Shrimp should not be kept in the cedar bucket in
which one ****s."? Probably not--I just made it up.

Max

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

Please consider again my post titled, "Demonstrably Stupid". The above
misguided folks define the term. They take a public stand against freedom
of speech.

Neither you nor Lady Pile It have responded to my queries: 1) is it free
speech to attribute to others that which you've said yourself, especially
when such attribution may injure the party to whom it is attributed? 2) is
anything anyone chooses to say protected under the auspices of the First
Amendment? (ie--can one yell "FIRE!" in a crowded venue?), and 3) shouldn't
illegal or illegitimate actions have consequences (a fundamental
conservative value)?

The concept of the netcop is nothing new. But it is a popular urban myth
that netcops are necessarily wrong or bad. Usenet started out many years
ago as a means of communication between engineers and scientists--a forum
for esoteric exchange between peers, as it were. Slowly and insidiously it
become corrupted by those who would use it for less enlightening purposes,
such as the myriad newsgroups that clog Usenet today. The engineers and
scientists attempted to put a halt to the nonsense and noise, but to no
avail. Their original NGs are all but extinct now, or at least so perverted
as to be worthless. So now we have thousands of generic NGs covering almost
as many topics as there are ideas, perverse or otherwise. Some are
worthwhile, but some are little more than an exercise in the arcane
mindlessness of the illogical. And any of them can be corrupted by the same
idiocy that corrupted the early iterations. Endless posting of the same
inane message--as we saw earlier this week here--is an example of how a NG
might be rendered useless. Posting BS under other's names is another.

It's doubtful a netcop can do much to stop the idiots. They are persistent,
as we've seen demonstrated by you. Get them kicked off a news server and
they'll be back in a day or so with a vengeance and a new ISP. Like flies
you can swat them all day, but they'll still be buzzing around your head at
day's end. So the netcop concept is an exercise in futility. But it isn't
necessarily wrong. Free speech has responsibilities and obligations. If I
stand on a street corner in your hometown with a bullhorn and proclaim for
all to hear that Neal Warren molests children every night on his boat and
may be a murderer, you'll probably sue me. If I anchor my boat next to
yours and scream in the bullhorn all hours of the night between 11pm and
7am, you'll have me arrested. A true conservative understands that free
speech is not an isolated concept, rather a guaranteed right with all the
attendant responsibility and accountability that a functional, orderly
society demands.

You're a juvenile whiner, Neal. You're no conservative. You may be a
redneck and a bigot, but you're not a conservative. A real conservative
would never question his responsibilities to his fellow citizens. You
simply don't give a **** about responsibilities to anyone beyond yourself.

Max

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

Please consider again my post titled, "Demonstrably Stupid". The above
misguided folks define the term. They take a public stand against freedom
of speech.

Neither you nor Lady Pile It have responded to my queries: 1) is it free
speech to attribute to others that which you've said yourself, especially
when such attribution may injure the party to whom it is attributed? 2) is
anything anyone chooses to say protected under the auspices of the First
Amendment? (ie--can one yell "FIRE!" in a crowded venue?), and 3) shouldn't
illegal or illegitimate actions have consequences (a fundamental
conservative value)?

The concept of the netcop is nothing new. But it is a popular urban myth
that netcops are necessarily wrong or bad. Usenet started out many years
ago as a means of communication between engineers and scientists--a forum
for esoteric exchange between peers, as it were. Slowly and insidiously it
become corrupted by those who would use it for less enlightening purposes,
such as the myriad newsgroups that clog Usenet today. The engineers and
scientists attempted to put a halt to the nonsense and noise, but to no
avail. Their original NGs are all but extinct now, or at least so perverted
as to be worthless. So now we have thousands of generic NGs covering almost
as many topics as there are ideas, perverse or otherwise. Some are
worthwhile, but some are little more than an exercise in the arcane
mindlessness of the illogical. And any of them can be corrupted by the same
idiocy that corrupted the early iterations. Endless posting of the same
inane message--as we saw earlier this week here--is an example of how a NG
might be rendered useless. Posting BS under other's names is another.

It's doubtful a netcop can do much to stop the idiots. They are persistent,
as we've seen demonstrated by you. Get them kicked off a news server and
they'll be back in a day or so with a vengeance and a new ISP. Like flies
you can swat them all day, but they'll still be buzzing around your head at
day's end. So the netcop concept is an exercise in futility. But it isn't
necessarily wrong. Free speech has responsibilities and obligations. If I
stand on a street corner in your hometown with a bullhorn and proclaim for
all to hear that Neal Warren molests children every night on his boat and
may be a murderer, you'll probably sue me. If I anchor my boat next to
yours and scream in the bullhorn all hours of the night between 11pm and
7am, you'll have me arrested. A true conservative understands that free
speech is not an isolated concept, rather a guaranteed right with all the
attendant responsibility and accountability that a functional, orderly
society demands.

You're a juvenile whiner, Neal. You're no conservative. You may be a
redneck and a bigot, but you're not a conservative. A real conservative
would never question his responsibilities to his fellow citizens. You
simply don't give a **** about responsibilities to anyone beyond yourself.

Max