Gould 0738 wrote:
What set you off, again, Karen Smith?

Your endless OT political posts!!!


Fair enough. Shall we expect the same abuse to be aimed at all the other people
who posted OT here, or are some of us particularly deserving targets because
our politics don't suit your own?

MY politics have nothing to do with anything, this is a boating NG, so
if you & about 3 others just stop actually starting OT threads, then the
rest will go away.



Are personal attacks more on-topic than political debates?

The personal attacks you complain of are on topic:-) you are a spammer,
what about the heater spam the other day??? You see yourself as someone
you are not Chuck, you are a big OT poster, I've made an effort to
comply with the truce instituted after your election, but you & a few
others seem to have used the hiatus as an opportunity to ramp up the OT
threads.


Logical question, however: if your bitch is with political posts, why do you
conjure up weird accusations in on-topic threads?

Again if you feel I'm out of line then defend yourself, I can & will
point to your deceptive spam I can & will point to your OT threads, if
you wish I'll even point to your abuse.

Why would you begin attacking me in a thread before I had even made a single
statement on the subject?

Why?? I need your permission??? I ask why would you continually start
OT political threads?? at least my comments are on topic.


Would you prefer that I give up posting on-topic altogether?

Only the off topic stuff I can & have over time learned to live with
your parroting of deceptive marketing spam & have even learned to
tolerate some of your other views (white suburbs indeed that still
takes some topping)


To split a very tiny

hair, the boat capsized, rather than sank, but that's no less a disaster.

If you actually knew anything about boats of that type, you'd know they


nearly always roll over once there's some real water aboard.


And if you knew from shoeshine, you'd know there's a difference between sinking
and capsizing. In a boat of any type. As I said, a capsizing is no less a
disaster.

In the context you were trying to spin it that the boat got rolled over
on the bar, it didn't the owner was clear it was taking water, once they
get a bit in them they roll over, indeed save a well managed dead calm
deceptive marketing demonstration they will not remain upright when flooded.


Here's some help for you. From Lenfesty's
"The Sailor's Illustrated Dictionary", (available at a fine nautical bookstore
near you for $24.95 US grin)

Capsize: (n) 1. To tun over. Most commonly it means the inadvertant turning
over of a boat. To capsize an oil drum is to turn it over, usually to gain
access to the bung.......2. A knot which changes its structure under strain is
said to capsize.

I must say I get a giggle when you tell us about "English":-) that's funny.

The boat rolled over as the inevitable "consequence" of taking on water
from a leak (it seems around the transom area but....????), it was not
the "inadvertent turning over of a boat".


Lenfesty doesn't even have an entry for "sink", it's so commonly understood.
Merriam-Webster confirms that the most common understanding for the word "sink"
is "To go to the bottom."

If not towed in promptly that boat would have sunk. Even much larger
boats can linger in an inverted position as part of the sinking process.


The fact that the creator of the "Give me a free boat, all my money back, maybe
both, and then I'll take down this damaging, one-side-of-the-story website,"
doesn't know the difference between sinking and capsizing, either, might
indicate that some of the other facts in the story could be less than accurate
as well.

So please paste where you got this from, you have no idea do you??? I
bet he was upset I bet even a bit unreasonable, so what??? the dealer
should have helped, it wouldn't have compromised the dealer indeed could
only have helped all concerned.


I'll now hold my breath while you castigate several other regular posters who
*have* directly challenged the website author's apparent lack of discerning
consumerism in purchashing a highly modified, 14 year old boat, (possibly
without survey), in the first place. That will be me in the corner of your
monitor, turning a suitable shade of blue.

You still don't get it do you, the boat filled with water that may or
may not be down to the manufacturer, the dealer, the boats age, boat's
prior accidents, weather & yes the owner, but the dealer dumping him
when he needed them is typical.



The owner bought it comparatively recently from one of your mates, when
he got into trouble for whatever reason(s) your dealers just dumped him,
that's the complaint & good on him for telling us about it.


I wonder if this is the first time he used the boat following purchase. If not,
what type of damage may have possibly occured after the 14 year-old used boat
was sold and the day of the capsize? Should the dealer offer free lifetime
repairs, or vessel replacement, to purchasers who buy a used boat "As Is" and
then (perhaps) run it aground or damage it while launching at a later date?

Chuck please try to stop a second, all that might be right but the
dealer just leaving him unsupported isn't.

He's unhappy & I support him telling us about it, after all you happily
regurgitate deceptive dealer sales pitches all the time here, a bit of
comes around is welcome.


Neither of us knows all the facts. I speculate there are things that *could*
have happened, but you applaud the damning website, say it's entirely the used
boat dealer's fault in any event, that a dealership you're not acquainted with
is a lousy place to do business, and that anybody else connected with the
marine industry is equally a piece of crap.

Which of us is being more reasonable, would you think?

Me:-)

K

MY politics have nothing to do with anything, this is a boating NG, so
if you & about 3 others just stop actually starting OT threads, then the
rest will go away.

There are over 20 posters who start OT threads in the NG, most of them *start*
more OT threads than I, and I'm surely not in 4th place. If 3 of the 20 posters
cease and desist, the other 17 will just dry up and blow away? Remember my
90-day experiment last spring? I ducked out of the NG entirely for 90 days, and
when I returned the situation was *worse* than when I left. Don't hand me some
crap about being the cause of 1/3 or 1/4 of the OT posts.

Fact is, you don't like me much. No big deal. I don't care a lot for you,
either. One of us doesn't make a habit of seeking out the other to make
unprovoked personal attacks. Which of us do you suppose that would be?

The personal attacks you complain of are on topic:-) you are a spammer,
what about the heater spam the other day??? You see yourself as someone
you are not Chuck, you are a big OT poster, I've made an effort to
comply with the truce instituted after your election, but you & a few
others seem to have used the hiatus as an opportunity to ramp up the OT
threads.

You weren't heard from for *months* before the election. Do an experiment. Go
to Google and check the participation in OT threads since the election. Then
reconsider your statement.

How is a report detailing the process of installing a diesel heater in a boat,
"spam"? Because I mentioned the name of the manufacturer of the product? That's
actually an important part of the story, as the DIY kit is, AFIK, unique to
that company.

While in Google, run a search on Karen Smith and "spam". Go back many, many,
years. Extremely revealing.


Logical question, however: if your bitch is with political posts, why do
you
conjure up weird accusations in on-topic threads?

Again if you feel I'm out of line then defend yourself, I can & will
point to your deceptive spam I can & will point to your OT threads, if
you wish I'll even point to your abuse.

You miss the point, Karen. If I "defend" myself, then this thread ceases to be
about this incident with the Grady White and its comparison to Boston Whaler.
It becomes OT. Ask yourself who chose to take it there? Did I toss in some
unprovoked, snide personal comments, or did you?

If you want to complain about an OT thread, do so within the context of that
thread. Chasing somebody around the NG yelling "OT Spammer!" in threads where
that party is neither posting OT nor doing any "spamming" under even the most
inclusive standards doesn't contribute to the discussion of the subject matter-
the very thing you are (supposedly) so chuffed about that after several months
of NG silence you can no longer control yourself and your present "targets"
here are no different than your previous.

Why would you begin attacking me in a thread before I had even made a
single
statement on the subject?

Why?? I need your permission???

No, Karen. You don't need my permission.
You are free to behave as badly as you choose, no permission needed.
Deliberately trolling for a fight makes the NG more OT, not more on-topic.

Would you prefer that I give up posting on-topic altogether?

Only the off topic stuff I can & have over time learned to live with
your parroting of deceptive marketing spam & have even learned to
tolerate some of your other views (white suburbs indeed that still
takes some topping)

Well in that case, here's a clue for you:
Blasting anybody engaged in a behavior you have "learned to tolerate" (big of
you, thanks), like my on-topic posting does nothing to encourage that tolerable
activity.
Odd that you haven't said "squeak" in any of the OT threads, but choose to deal
with it after months, and months, by blasting my participation in the on-topic
subjects, isn't it?



In the context you were trying to spin it that the boat got rolled over
on the bar,

Sure hope you never make it to jury duty when I'm on trial. :-) I said that
such was among the "possibilities". If you were jury foreman and the
prosecution said, "We have evidence that Gould was somewhere in the same state
when the crime was committed," I'd be doing life without parole. :-)


I must say I get a giggle when you tell us about "English":-) that's funny.

When you're done laughing, perhaps you'll educate this professional writer by
offering a brief explanation of just how "capsize" is synonymous with "sink"?


The boat rolled over as the inevitable "consequence" of taking on water
from a leak (it seems around the transom area but....????), it was not
the "inadvertent turning over of a boat".

If the turning over was deliberate, where's the website author's gripe?

If not towed in promptly that boat would have sunk. Even much larger
boats can linger in an inverted position as part of the sinking process.

Very likely. However, the title of the blackmail site is "My boat sank," not
"There's a high probability my boat would have gone to the bottom if help
hadn't arrived when it did." Sensationalism vs. fact. Does that qualify as
"spam"?

So please paste where you got this from, you have no idea do you???

You must be new. You don't recall the long list of websites in this tradition?
Think of the guy who accepted (for a discount) a transport damaged, underrated
Panda generator and then tried to run it 24/7. Remember the couple on the SF
Delta who had a misplumbed live well in their brand new boat, left a secure
mooring
to set back off across the bay in a boat known to be taking on a large quantity
of water, and then blasted the salesperson for suggesting they bring the boat
back to the dealership and "putting us in danger."?
Nearly all of these sites are economically motivated, hoping to use bad
publicity where logical argument and examination of facts have not produced a
favorable outcome for the consumer. I'll bet you a Washington apple to an
Australian whatever that if Grady White gives the guy a new boat, or the dealer
refunds the purchase price of the boat he bought, the site will disappear in a
heartbeart.

The poster who submitted this to rec.boats has never posted anything here,
AFAIK. He composed his one-sided website, omitted any facts or circumstances
not damaging to the manufacturer or the dealer, and probably posted it
everywhere the internet has any boating content what so ever.

You still don't get it do you, the boat filled with water that may or
may not be down to the manufacturer, the dealer, the boats age, boat's
prior accidents, weather & yes the owner, but the dealer dumping him
when he needed them is typical.

What would you consider an "acceptable" response from the dealer?

Chuck please try to stop a second, all that might be right but the
dealer just leaving him unsupported isn't.

What would you consider an "acceptable" response from the dealer? As I
remember, the creator of the website doesn't really detail what the dealer's
response was, or wasn't, just that he thought he was given the brush off. I
will not believe that he called the dealership and was simply told to go screw
himself, not our problem, etc.

These "I'll get you!" websites more often than not result from a vendor failing
to meet every last expectation, reasonable or not, of a consumer with a
problem.

Neither of us knows all the facts. I speculate there are things that
*could*
have happened, but you applaud the damning website, say it's entirely the
used
boat dealer's fault in any event, that a dealership you're not acquainted
with
is a lousy place to do business, and that anybody else connected with the
marine industry is equally a piece of crap.

Which of us is being more reasonable, would you think?

Me:-)


Well, at least you had the decency not to protest my summary of your position.
I'll hand you that.


Really support our troops. Join "Soldiers for The Truth". http://www.sftt.org/

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...

Really support our troops. Join "Soldiers for The Truth".
http://www.sftt.org/


Awesome link, Chuck! I especially liked the Fallujah 11/22/04 Update. The
"terrorists" (aka--insurgents) were fighting from (or storing arms in) 60%
of the Mosques in Fallujah. That (plus the fact that they are not wearing
an identifiable uniform, and are playing dead and then shooting our troops)
makes them "unlawful combatants"...which means they're not entitled to the
protections provided under the Geneva Convention. In fact, if you read one
of the captions " Under international law the improper use of privileged
buildings to include churches and mosques, is a war crime".

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 17:56:06 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Awesome link, Chuck! I especially liked the Fallujah 11/22/04 Update.
The "terrorists" (aka--insurgents) were fighting from (or storing arms in)
60% of the Mosques in Fallujah. That (plus the fact that they are not
wearing an identifiable uniform, and are playing dead and then shooting
our troops) makes them "unlawful combatants"...which means they're not
entitled to the protections provided under the Geneva Convention.

Repeating this over and over, does not make it true. "Unlawful
combatants" *are* protected under the Geneva Conventions. It is true that
they may not be afforded "prisoner of war" status, but they are protected.

http://www.ciss.ca/Comment_GulfWarPOWs.htm

In
fact, if you read one of the captions " Under international law the
improper use of privileged buildings to include churches and mosques, is a
war crime".

Gould 0738 wrote:
MY politics have nothing to do with anything, this is a boating NG, so
if you & about 3 others just stop actually starting OT threads, then the
rest will go away.


There are over 20 posters who start OT threads in the NG, most of them *start*
more OT threads than I, and I'm surely not in 4th place. If 3 of the 20 posters
cease and desist, the other 17 will just dry up and blow away? Remember my
90-day experiment last spring? I ducked out of the NG entirely for 90 days, and
when I returned the situation was *worse* than when I left. Don't hand me some
crap about being the cause of 1/3 or 1/4 of the OT posts.

Damn a long one here we go:-)

Chuck after the elections it was hoped you, jps etc & you know who
might at least accept the outcome & cut it back you haven't; if anything
you've gotten worse.


Fact is, you don't like me much. No big deal. I don't care a lot for you,
either. One of us doesn't make a habit of seeking out the other to make
unprovoked personal attacks. Which of us do you suppose that would be?

It's me:-) & expect I'll continue as long as you continue OT political
stuff, so we have a deal yes??



The personal attacks you complain of are on topic:-) you are a spammer,
what about the heater spam the other day??? You see yourself as someone
you are not Chuck, you are a big OT poster, I've made an effort to
comply with the truce instituted after your election, but you & a few
others seem to have used the hiatus as an opportunity to ramp up the OT
threads.


You weren't heard from for *months* before the election. Do an experiment. Go
to Google and check the participation in OT threads since the election. Then
reconsider your statement.

I gave up just as I did before your last election when Gore lost:-)
this NG is ruined by a few OT posters, you & Krause being the main players.


How is a report detailing the process of installing a diesel heater in a boat,
"spam"? Because I mentioned the name of the manufacturer of the product? That's
actually an important part of the story, as the DIY kit is, AFIK, unique to
that company.

Come on chuckles it was a paid advertisement!! you got the heater cheap
I take it in exchange for spamming us??? Nice one Chuckles.


While in Google, run a search on Karen Smith and "spam". Go back many, many,
years. Extremely revealing.

Gee me selling anything at all??? If there are so many you'll have no
trouble pasting at least what say 3 examples??? go for it; if you can
I'll put my hands up to that, but I doubt you will.




Logical question, however: if your bitch is with political posts, why do

you

conjure up weird accusations in on-topic threads?

Again if you feel I'm out of line then defend yourself, I can & will
point to your deceptive spam I can & will point to your OT threads, if
you wish I'll even point to your abuse.


You miss the point, Karen. If I "defend" myself, then this thread ceases to be
about this incident with the Grady White and its comparison to Boston Whaler.
It becomes OT. Ask yourself who chose to take it there? Did I toss in some
unprovoked, snide personal comments, or did you?

You really are up yourself chucky, chuckys in love with chucky. I don't
need your permission or acceptance of anything I say or don't say. You
are a political OT & spam poster, so as far as I'm concerned fair game
in any circumstances.


If you want to complain about an OT thread, do so within the context of that
thread. Chasing somebody around the NG yelling "OT Spammer!" in threads where
that party is neither posting OT nor doing any "spamming" under even the most
inclusive standards doesn't contribute to the discussion of the subject matter-
the very thing you are (supposedly) so chuffed about that after several months
of NG silence you can no longer control yourself and your present "targets"
here are no different than your previous.

Get this the OT spammer now says he can set the rules for complaining
about his OT & spam??? Not likely, the best I can do is when I feel so
inclined lob a grenade your way & I do & I will.


Why would you begin attacking me in a thread before I had even made a

single

statement on the subject?

Why?? I need your permission???


No, Karen. You don't need my permission.
You are free to behave as badly as you choose, no permission needed.
Deliberately trolling for a fight makes the NG more OT, not more on-topic.

Well thanks I chose to behave against OT spammers, you chose to be an
OT spammer, there we have it.


Would you prefer that I give up posting on-topic altogether?

Only the off topic stuff I can & have over time learned to live with
your parroting of deceptive marketing spam & have even learned to
tolerate some of your other views (white suburbs indeed that still
takes some topping)


Well in that case, here's a clue for you:
Blasting anybody engaged in a behavior you have "learned to tolerate" (big of
you, thanks), like my on-topic posting does nothing to encourage that tolerable
activity.
Odd that you haven't said "squeak" in any of the OT threads, but choose to deal
with it after months, and months, by blasting my participation in the on-topic
subjects, isn't it?

I've seen what happens to the huge number of people who have politely
asked you to stop it, you Chuck, that's you personally, set upon them.
No thanks we all handle things our own way, mine it to point out you are
an OT spammer, an ex used car salesman & ex boat broker (people can make
their own minds up about that), know little about boats as demonstrated
from your continual parroting of spam fed to you by dealers.




In the context you were trying to spin it that the boat got rolled over
on the bar,


Sure hope you never make it to jury duty when I'm on trial. :-)

You should too I'm against the death penalty in any circumstance but if
it were say parking in a no spam area, you'd be a lifer for sure.

I said that
such was among the "possibilities". If you were jury foreman and the
prosecution said, "We have evidence that Gould was somewhere in the same state
when the crime was committed," I'd be doing life without parole. :-)

Yep, even without evidence, if it meant you could no longer start
political OT threads & spam in this NG.



I must say I get a giggle when you tell us about "English":-) that's funny.


When you're done laughing, perhaps you'll educate this professional writer by
offering a brief explanation of just how "capsize" is synonymous with "sink"?



The boat rolled over as the inevitable "consequence" of taking on water

from a leak (it seems around the transom area but....????), it was not

the "inadvertent turning over of a boat".


If the turning over was deliberate, where's the website author's gripe?


If not towed in promptly that boat would have sunk. Even much larger
boats can linger in an inverted position as part of the sinking process.


Very likely. However, the title of the blackmail site is "My boat sank," not
"There's a high probability my boat would have gone to the bottom if help
hadn't arrived when it did." Sensationalism vs. fact. Does that qualify as
"spam"?


So please paste where you got this from, you have no idea do you???


You must be new. You don't recall the long list of websites in this tradition?
Think of the guy who accepted (for a discount) a transport damaged, underrated
Panda generator and then tried to run it 24/7. Remember the couple on the SF
Delta who had a misplumbed live well in their brand new boat, left a secure
mooring
to set back off across the bay in a boat known to be taking on a large quantity
of water, and then blasted the salesperson for suggesting they bring the boat
back to the dealership and "putting us in danger."?
Nearly all of these sites are economically motivated, hoping to use bad
publicity where logical argument and examination of facts have not produced a
favorable outcome for the consumer. I'll bet you a Washington apple to an
Australian whatever that if Grady White gives the guy a new boat, or the dealer
refunds the purchase price of the boat he bought, the site will disappear in a
heartbeart.

I'm not supporting his case for money I am supporting him telling the
world he's not happy, it might be untrue just as most of the spam you
post here about boats you're trying to help market isn't true. The fact
you don't know any better doesn't make it true, you repeat the spam
marketing line, if you didn't ...................

He's not trying to sell anything to people, particularly people here
can make their own minds up about the merits or otherwise.


The poster who submitted this to rec.boats has never posted anything here,
AFAIK. He composed his one-sided website, omitted any facts or circumstances
not damaging to the manufacturer or the dealer, and probably posted it
everywhere the internet has any boating content what so ever.

Gee again apply this to the dealers.


You still don't get it do you, the boat filled with water that may or
may not be down to the manufacturer, the dealer, the boats age, boat's
prior accidents, weather & yes the owner, but the dealer dumping him
when he needed them is typical.


What would you consider an "acceptable" response from the dealer?

Clearly from the owners response anything but whatever he did:-)


Chuck please try to stop a second, all that might be right but the
dealer just leaving him unsupported isn't.


What would you consider an "acceptable" response from the dealer? As I
remember, the creator of the website doesn't really detail what the dealer's
response was, or wasn't, just that he thought he was given the brush off. I
will not believe that he called the dealership and was simply told to go screw
himself, not our problem, etc.

It sounds like the owner was upset & probably made some over the top
demands, but so what?? the dealer is in business & just made a heap of
money from this person, as I said anyone but a dealer would have handled
it so the owner was at least aware of the facts if not exactly happy
about them & with a bit of luck the dealer could have made lots more
money from the boat.


These "I'll get you!" websites more often than not result from a vendor failing
to meet every last expectation, reasonable or not, of a consumer with a
problem.

See Chuck that's your problem you depend on consumers having nowhere to
go now they do, as I said a good example was Ficht despite the dealers
lies owners knew they weren't alone & could vent their anger.



Neither of us knows all the facts. I speculate there are things that

*could*

have happened, but you applaud the damning website, say it's entirely the

used

boat dealer's fault in any event, that a dealership you're not acquainted

with

is a lousy place to do business, and that anybody else connected with the
marine industry is equally a piece of crap.

Which of us is being more reasonable, would you think?

Me:-)



Well, at least you had the decency not to protest my summary of your position.
I'll hand you that.

I wouldn't if I were you:-) now I won't ignore your spam because I
can't be bothered with your protests.


K



Really support our troops. Join "Soldiers for The Truth". http://www.sftt.org/

Chuck after the elections it was hoped you, jps etc & you know who
might at least accept the outcome & cut it back you haven't; if anything
you've gotten worse.

Bullshirts. But don't let the facts screw up a good rant. JPS hasn't posted
here in days, maybe weeks. There are several active OT threads currently
running where I have participated very little, or not at all. I don't believe
there is a current OT thread that I started. (Unless the States Rights thing
from about ten days ago is still running).

It's me:-) & expect I'll continue as long as you continue OT political
stuff, so we have a deal yes??



No, we don't have a deal. You can make yourself look silly as hell, no problem
by me. I'll post as I want, when I want, and if you want to flame the heck out
of me for it I'll simply take all the more pleasure in peeing you off. If I
post on topic, or off, it certainly will not have anything to do with your
opinions of me.

I gave up just as I did before your last election when Gore lost:-)
this NG is ruined by a few OT posters, you & Krause being the main players.

Once again, your allegations will not stand up if you check the archives. You
just admitted you hadn't frequented the NG for a long time ("gave up") and yet
you claim to be expert on the quantity and authorship of OT threads?

Come on chuckles it was a paid advertisement!! you got the heater cheap
I take it in exchange for spamming us??? Nice one Chuckles.

You don't get it. There are what, 25, 30, maybe 35 active boaters (tops) on the
NG?
Another 20 or so who don't boat but hang out to lob manure wads at Krause or
others considered "treasonous liberals"? I've never tried to sell a darn thing
on rec.boats. Even if I wanted to, there isn't enough mass to make a market for
anything.

While in Google, run a search on Karen Smith and "spam". Go back many,
many,
years. Extremely revealing.

Gee me selling anything at all??? If there are so many you'll have no
trouble pasting at least what say 3 examples??? go for it; if you can
I'll put my hands up to that, but I doubt you will.


You misunderstand. When one runs Karen Smith and "spam", they discover that the
charge of "spamming" is your stock attack on nearly everybody who has ever
posted to rec.boats and who is associated in any way with the marine business.
Your crusade against Dave Brown, your attacks on Peggie Hall, etc etc etc are
all there for everybody to see. You have helped run off several worthy
contributors to rec.boats over the years with your often vicious, frequently
relentless attacks, usually because the people hold a different professional
opinion than your own. Then you presume to blame the demise of the NG on
others.


You really are up yourself chucky, chuckys in love with chucky. I don't
need your permission or acceptance of anything I say or don't say. You
are a political OT & spam poster, so as far as I'm concerned fair game
in any circumstances.

You're entitled to your opinion. You're also entitled to appear obsessed and
consumed by it. What other conclusion can one draw when you can't resist
throwing up unprovoked personal attacks?
I must be always on your mind. Pity for you, if so.



Get this the OT spammer now says he can set the rules for complaining
about his OT & spam??? Not likely, the best I can do is when I feel so
inclined lob a grenade your way & I do & I will.

Yes, I'm sure you will. You have done very little else here for a number of
years. Your targets change, but your behavior does not.



I've seen what happens to the huge number of people who have politely
asked you to stop it, you Chuck, that's you personally, set upon them.

How about a single example? Either one of the "huge" number who have "politely
asked me to stop" or that I have "set upon" as a result?

I wouldn't if I were you:-) now I won't ignore your spam because I
can't be bothered with your protests.

It occurs to me, Karen, that your "protests" would have no effect except to
increase my credibilty among anybody familiar with your modus operandi and
track record.

Welcome back to the group. Protest, flame, insult, stalk, lie, rant, and lob
all the poison ink you choose. You believe you're on a mission, so I'll simply
leave you to it.
The great humor of the entire situation is your failure to see that your
constant personal attacking of others says far more about you than it does
about your intended victims.

I'm honored to be among those you consider "very much unlike" yourself. Fire
away, granny. I'm not really all that bothered by hysterical zealots. Appealing
to your reason has failed to dissuade you from your current crusade, (as I
suspected), and you can now proceed to show us all your arse and exercise your
acid vocabulary. That will certainly improve the content of the group, about
which you claim to be so impassioned.

PS:

Searched all groups Results 1 - 10 of 203 for group:rec.boats insubject:OT
author:Smith.

Gould 0738 wrote:

OK Chuckles so let's just stop now hey??? You keep up your abuse of
anyone who calls you for what you are, your OT political stuff & your
spam & I'll keep up calling you for what you are & reviewing your
deceptive marketing spam, when & if it suits me.

Do you know how to set the killfile??? Just do that, I never change my
ID etc so you'll be safe from criticism.

You can continue in your "I'm not an OT political spammer who will even
stoop to race/skin colour trying the sell OT political BS, I'm really a
nice ex boat broker bloke" delusion & as for me???; well I'll be as
happy as a lamb (you do know what a lamb is don't your Chuck?? or did
you have all but those rare ones shot for being the wrong colour in the
suburbs:-))



K


Chuck after the elections it was hoped you, jps etc & you know who
might at least accept the outcome & cut it back you haven't; if anything
you've gotten worse.


Bullshirts. But don't let the facts screw up a good rant. JPS hasn't posted
here in days, maybe weeks. There are several active OT threads currently
running where I have participated very little, or not at all. I don't believe
there is a current OT thread that I started. (Unless the States Rights thing
from about ten days ago is still running).


It's me:-) & expect I'll continue as long as you continue OT political
stuff, so we have a deal yes??




No, we don't have a deal. You can make yourself look silly as hell, no problem
by me. I'll post as I want, when I want, and if you want to flame the heck out
of me for it I'll simply take all the more pleasure in peeing you off. If I
post on topic, or off, it certainly will not have anything to do with your
opinions of me.


I gave up just as I did before your last election when Gore lost:-)
this NG is ruined by a few OT posters, you & Krause being the main players.


Once again, your allegations will not stand up if you check the archives. You
just admitted you hadn't frequented the NG for a long time ("gave up") and yet
you claim to be expert on the quantity and authorship of OT threads?


Come on chuckles it was a paid advertisement!! you got the heater cheap
I take it in exchange for spamming us??? Nice one Chuckles.


You don't get it. There are what, 25, 30, maybe 35 active boaters (tops) on the
NG?
Another 20 or so who don't boat but hang out to lob manure wads at Krause or
others considered "treasonous liberals"? I've never tried to sell a darn thing
on rec.boats. Even if I wanted to, there isn't enough mass to make a market for
anything.


While in Google, run a search on Karen Smith and "spam". Go back many,

many,

years. Extremely revealing.

Gee me selling anything at all??? If there are so many you'll have no
trouble pasting at least what say 3 examples??? go for it; if you can
I'll put my hands up to that, but I doubt you will.



You misunderstand. When one runs Karen Smith and "spam", they discover that the
charge of "spamming" is your stock attack on nearly everybody who has ever
posted to rec.boats and who is associated in any way with the marine business.
Your crusade against Dave Brown, your attacks on Peggie Hall, etc etc etc are
all there for everybody to see. You have helped run off several worthy
contributors to rec.boats over the years with your often vicious, frequently
relentless attacks, usually because the people hold a different professional
opinion than your own. Then you presume to blame the demise of the NG on
others.



You really are up yourself chucky, chuckys in love with chucky. I don't
need your permission or acceptance of anything I say or don't say. You
are a political OT & spam poster, so as far as I'm concerned fair game
in any circumstances.


You're entitled to your opinion. You're also entitled to appear obsessed and
consumed by it. What other conclusion can one draw when you can't resist
throwing up unprovoked personal attacks?
I must be always on your mind. Pity for you, if so.




Get this the OT spammer now says he can set the rules for complaining
about his OT & spam??? Not likely, the best I can do is when I feel so
inclined lob a grenade your way & I do & I will.


Yes, I'm sure you will. You have done very little else here for a number of
years. Your targets change, but your behavior does not.




I've seen what happens to the huge number of people who have politely
asked you to stop it, you Chuck, that's you personally, set upon them.


How about a single example? Either one of the "huge" number who have "politely
asked me to stop" or that I have "set upon" as a result?


I wouldn't if I were you:-) now I won't ignore your spam because I
can't be bothered with your protests.


It occurs to me, Karen, that your "protests" would have no effect except to
increase my credibilty among anybody familiar with your modus operandi and
track record.

Welcome back to the group. Protest, flame, insult, stalk, lie, rant, and lob
all the poison ink you choose. You believe you're on a mission, so I'll simply
leave you to it.
The great humor of the entire situation is your failure to see that your
constant personal attacking of others says far more about you than it does
about your intended victims.

I'm honored to be among those you consider "very much unlike" yourself. Fire
away, granny. I'm not really all that bothered by hysterical zealots. Appealing
to your reason has failed to dissuade you from your current crusade, (as I
suspected), and you can now proceed to show us all your arse and exercise your
acid vocabulary. That will certainly improve the content of the group, about
which you claim to be so impassioned.

PS:

Searched all groups Results 1 - 10 of 203 for group:rec.boats insubject:OT
author:Smith.

On 09 Dec 2004 07:15:08 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Your crusade against Dave Brown, your attacks on Peggie Hall, etc etc etc are
all there for everybody to see.

====================================

That is unquestionably true unfortunately. I had the pleasure of
meeting Dave Brown in person once and he struck me as being a pretty
straight guy struggling to run a small marina business in a small, out
of the way place in the world that has about a 3 month season.

Wayne.B wrote:
On 09 Dec 2004 07:15:08 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:


Your crusade against Dave Brown, your attacks on Peggie Hall, etc etc etc are
all there for everybody to see.


====================================

That is unquestionably true unfortunately.

I hardly think I had anything at all to do with Peggy leaving & hope
not but as for :

I had the pleasure of
meeting Dave Brown in person once and he struck me as being a pretty
straight guy

Yep he was smooth dealer could present well sales sales sales.

struggling to run a small marina business in a small, out
of the way place in the world that has about a 3 month season.

Yes & I guess that meant he got lots of extra "rebates" however he
failed to mention the facts in all the dealer markup threads over the
years, indeed when I repeatedly called him on it he just personally
attacked me to maintain the deception (don't your remember him saying
he'd just "love" for all you gullible dealer lackies to see his
"invoice" & show how little his markup was????, you were being had by
pros!!!)

Indeed it wasn't till the OMC dealers tried to sue the OMC bankruptcy
administrator to steal what little was left from the union retirees,
that the magnitude of the deception was fully revealed (30% on Ficht
sales!!!!!).

Needless to say when attacked I happily oblige & will again if & when
the opportunity presents, hopefully gaining as much pleasu-)

If you are giving your personal view on him so you should, I guess I
can say I disagree?? but as always I like to give relevant reasons.

Although I'm a bit chuffed if you say I was instrumental in his demise
from here, really??? gee given what I took from him & the other OMC
bludgers;......... what a bunch of wimps!!!:-)

However I probably should be a bit modest & tell you if you bothered to
check you would have seen they were here spamming & abusing right up
till about 3 weeks before OMC rolled into the table drain (was that
possibly the time dealers got prior knowledge the end was nigh???? but
continued to sell defunct engines to unsuspecting consumers??), then
your good bloke NG dealers just dumped all the people they'd been
telling to buy Ficht:-) &.... wait for it.......... on mass ran away!!!!!!

As I said at the time I know I wished a pox on all their houses &
thought I'd done pretty OK when the pine tree arrived; but gee what
happened next was scary even for me:-)

Their victims were here day after day leading to weeks asking for any
help or even the most basic of information but ALL your hero dealers
just ran & hid as spammer cowards always do when there's nothing left to
sell!!! sell!!!! sell!!!

What?? then about a year or so later??? Tried to come back as a Merc
dealer:-) now that was funny really really hilarious, because during the
Ficht debacle he'd told this NG they should buy Ficht not only because
there was nothing wrong with it:-) but because they'd been told of
warehouses full of blown Optimaxes:-) Would have made spamming Optimaxes
a bit difficult yes?? No sales to made from the spam so ...........

Thanks Wayne brought back some NG funny times, sad times for the
boaters taken in by them ........ & the union retirees taken in by the
inept union funds of course.

K