I would have to disagree with you, my discussions with you have been issue
oriented,

What?!

Use this thread as an example. You won't have to look very far. Check out your
very *first* response. Ask yourself if it addressed the issue, or was personal
in nature.

PS who is my sidekick?

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Gould,
Wasn't that you who was complaining about those who cut and pasted
articles
in rec.boats?


Yes, I have criticized Harry, NOYB, Fritz, and others for this practice.
Some
posters here seem to have nothing original to contribute.
My rare use of a CNP doesn't sum up my participation.

The item in question did not appear in every major newspaper across the
country, as most CnP's hve done.

Go back and examine your own posts. You don't CNP, but if you want to
define
style of participation you will find a consistent theme of atempting to
divert
nearly every discussion to a question of personalities, rather than
issues.

Exactly like your sidekick- you are only critical of liberal cut 'n paste.
Get
back to me when you've criticized some conservatives, just as I have been
critical of Harry for excessive CnP.

PS who is my sidekick?

Almost without exception, each time you make a personally critical remark JimH
(aka Dennis Compton) chimes in with "yeah, that goes for me too! LOL"

Funny how everybody has been overlooking a whopping great lie of a couple years
ago, "I'm a university student studying pyschology and harrassing rec.boats has
been my class assignment". Funnier yet how that same person dares to be
critical of others for making unsupportable claims.

I must have missed that one, who is a university student studying psychology
and how is that relevant?


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
PS who is my sidekick?

Almost without exception, each time you make a personally critical remark
JimH
(aka Dennis Compton) chimes in with "yeah, that goes for me too! LOL"

Funny how everybody has been overlooking a whopping great lie of a couple
years
ago, "I'm a university student studying pyschology and harrassing
rec.boats has
been my class assignment". Funnier yet how that same person dares to be
critical of others for making unsupportable claims.

I must have missed that one, who is a university student studying psychology
and how is that relevant?

Then my subtlety was effective. The party involved, if he or she reads this
thread, gets the message.

The point is that *nobody* proved to be, as claimed, a university student
studying psychology. It is marginally relevant to a discussion of sidekicks.
Those who were here at the time are fully aware of the situation I refer to.
Those who came after the events in question don't need to have their
perceptions of a currently active poster negatively effected by something that
person probably now regrets and would take off of Google if he or she could.

Jim's name is Jim Hertvik. It's important to use that name. It's Jim
Hertvik even when he claimed it was his "son Jeff" who logged onto his
account to make mischief, as Hertvik claimed a few years ago.

It's not important to use Jim's full name.
Unlike some of the more slippery (ashamed?) participants he does at least stick
to the same handle for extended periods of time. His rec.boats name is JimH,
and it passes the most important test in that it is consistent.