|
KMAN wrote: in article , Mark H. Bowen at wrote on 3/15/05 5:29 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. Get well soon, Tinkerntom. I can't for the life of me believe that you *actually* read all that the SinisterMinister posted? Mark --and responded too?-- It took about 12 seconds. And despite your profound parsing and retort, God still Loves you KMAN, He showed us His Love when He sent Jesus into the world to die for you. You can scream and shout and whine, but it won't change God's Love for you. There is no religion here, no threat, no control, just God loving you with infinite, wonderful, boundless love. God's love is free for the taking, no charge, no membership dues, no life of religious duty, or conscript service. We rejoice to be called the Children of God and to know His Love that passes understanding. And this is God that Loves KMAN as well! TnT |
"Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Mark H. Bowen at wrote on 3/15/05 5:29 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. Get well soon, Tinkerntom. I can't for the life of me believe that you *actually* read all that the SinisterMinister posted? Mark --and responded too?-- It took about 12 seconds. And despite your profound parsing and retort, God still Loves you KMAN I think we've clearly established that you believe that your god loves me. Beyond that, what is your purpose in repeating your sermon over and over again? Are you trying to make yourself and your beliefs look like a pathetic joke, or is that just an unfortunate side effect of your personality disorder? |
KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Mark H. Bowen at wrote on 3/15/05 5:29 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. Get well soon, Tinkerntom. I can't for the life of me believe that you *actually* read all that the SinisterMinister posted? Mark --and responded too?-- It took about 12 seconds. And despite your profound parsing and retort, God still Loves you KMAN I think we've clearly established that you believe that your god loves me. Beyond that, what is your purpose in repeating your sermon over and over again? Are you trying to make yourself and your beliefs look like a pathetic joke, or is that just an unfortunate side effect of your personality disorder? No, I believe God Loves you! Big Difference! TnT |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/16/05 7:03 PM: KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Mark H. Bowen at wrote on 3/15/05 5:29 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. Get well soon, Tinkerntom. I can't for the life of me believe that you *actually* read all that the SinisterMinister posted? Mark --and responded too?-- It took about 12 seconds. And despite your profound parsing and retort, God still Loves you KMAN I think we've clearly established that you believe that your god loves me. Beyond that, what is your purpose in repeating your sermon over and over again? Are you trying to make yourself and your beliefs look like a pathetic joke, or is that just an unfortunate side effect of your personality disorder? No, I believe God Loves you! Big Difference! TnT OK, let's try again. You believe god loves me. Beyond communicating this belief - which you have done perhaps 100 times - what is it you wish to accomplish? |
KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/16/05 7:03 PM: KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Mark H. Bowen at wrote on 3/15/05 5:29 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. Get well soon, Tinkerntom. I can't for the life of me believe that you *actually* read all that the SinisterMinister posted? Mark --and responded too?-- It took about 12 seconds. And despite your profound parsing and retort, God still Loves you KMAN I think we've clearly established that you believe that your god loves me. Beyond that, what is your purpose in repeating your sermon over and over again? Are you trying to make yourself and your beliefs look like a pathetic joke, or is that just an unfortunate side effect of your personality disorder? No, I believe God Loves you! Big Difference! TnT OK, let's try again. You believe god loves me. Beyond communicating this belief - which you have done perhaps 100 times - what is it you wish to accomplish? You are almost getting it! I believe God Loves you, TnT |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/16/05 8:49 PM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/16/05 7:03 PM: KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Mark H. Bowen at wrote on 3/15/05 5:29 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. Get well soon, Tinkerntom. I can't for the life of me believe that you *actually* read all that the SinisterMinister posted? Mark --and responded too?-- It took about 12 seconds. And despite your profound parsing and retort, God still Loves you KMAN I think we've clearly established that you believe that your god loves me. Beyond that, what is your purpose in repeating your sermon over and over again? Are you trying to make yourself and your beliefs look like a pathetic joke, or is that just an unfortunate side effect of your personality disorder? No, I believe God Loves you! Big Difference! TnT OK, let's try again. You believe god loves me. Beyond communicating this belief - which you have done perhaps 100 times - what is it you wish to accomplish? You are almost getting it! I believe God Loves you, TnT Beyond communicating this belief - which you have done perhaps 101 times now - what is it you wish to accomplish? |
" Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/16/05 8:49 PM: You are almost getting it! I believe God Loves you, TnT And Satan love you, but what's your point? Mark |
KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/16/05 8:49 PM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/16/05 7:03 PM: KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Mark H. Bowen at wrote on 3/15/05 5:29 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. Get well soon, Tinkerntom. I can't for the life of me believe that you *actually* read all that the SinisterMinister posted? Mark --and responded too?-- It took about 12 seconds. And despite your profound parsing and retort, God still Loves you KMAN I think we've clearly established that you believe that your god loves me. Beyond that, what is your purpose in repeating your sermon over and over again? Are you trying to make yourself and your beliefs look like a pathetic joke, or is that just an unfortunate side effect of your personality disorder? No, I believe God Loves you! Big Difference! TnT OK, let's try again. You believe god loves me. Beyond communicating this belief - which you have done perhaps 100 times - what is it you wish to accomplish? You are almost getting it! I believe God Loves you, TnT Beyond communicating this belief - which you have done perhaps 101 times now - what is it you wish to accomplish? What belief is that? TnT |
KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Melissa at wrote on 3/14/05 11:36 PM: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi Tinkerntom, On 14 Mar 2005 20:16:06 -0800, you wrote: Did you get a chance to check out those two links I left for you on one of our last post prior to the week end? I found them interesting in that they come from Alan Keyes who is as representative of the conservative religious right as you can get. I am wondering if anyone else on that side of the aisle has read his observations, and is takeing heed? I suspect that there is a ground swell already building. When I get a chance I may find those links to have a look, but are you aware of the situation between Keyes and his lesbian daughter? Here's a Washington Post article about them: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Feb12.html Here's what Maya herself had to say about it: http://tinyurl.com/6g44n Sure, she's 19, and responsible for herself, but it wasn't until after she "came out" publicly about her sexual orientation that her parents decided to "cut her loose". Interesting "family values" at the very least. - -- Melissa Hey now Melissa, just because he has turned his back on his own daughter...if only Dick Cheney could feel the love of god as strongly as Alan Keyes, he'd kick his daughter to the curb too! But no, the best Dick can muster is to be quietly disapproving. Satan has made him weak, whereas the blood of Christ flows thorugh Alan's veins and gives him the strength to hate his own daughter. Religion is so beautiful! Religion is ugly and a deadly poison. Jesus said I came to give you life, and to give it to you abundantly. So obviously they are two diffierent things, though some still can't seem to keep them separate! TnT Religion is the term that describes how human beings apply deity belief to real world practices. It's all about power and control. And it is ugly. It seems that we have already discussed the subject of religion, was there some new insight you desired to share, by returning to the subject? If you do not have anything specific in mind, I ask Melissa a question off line, that she apparently is too busy to get into. I understand how that is, however I could ask you the same question if you would be interested, though I would probably have to rephrase it for the different circumstances. Let me know if you are interested. You might even check with her, and she may be able to tell you what I ask her, and it would save some time, TnT |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/17/05 11:29 PM: KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Melissa at wrote on 3/14/05 11:36 PM: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi Tinkerntom, On 14 Mar 2005 20:16:06 -0800, you wrote: Did you get a chance to check out those two links I left for you on one of our last post prior to the week end? I found them interesting in that they come from Alan Keyes who is as representative of the conservative religious right as you can get. I am wondering if anyone else on that side of the aisle has read his observations, and is takeing heed? I suspect that there is a ground swell already building. When I get a chance I may find those links to have a look, but are you aware of the situation between Keyes and his lesbian daughter? Here's a Washington Post article about them: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Feb12.html Here's what Maya herself had to say about it: http://tinyurl.com/6g44n Sure, she's 19, and responsible for herself, but it wasn't until after she "came out" publicly about her sexual orientation that her parents decided to "cut her loose". Interesting "family values" at the very least. - -- Melissa Hey now Melissa, just because he has turned his back on his own daughter...if only Dick Cheney could feel the love of god as strongly as Alan Keyes, he'd kick his daughter to the curb too! But no, the best Dick can muster is to be quietly disapproving. Satan has made him weak, whereas the blood of Christ flows thorugh Alan's veins and gives him the strength to hate his own daughter. Religion is so beautiful! Religion is ugly and a deadly poison. Jesus said I came to give you life, and to give it to you abundantly. So obviously they are two diffierent things, though some still can't seem to keep them separate! TnT Religion is the term that describes how human beings apply deity belief to real world practices. It's all about power and control. And it is ugly. It seems that we have already discussed the subject of religion, was there some new insight you desired to share, by returning to the subject? Uh. Looking at the context above, it appears you made a statement about religion and I respond to that statement, so I'm not really sure where you are coming from with the suggestion that I "returned" to the subject. If you do not have anything specific in mind, I ask Melissa a question off line, that she apparently is too busy to get into. I understand how that is, however I could ask you the same question if you would be interested, though I would probably have to rephrase it for the different circumstances. Let me know if you are interested. You might even check with her, and she may be able to tell you what I ask her, and it would save some time, TnT I'm sorry Tinkerntom, I honestly have no idea what the above paragraph is supposed to mean. |
KMAN wrote:
in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/17/05 11:29 PM: KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Melissa at wrote on 3/14/05 11:36 PM: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi Tinkerntom, On 14 Mar 2005 20:16:06 -0800, you wrote: Did you get a chance to check out those two links I left for you on one of our last post prior to the week end? I found them interesting in that they come from Alan Keyes who is as representative of the conservative religious right as you can get. I am wondering if anyone else on that side of the aisle has read his observations, and is takeing heed? I suspect that there is a ground swell already building. When I get a chance I may find those links to have a look, but are you aware of the situation between Keyes and his lesbian daughter? Here's a Washington Post article about them: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Feb12.html Here's what Maya herself had to say about it: http://tinyurl.com/6g44n Sure, she's 19, and responsible for herself, but it wasn't until after she "came out" publicly about her sexual orientation that her parents decided to "cut her loose". Interesting "family values" at the very least. - -- Melissa Hey now Melissa, just because he has turned his back on his own daughter...if only Dick Cheney could feel the love of god as strongly as Alan Keyes, he'd kick his daughter to the curb too! But no, the best Dick can muster is to be quietly disapproving. Satan has made him weak, whereas the blood of Christ flows thorugh Alan's veins and gives him the strength to hate his own daughter. Religion is so beautiful! Religion is ugly and a deadly poison. Jesus said I came to give you life, and to give it to you abundantly. So obviously they are two diffierent things, though some still can't seem to keep them separate! TnT Religion is the term that describes how human beings apply deity belief to real world practices. It's all about power and control. And it is ugly. It seems that we have already discussed the subject of religion, was there some new insight you desired to share, by returning to the subject? I guess that is why I am a bit confused as well! When checking the daily post, there were two by me at 8:28 am, 3/17, and one by you at 8:36 am, under the title, "Repost: About Scotty". Except I did not do any posting this AM. and the post are copies of post from a couple of days ago, so I figured somehow, you know how to repost previously post comments, and were interested in "returning" to the discussion about "religion". Something strange may be going on with Google archives! Uh. Looking at the context above, it appears you made a statement about religion and I respond to that statement, so I'm not really sure where you are coming from with the suggestion that I "returned" to the subject. If you do not have anything specific in mind, I ask Melissa a question off line, that she apparently is too busy to get into. I understand how that is, however I could ask you the same question if you would be interested, though I would probably have to rephrase it for the different circumstances. Let me know if you are interested. You might even check with her, and she may be able to tell you what I ask her, and it would save some time, TnT I'm sorry Tinkerntom, I honestly have no idea what the above paragraph is supposed to mean. No apologies necessary. I was also assuming from your comments that Melissa did email you the copy of what she sent me. It was quite interesting, and I was interested in asking her some questions. However, she indicated that she is very busy, and was not sure that she would have the time. So, based on my previous misunderstanding of the above posting activity, I thought that if you were interested, we could pursue my question. I did not want to ask it though unless you are interested, and I even encouraged you to check with her, and she could share my question with you that I ask her. That would allow us to get into the question, maybe more directly, though there would probably need to adjust the exact question for the different circumstances of talking with you, vs. with her! TnT |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/18/05 12:25 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/17/05 11:29 PM: KMAN wrote: "Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: in article , Melissa at wrote on 3/14/05 11:36 PM: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi Tinkerntom, On 14 Mar 2005 20:16:06 -0800, you wrote: Did you get a chance to check out those two links I left for you on one of our last post prior to the week end? I found them interesting in that they come from Alan Keyes who is as representative of the conservative religious right as you can get. I am wondering if anyone else on that side of the aisle has read his observations, and is takeing heed? I suspect that there is a ground swell already building. When I get a chance I may find those links to have a look, but are you aware of the situation between Keyes and his lesbian daughter? Here's a Washington Post article about them: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Feb12.html Here's what Maya herself had to say about it: http://tinyurl.com/6g44n Sure, she's 19, and responsible for herself, but it wasn't until after she "came out" publicly about her sexual orientation that her parents decided to "cut her loose". Interesting "family values" at the very least. - -- Melissa Hey now Melissa, just because he has turned his back on his own daughter...if only Dick Cheney could feel the love of god as strongly as Alan Keyes, he'd kick his daughter to the curb too! But no, the best Dick can muster is to be quietly disapproving. Satan has made him weak, whereas the blood of Christ flows thorugh Alan's veins and gives him the strength to hate his own daughter. Religion is so beautiful! Religion is ugly and a deadly poison. Jesus said I came to give you life, and to give it to you abundantly. So obviously they are two diffierent things, though some still can't seem to keep them separate! TnT Religion is the term that describes how human beings apply deity belief to real world practices. It's all about power and control. And it is ugly. It seems that we have already discussed the subject of religion, was there some new insight you desired to share, by returning to the subject? I guess that is why I am a bit confused as well! When checking the daily post, there were two by me at 8:28 am, 3/17, and one by you at 8:36 am, under the title, "Repost: About Scotty". Except I did not do any posting this AM. and the post are copies of post from a couple of days ago, so I figured somehow, you know how to repost previously post comments, and were interested in "returning" to the discussion about "religion". Something strange may be going on with Google archives! Using google to post to a newsgroup sucks ass, Tinkerntom. Uh. Looking at the context above, it appears you made a statement about religion and I respond to that statement, so I'm not really sure where you are coming from with the suggestion that I "returned" to the subject. If you do not have anything specific in mind, I ask Melissa a question off line, that she apparently is too busy to get into. I understand how that is, however I could ask you the same question if you would be interested, though I would probably have to rephrase it for the different circumstances. Let me know if you are interested. You might even check with her, and she may be able to tell you what I ask her, and it would save some time, TnT I'm sorry Tinkerntom, I honestly have no idea what the above paragraph is supposed to mean. No apologies necessary. I was also assuming from your comments that Melissa did email you the copy of what she sent me. It was quite interesting, and I was interested in asking her some questions. However, she indicated that she is very busy, and was not sure that she would have the time. So, based on my previous misunderstanding of the above posting activity, I thought that if you were interested, we could pursue my question. I did not want to ask it though unless you are interested, and I even encouraged you to check with her, and she could share my question with you that I ask her. That would allow us to get into the question, maybe more directly, though there would probably need to adjust the exact question for the different circumstances of talking with you, vs. with her! TnT I think one of the reasons you have trouble communicating is that you are too brief. |
KMAN wrote: ....snip... Using google to post to a newsgroup sucks ass, Tinkerntom. ....snip.. I think one of the reasons you have trouble communicating is that you are too brief. I agree! :) TnT |
Melissa wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi Tinkerntom, On 17 Mar 2005 21:25:27 -0800, you wrote: No apologies necessary. I was also assuming from your comments that Melissa did email you the copy of what she sent me. It was quite interesting, and I was interested in asking her some questions. However, she indicated that she is very busy, and was not sure that she would have the time. I'll step in here for a moment to say this about that... I've been sitting on your message for a couple of days because (1) I *am* too busy to get into an involved theological discussion with you, and (2) I told you that I really didn't want to get into an involved theological discussion with you, and (3) Even though I invited you to *comment on what I had written*, you chose not to. Instead, you tried to turn the discussion into something else entirely, and so (4) I've been trying to think up a tactful way to say "sod off", but I haven't come up with just the right words quite yet. ;-) When I call you, semi-affectionately, "The Tinkering One", I'm referring to your penchant for tinkering with the heads of those you choose to converse with. It can be amusing for a few moments, but after that, it begins to feel a bit tedious, and so I move on to other things. I hope this doesn't offend you too terribly much. :-) - -- Melissa PGP Public Keys: http://www.willkayakforfood.tk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQCVAwUBQjqWqDEYqNTZBqoEAQN94gP+KKT9GpengXGXY5Ojoz db5Td+8GMwL4kH H5gpmJSbvqJdzkp7r4Vjn5n2PVWz8RDCsLRi2/w9wwoqsIdr0Nur/oW4Vy656A3J PHvO4rkM4ScgbAfRFZDE4H/hWwoIysycslPI9m1v0HgDWyijHJMKD2nwgE1j1dDi X5g11DETrTc= =FRB9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- As I have acknowledged, the penchant for tinkering, expresses itself in many ways. I certainly did not want the opportunity to explore what you shared, to go unexplored, and I did comment to the extent that I said I found what you shared, very instructive. I also desired to keep what you revealed off-list, to stay off-list if you so desired, and so I did not go into detail here in the group. I assume you had your reasons, and if for no other reason you did not want to get anymore involved because you were busy with other things, and were not sure that even if you had time that you desired to get involved in a theological discussion with me. I tried to be sensitive to your request, spoken and unspoken, and sensitively aware that it sounded like you have some history on the subject, that though it may be instructive to me, it may be beyond reasonable sensitivities to go there unless you led the way. I have found your perspective as a paddler, and a woman, especially enlightening, and appreciate your effort to assist me in my understanding of certain issues. I did not desire to offend you, and I am not offended by your reticence to engage me in a theological conversation. I have found there is a time and a place for everything, and if these were not in alignment for you, I was not prepared to force the issue. I have concidered what you said, and have attempted to mitigate my use or certain language idioms that may be difficult for some to understand, or even hear for whatever their reasons, so please do not think that I did not hear you. My greatest comment is what I have chosen to do, not only in reference to your input, and any subsequent conversation with you, but also in reference to others, and in particular KMAN. Now I would be the first to acknowledge, that I love to tinker with peoples heads. Please understand that though the evidence is not always glaring, I usually start with my own. Also as you know by now, the area of most dynamic tinkering surrounds the issues generally involved in theology. I realize that this subject is not equally enjoyed by others, and their enthusiasm quickly wears thin. However, I feel like I am in a testing lab, and it is my privilege to keep testing, and probing, and prodding. Some experiments may blow up in my face, but like another ENTP, inventor, Thomas Edison, "I just find one more thing that did not work!" So its back to the drawing board. Now if you would like to discuss your email further, on-list or off-list, I would be more than glad to engage you in the discussion, at your convienence, and your discretion! TnT |
Tinkerntom wrote: ....snip... Now if you would like to discuss your email further, on-list or off-list, I would be more than glad to engage you in the discussion, at your convienence, and your discretion! TnT I reread your post, and if you desire to have me "sod off," though I do not know exactly what that means, I can probably figure it out. And I would definitely reserve any further comments as indicated above, in my previous post, to a matter of sensitve consideration. The Tinkering One |
Tink, in reference to Melissa's post:
================== I reread your post, and if you desire to have me "sod off," though I do not know exactly what that means, I can probably figure it out. ============== It means that either (a) Melissa watches PBS and/or BBC America, or (b) she's a fan of Brit-Flicks, or (c) she's lived in Britain, or (d) she has an expanded vocabulary or (e) all of the above. Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Cheers, frtzw906 |
BCITORGB wrote: Tink, in reference to Melissa's post: ================== I reread your post, and if you desire to have me "sod off," though I do not know exactly what that means, I can probably figure it out. ============== It means that either (a) Melissa watches PBS and/or BBC America, or (b) she's a fan of Brit-Flicks, or (c) she's lived in Britain, or (d) she has an expanded vocabulary or (e) all of the above. Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Cheers, frtzw906 But now I have another problem, whats "'murcan"? Though I might be able to figure that one out as well. :-) As to any appropriate reponse, to her request: Lead on! TnT |
Tink:
=============== As to any appropriate reponse, to her request: Lead on! TnT ================== Well, just for starters, don't call her a "******", OK? How about: "Look 'ere luv, I fancies you." But I really should leave recommendations re an appropriate response to "sod off" to any Brits in the group. You see, that's what Canucks are good at; translating for Brits and Yanks. Kinda reminds me of watching "The Full Monty" with a bunch of Yanks in the theater. One of my favorite bits was when the supervisor was trying to get the choreography right and, finally, exasperated, he suggested that it was just "like Sheffield United playing the offside trap". Immediately, the guys in the flick got it, and most of the audience in Vancouver (find me a kid that doesn't play soccer in Vancouver...) got it. Most Yanks in the crowd; well, let's just say they didn't know what others around them were laughing about. WOW! How's that for OT? frtzw906 frtzw906 |
BCITORGB wrote: Tink: =============== As to any appropriate reponse, to her request: Lead on! TnT ================== Well, just for starters, don't call her a "******", OK? How about: "Look 'ere luv, I fancies you." But I really should leave recommendations re an appropriate response to "sod off" to any Brits in the group. You see, that's what Canucks are good at; translating for Brits and Yanks. Kinda reminds me of watching "The Full Monty" with a bunch of Yanks in the theater. One of my favorite bits was when the supervisor was trying to get the choreography right and, finally, exasperated, he suggested that it was just "like Sheffield United playing the offside trap". Immediately, the guys in the flick got it, and most of the audience in Vancouver (find me a kid that doesn't play soccer in Vancouver...) got it. Most Yanks in the crowd; well, let's just say they didn't know what others around them were laughing about. WOW! How's that for OT? frtzw906 frtzw906 No disrespect meant at all, she is definitely a sweet heart, and by lead on I was allowing her to show me the civilised way of being nice. I probably need all the help I can get! Though to call her "luv, and I fancies you", could get me in hot water with my true luv whom I surely do fancy. No offense Melissa, but I get to live with her, and you are just a another sweet sireen out there in this sea of fog horns. TnT |
BCITORGB wrote: Tink: =============== As to any appropriate reponse, to her request: Lead on! TnT ================== Well, just for starters, don't call her a "******", OK? How about: "Look 'ere luv, I fancies you." But I really should leave recommendations re an appropriate response to "sod off" to any Brits in the group. You see, that's what Canucks are good at; translating for Brits and Yanks. Kinda reminds me of watching "The Full Monty" with a bunch of Yanks in the theater. One of my favorite bits was when the supervisor was trying to get the choreography right and, finally, exasperated, he suggested that it was just "like Sheffield United playing the offside trap". Immediately, the guys in the flick got it, and most of the audience in Vancouver (find me a kid that doesn't play soccer in Vancouver...) got it. Most Yanks in the crowd; well, let's just say they didn't know what others around them were laughing about. WOW! How's that for OT? frtzw906 frtzw906 BTW, I could find you a bunch of kids who don't play soccer in Vancouver! I never did understand the game, and I saw it played in Mexico. The kids in town play it on the street, dodging the cars without stopping the game. The drivers appear to be part of the game as well. Now if they could just figure out how to put this on TV, they would have something. So translate your "offside trap" for this yank! TnT |
Tink thinks:
========== Now if they could just figure out how to put this on TV, they would have something. =========== Tink, I reckon that on r.b.p., one of the last things you'd want to discuss is soccer on TV. Suffice to say: it IS on TV and enjoyed immensely (by the rest of the world). Oh, and BTW, "they DO have something." As to the offside trap, we'll leave that to another forum or, very simply: it's like a moving hockey blue line, defined by the last defender (actually, as a field hockey coach - a game which has no offside - I find soccer offside rather stupid). I know that was really OT, but then I felt less guilty when I noted that this thread is "about scotty". Suddenly I feel like a discussion of soccer, hockey, etc is quite "onside" GRIN cheers, frtzw906 |
"Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... |
KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. |
BCITORGB wrote: Tink thinks: ========== Now if they could just figure out how to put this on TV, they would have something. =========== Tink, I reckon that on r.b.p., one of the last things you'd want to discuss is soccer on TV. Suffice to say: it IS on TV and enjoyed immensely (by the rest of the world). Oh, and BTW, "they DO have something." As to the offside trap, we'll leave that to another forum or, very simply: it's like a moving hockey blue line, defined by the last defender (actually, as a field hockey coach - a game which has no offside - I find soccer offside rather stupid). I know that was really OT, but then I felt less guilty when I noted that this thread is "about scotty". Suddenly I feel like a discussion of soccer, hockey, etc is quite "onside" GRIN cheers, frtzw906 Frtzw, to get back on topic, since your back on this thread, I wanted to check and see if you ever got a chance to check out those two previous links that I found. I know that you have been dealing with important stuff, Kayak rack, et all, but just a reminder of something to take a look at when you get a chance. I also came across this interesting statement, that I wanted to share with you. "Groups of Christians still battle each other today to promote the rights or even the salvation of one group over against another. Gender or sexual orientation rather than faith in Jesus Christ has come to determine the believer's status within a congregation. Against a masculine God, then, a feminine God is promoted by some, while for others Christian faith is defined or denied by sexual orientation. In the recent political campaign in America, some conservative Republican believers went so far as to argue that Christian faith and support for Democratic candidates were mutually exclusive! Paul would have no part of such a divisive debate, except to remind all believers that in Jesus Christ many different people have one faith in common (compare Col 3:11; Gal 3:28)." This came out of a commentary published by Inter-Varsity Press, which is a fairly conservative group, but demonstrates an openminded approach for the nonessentials of the Christian Faith, and was in context of our previous discussion. TnT |
KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. I guess I always figured you for the couch potatoe type! Tnt |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/19/05 2:14 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. I guess I always figured you for the couch potatoe type! Tnt We need William Figueroa here to explain to Tinkerntom why he is starting to look as hebetudinous as he is crazy ;-) |
KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 2:14 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. I guess I always figured you for the couch potatoe type! Tnt We need William Figueroa here to explain to Tinkerntom why he is starting to look as hebetudinous as he is crazy ;-) Well, life is like a box of chocolates, you learn to make do with what you got, or not! Not all of us are smart as you to use such big words, must be from setting around reading the dictionary. TnT |
Melissa:
========== Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect ========== I rather thought it might be "for effect", so, in the spirit of an "over the top" translation, I gave it the most extreme translation. What isn't clear, however, is how someone on the Wet Coast comes up with something as unAmerican (nonAmerican?) as "sod off". That isn't part of the typical American vernacular is it? Cheers, Wilf |
Tink asks for comment on:
============= "Groups of Christians still battle each other today to promote the rights or even the salvation of one group over against another. Gender or sexual orientation rather than faith in Jesus Christ has come to determine the believer's status within a congregation. ============== Tink, I read over those links and found them mildly interesting. I found them somewhat lacking in credibility insofar as the author thinks that "W" and his cabinet are not "Christian" enough. Nonetheless, I found some of his general thesis plausible: that too many of these groups are lead around by the nose. For example, the citation you give above illustrates the point. I'm thinking (but who am I?) that with all the crap happening around the globe, your god has better things to worry about that a couple of guys (gals) holding hands. frtzw906 |
BCITORGB wrote: Tink asks for comment on: ============= "Groups of Christians still battle each other today to promote the rights or even the salvation of one group over against another. Gender or sexual orientation rather than faith in Jesus Christ has come to determine the believer's status within a congregation. ============== Tink, I read over those links and found them mildly interesting. I found them somewhat lacking in credibility insofar as the author thinks that "W" and his cabinet are not "Christian" enough. Nonetheless, I found some of his general thesis plausible: that too many of these groups are lead around by the nose. For example, the citation you give above illustrates the point. I'm thinking (but who am I?) that with all the crap happening around the globe, your god has better things to worry about that a couple of guys (gals) holding hands. frtzw906 I realize that the links may lack credibility from your perspective, though I included them to show that all is not smooth sailing in the religious conservative camp. The news media oftentimes talks about the conservative Christian agenda as a monolithic structure, unquestioningly endorsing the political right. Fact is it is not monolithic, and it is definitely fractured, if not coming apart at the seams. This may be a dirty little secret that the political right does not want to be made known for some strange reason. There are essentials, and non-essential elements of the Christian Faith, so much of the cat-fightin' is over non-essentials. Usually to the ignoring and being ignorant of the essentials. The essentials in our Christian Life being Faith, Love, and Joy. You are correct, I did not see anything in that list about who's holding whose hand. That may explain the lack of the Big Three in supposed Christian's lives. I like to check out the faces of the audiences of the TV religious programs. Usually you find dour faces, which convinces me that I don't need whatever the preacher is "selling", and I would rather be out paddling! TnT |
Melissa wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi Wilf, On 19 Mar 2005 09:36:24 -0800, you wrote: I rather thought it might be "for effect", so, in the spirit of an "over the top" translation, I gave it the most extreme translation. What isn't clear, however, is how someone on the Wet Coast comes up with something as unAmerican (nonAmerican?) as "sod off". That isn't part of the typical American vernacular is it? When it comes to vocabulary, I guess I can be a bit of an indiscriminate "sponge", or "lint collector", or something like that. Squeeze or shake me and who knows what might pop out?! :-) I've been to a lot of places, and I've spent a great deal of time in the company of non-US friends and acquaintances (sometimes living with them for extended periods), and I read a lot of books, etc., so I guess I've picked up bits and pieces of local vernacular here and there, and so "mixing and matching" is usually fairly unconscious on my part. Other times, I'll specifically choose one type of word or phrase, regardless of origin, for a very particular reason. It can be useful to have at one's disposal several things to choose from, no? (though even when it comes to shoes, I'm still no Imelda Marcos!). ;-) Just be sure to stop me if I begin "speaking in tongues", as that might really muck up the works! ;-) - -- Melissa PGP Public Keys: http://www.willkayakforfood.tk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQCVAwUBQjxzXzEYqNTZBqoEAQPFpwP/ez8YRsWHZjZ5Q6frQXtBwnsfuMHM7cGu FvgUBFBNzChRPEyTI1Uy3eTjmyCgF8+PNjhQvldoFR0uRHuMam 65jZwl3AxHf+ob B7k0qPFXKzYVK57ibAaHh4ssv5KDz/O8iKTCe0eH6FbL9LntP4w/kcenbiCmwVBw ppg+wn55VNA= =2k/u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Who squeezed you for even that last to pop out? :) TnT |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/19/05 3:17 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 2:14 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. I guess I always figured you for the couch potatoe type! Tnt We need William Figueroa here to explain to Tinkerntom why he is starting to look as hebetudinous as he is crazy ;-) Well, life is like a box of chocolates, you learn to make do with what you got, or not! Not all of us are smart as you to use such big words, must be from setting around reading the dictionary. TnT Forget the big words, did you at least get the Figueroa reference...and why I made it? |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/19/05 2:22 PM: BCITORGB wrote: Tink asks for comment on: ============= "Groups of Christians still battle each other today to promote the rights or even the salvation of one group over against another. Gender or sexual orientation rather than faith in Jesus Christ has come to determine the believer's status within a congregation. ============== Tink, I read over those links and found them mildly interesting. I found them somewhat lacking in credibility insofar as the author thinks that "W" and his cabinet are not "Christian" enough. Nonetheless, I found some of his general thesis plausible: that too many of these groups are lead around by the nose. For example, the citation you give above illustrates the point. I'm thinking (but who am I?) that with all the crap happening around the globe, your god has better things to worry about that a couple of guys (gals) holding hands. frtzw906 I realize that the links may lack credibility from your perspective, though I included them to show that all is not smooth sailing in the religious conservative camp. The news media oftentimes talks about the conservative Christian agenda as a monolithic structure, unquestioningly endorsing the political right. Fact is it is not monolithic, and it is definitely fractured, if not coming apart at the seams. This may be a dirty little secret that the political right does not want to be made known for some strange reason. Well Tinkerntom, they wouldn't want it to become known because they'd like to keep running the US of A and whether it is commies, socialists, liberals, gays, or gay liberal commies, a lot of people on the right would rather be in bed with Hitler himself than "one of those." There are essentials, and non-essential elements of the Christian Faith, so much of the cat-fightin' is over non-essentials. Usually to the ignoring and being ignorant of the essentials. The essentials in our Christian Life being Faith, Love, and Joy. What do you think are essentials to the those who are not Christian? You are correct, I did not see anything in that list about who's holding whose hand. That may explain the lack of the Big Three in supposed Christian's lives. I like to check out the faces of the audiences of the TV religious programs. Usually you find dour faces, which convinces me that I don't need whatever the preacher is "selling", and I would rather be out paddling! TnT They usually look like they are on drugs. Which makes sense, because you know a religious belief system is working when its followers are not under their own power and control. |
KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 3:17 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 2:14 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. I guess I always figured you for the couch potatoe type! Tnt We need William Figueroa here to explain to Tinkerntom why he is starting to look as hebetudinous as he is crazy ;-) Well, life is like a box of chocolates, you learn to make do with what you got, or not! Not all of us are smart as you to use such big words, must be from setting around reading the dictionary. TnT Forget the big words, did you at least get the Figueroa reference...and why I made it? The name Dan Quail rings a bell! I'm glad you are around two make sure we don't all goe offf halfed cocked and spill a worrd witd lesss than camplete accurracy now and then. I am surre yu woold knot be able to figur oot what else important is going on or been saide if thar wert a sppeellen errorr. Some politicians carreers have fallen because of a simple misspelled word. Now for those who set around and read a dictionary all day for inspirational reading, cause they can't figure anything really significant to do than to be picky about other folks spelling errors, and can't make a positive constructive contribution to an ongoing discussion, then it should not surprise you when they would delight to bring down a decent and honorable man because of a spelling error, in order to promote their own philanderer, and then think that the philanderer is a asset to the country and the world. But such is how some enlightened elitist think and act. And so it would not surprise me that the same enlightened elitist attitude would be substituted for a meaningjul contribution on something as lame as the RBP. TnT |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/20/05 2:03 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 3:17 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 2:14 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. I guess I always figured you for the couch potatoe type! Tnt We need William Figueroa here to explain to Tinkerntom why he is starting to look as hebetudinous as he is crazy ;-) Well, life is like a box of chocolates, you learn to make do with what you got, or not! Not all of us are smart as you to use such big words, must be from setting around reading the dictionary. TnT Forget the big words, did you at least get the Figueroa reference...and why I made it? The name Dan Quail rings a bell! I'm glad you are around two make sure we don't all goe offf halfed cocked and spill a worrd witd lesss than camplete accurracy now and then. Humour, Tinkerntom. Humour. I am surre yu woold knot be able to figur oot what else important is going on or been saide if thar wert a sppeellen errorr. Some politicians carreers have fallen because of a simple misspelled word. Now for those who set around and read a dictionary all day for inspirational reading, cause they can't figure anything really significant to do than to be picky about other folks spelling errors If I had just jumped into RPB and made a joke about your spelling abilities, I'd have to agree with you. However, in light of the vast amounts of your verbiage that I have waded through on numerous occasions, you might be getting a tad carried away with this angle. and can't make a positive constructive contribution to an ongoing discussion, then it should not surprise you when they would delight to bring down a decent and honorable man Humble too! because of a spelling error, in order to promote their own philanderer, and then think that the philanderer is a asset to the country and the world. Uh. I'm promoting a philanderer by having fun with your spelling of potato? But such is how some enlightened elitist think and act. And so it would not surprise me that the same enlightened elitist attitude would be substituted for a meaningjul contribution on something as lame as the RBP. TnT Man, you jesus freaks sure ain't fun. |
KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/20/05 2:03 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 3:17 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 2:14 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. I guess I always figured you for the couch potatoe type! Tnt We need William Figueroa here to explain to Tinkerntom why he is starting to look as hebetudinous as he is crazy ;-) Well, life is like a box of chocolates, you learn to make do with what you got, or not! Not all of us are smart as you to use such big words, must be from setting around reading the dictionary. TnT Forget the big words, did you at least get the Figueroa reference...and why I made it? The name Dan Quail rings a bell! I'm glad you are around two make sure we don't all goe offf halfed cocked and spill a worrd witd lesss than camplete accurracy now and then. Humour, Tinkerntom. Humour. I thought I was being humorous also, thanks for the compliment! I am surre yu woold knot be able to figur oot what else important is going on or been saide if thar wert a sppeellen errorr. Some politicians carreers have fallen because of a simple misspelled word. Now for those who set around and read a dictionary all day for inspirational reading, cause they can't figure anything really significant to do than to be picky about other folks spelling errors If I had just jumped into RPB and made a joke about your spelling abilities, I'd have to agree with you. However, in light of the vast amounts of your verbiage that I have waded through on numerous occasions, you might be getting a tad carried away with this angle. Hey, you have asked questions that sometimes required an indepth discussion. If you want to keep it simple, ask simple questions! and can't make a positive constructive contribution to an ongoing discussion, then it should not surprise you when they would delight to bring down a decent and honorable man Humble too! I agree, he could have acted more humble, but then politicians running for high office aren't known for being humble, and the news media loves to find a weak point, and never let it go. I am sure that if you ask Dan, how to spell patato now, he would be able to tell you. So should we ask him to be president now, that he knows how to spell patato! because of a spelling error, in order to promote their own philanderer, and then think that the philanderer is a asset to the country and the world. Uh. I'm promoting a philanderer by having fun with your spelling of potato? No, but the media at the time sure had fun at Dan's expense, and used it to promote BillyBob, without really checking out some of the serious allegations about the latter. And then they act surprised about Monica. But such is how some enlightened elitist think and act. And so it would not surprise me that the same enlightened elitist attitude would be substituted for a meaningjul contribution on something as lame as the RBP. TnT Man, you jesus freaks sure ain't fun. Oh, we can be fun, but I prefer when discussing substantive issues with you, instead of my spelling, or for that matter yours, not becoming the subject. Sp flames are not particularly interesting. If it is critical for the content of the discussion, then clarify for clarity sake, otherwise figure it out. I have seen so many threads just break down into nit-picking ****ing contest. I know that you are able to discuss issues in a mature and thoughtful manner. I have gotten to know enough about you to know that you have alot to contribute to a discussion, and that you have a perspective that is valuable for me to hear. It is distressing and annoying when you get picky and penny ante, and I am inclined to just ignore you as I do a few others. There are times when we snipe at each other, and it can be fun, from the stand point that as we have gotten to know one another, we know each others hot buttons. Hopefully we do not do so to destroy the other person. I am sure that from your perspective of me going over the edge, while you are setting on your couch reading the dictionary, must look very humorous to a Martian checking out the local electronic binary data fields surrounding the Earth. Some of the quips are cute, clever, and funny, and then some are mean, nasty, and hurt. I would assume from what you have indicated about your respect for mankind, that you would not intentionally hurt another human being. Why would you do it mentally, and then claim it was fun. See I've gotten to know you to well, and I actually don't think you are such a bad guy! Respectfully TnT |
Tinkerntom wrote: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/20/05 2:03 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 3:17 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 2:14 AM: KMAN wrote: in article , Tinkerntom at wrote on 3/19/05 1:44 AM: KMAN wrote: "Melissa" wrote in message ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi BCITORGB, On 18 Mar 2005 09:05:14 -0800, you wrote: Let me translate, into 'murcan: F*CK OFF! Depending on context, the exact meaning of "sod off" can be as offensive as you describe, or as mild as a somewhat annoyed "go away". Since I'm not prone to say things such as the former, even when I'm *really* annoyed, my use of the phrase here was definitely of the latter sort. Perhaps a bit "over the top" for effect, I admit, and I suppose it could have been easily misunderstood, so I do apologize if I've offended anyone *way too much*. Besides, I only mentioned the phrase in terms of trying to think up a "tactful" way to say it! ;-) - -- Melissa You could try "get bent" but then in Tinkerntom's case, he's already "around the bend"... OF course KMAN would know, he got there before I did! TnT I had to get a good seat to watch you go over the edge. I guess I always figured you for the couch potatoe type! Tnt We need William Figueroa here to explain to Tinkerntom why he is starting to look as hebetudinous as he is crazy ;-) Well, life is like a box of chocolates, you learn to make do with what you got, or not! Not all of us are smart as you to use such big words, must be from setting around reading the dictionary. TnT Forget the big words, did you at least get the Figueroa reference...and why I made it? The name Dan Quail rings a bell! I'm glad you are around two make sure we don't all goe offf halfed cocked and spill a worrd witd lesss than camplete accurracy now and then. Humour, Tinkerntom. Humour. I thought I was being humorous also, thanks for the compliment! I am surre yu woold knot be able to figur oot what else important is going on or been saide if thar wert a sppeellen errorr. Some politicians carreers have fallen because of a simple misspelled word. Now for those who set around and read a dictionary all day for inspirational reading, cause they can't figure anything really significant to do than to be picky about other folks spelling errors If I had just jumped into RPB and made a joke about your spelling abilities, I'd have to agree with you. However, in light of the vast amounts of your verbiage that I have waded through on numerous occasions, you might be getting a tad carried away with this angle. Hey, you have asked questions that sometimes required an indepth discussion. If you want to keep it simple, ask simple questions! and can't make a positive constructive contribution to an ongoing discussion, then it should not surprise you when they would delight to bring down a decent and honorable man Humble too! I agree, he could have acted more humble, but then politicians running for high office aren't known for being humble, and the news media loves to find a weak point, and never let it go. I am sure that if you ask Dan, how to spell patato now, he would be able to tell you. So should we ask him to be president now, that he knows how to spell patato! because of a spelling error, in order to promote their own philanderer, and then think that the philanderer is a asset to the country and the world. Uh. I'm promoting a philanderer by having fun with your spelling of potato? No, but the media at the time sure had fun at Dan's expense, and used it to promote BillyBob, without really checking out some of the serious allegations about the latter. And then they act surprised about Monica. But such is how some enlightened elitist think and act. And so it would not surprise me that the same enlightened elitist attitude would be substituted for a meaningjul contribution on something as lame as the RBP. TnT Man, you jesus freaks sure ain't fun. Oh, we can be fun, but I prefer when discussing substantive issues with you, instead of my spelling, or for that matter yours, not becoming the subject. Sp flames are not particularly interesting. If it is critical for the content of the discussion, then clarify for clarity sake, otherwise figure it out. I have seen so many threads just break down into nit-picking ****ing contest. I know that you are able to discuss issues in a mature and thoughtful manner. I have gotten to know enough about you to know that you have alot to contribute to a discussion, and that you have a perspective that is valuable for me to hear. It is distressing and annoying when you get picky and penny ante, and I am inclined to just ignore you as I do a few others. There are times when we snipe at each other, and it can be fun, from the stand point that as we have gotten to know one another, we know each others hot buttons. Hopefully we do not do so to destroy the other person. I am sure that from your perspective of me going over the edge, while you are setting on your couch reading the dictionary, must look very humorous to a Martian checking out the local electronic binary data fields surrounding the Earth. Some of the quips are cute, clever, and funny, and then some are mean, nasty, and hurt. I would assume from what you have indicated about your respect for mankind, that you would not intentionally hurt another human being. Why would you do it mentally, and then claim it was fun. See I've gotten to know you to well, and I actually don't think you are such a bad guy! Respectfully TnT Here is something funny, I was checking out my post, and I still can't spell "potato!" I wanted to warn you so that you don't choke on patato, laughing! TnT |
in article , Tinkerntom
at wrote on 3/20/05 4:30 AM: snip Uh. I'm promoting a philanderer by having fun with your spelling of potato? No, but the media at the time sure had fun at Dan's expense, and used it to promote BillyBob, without really checking out some of the serious allegations about the latter. And then they act surprised about Monica. Billy Bob was hardly the first president to mess around. If George W isn't, it's probably only because he is so incredibly unappealing. But such is how some enlightened elitist think and act. And so it would not surprise me that the same enlightened elitist attitude would be substituted for a meaningjul contribution on something as lame as the RBP. TnT Man, you jesus freaks sure ain't fun. Oh, we can be fun, but I prefer when discussing substantive issues with you, instead of my spelling, or for that matter yours, not becoming the subject. Sp flames are not particularly interesting. It wasn't a flame, Tinkerntom. Your are getting quite wound up on this angle, when clearly if you look back over our umpteen questions, you can't make a case that I pick on your spelling. Had ANYONE made that particular spelling error, I could not have resisted a reference to the potatoe incident. If it is critical for the content of the discussion, then clarify for clarity sake, otherwise figure it out. I have seen so many threads just break down into nit-picking ****ing contest. Again, you are getting wound up over nothing. I know that you are able to discuss issues in a mature and thoughtful manner. I wasn't discussing an issue. I was having fun with a reference to the potatoe incident. I have gotten to know enough about you to know that you have alot to contribute to a discussion, and that you have a perspective that is valuable for me to hear. It is distressing and annoying when you get picky and penny ante, and I am inclined to just ignore you as I do a few others. Tinkerntom, by all means if you feel that you need to ignore me, go ahead, by why you would chose to do so on the basis of the potatoe joke will surely be a huge mystery. There are times when we snipe at each other, and it can be fun, from the stand point that as we have gotten to know one another, we know each others hot buttons. Hopefully we do not do so to destroy the other person. I am sure that from your perspective of me going over the edge, while you are setting on your couch reading the dictionary, must look very humorous to a Martian checking out the local electronic binary data fields surrounding the Earth. I don't think I even have a dictionary here, perhaps a scrabble dictionary somewhere. I don't use particular big words very often Tinkerntom. Some of the quips are cute, clever, and funny, and then some are mean, nasty, and hurt. I would assume from what you have indicated about your respect for mankind, that you would not intentionally hurt another human being. Why would you do it mentally, and then claim it was fun. See I've gotten to know you to well, and I actually don't think you are such a bad guy! Respectfully TnT What are we talking about here? The potatoe spelling? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:02 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com