Bull****. My address and phone number was in the ad and you know it. After
you posted it, I went back and edited the ad to remove that information. I
also killed the email address and it is no longer active. I am also trying
to get the ad removed from that site entirely.

*You* knew the ad contained that personal information about me yet you chose
to post it here. *You* deliberately sought it out and posted it here.

Yes, you are an internet stalker and lack morals and ethics.

That, Mr. Hertvik, is *another phucking lie!*

You did not go back and "edit" the ad. There was no address and phone
number on the ad when I posted the link. Look very carefully: Is there
even a place on the advertising form for an address and phone number? I
don't remember one. After your "edit", does the ad still say you
haven't logged on since 2003? What a pathetic and obviously false
claim. You certainly are desperate to try and salvage some credibility.

Wow. You come so clearly into focus with this latest claim. Look up
pathological. You get caught in one lie, ("Gould revealed my address
and phone number") and you simply try to cover with another, ("It
doesn't show in the ad now because I went back and edited it") and then
another?, and then another?
(I could edit the ad but they wouldn't let me delete it!)?

I wouldn't have posted the link if it had contained your address and
phone number.

It's so inconsistent for you to be so paranoid that somebody will be
able to connect your malicious behavior on the net with your actual
identity that you go back and "kill" an email address you previously
published and your new false, fictitious, blatant lie that the ad
originally contained your address and phone number. Nobody as nervous
about publishing their name and address as you seem to be would have
ever put it an ad. We both know it wasn't there. We both know that it
isn't until a day later, and a string of unanswerable refutations of
your false claim that I disclosed your address and phone number, that
this new story that you "edited" the ad has appeared.


But be well aware that I could have revealed your address had I wanted
to.
Ever hear the limerick about a guy from "(insert word here)" who "went
to sea in a (insert word here)"? Yeah, I know your address, phone
number, 10-digit zip code, etc. It's publicly available on the internet
by typing in a very common web address, and I'll bet 90% of the people
reading this NG know exactly where to go to find it. Even so, I choose
to keep this information confidential, but if you want to continue to
lie that I have disclosed it then there will certainly be no reason for
me to continue doing so. This entire exercise began after I expressed
some disapproval that another poster was using a funny photo to flame
you and you responded by furiously charging me with endorsing the use
of the photo for that purpose.

See, Jim......if I'm going to get the blame I might as well have the
game.
You still want to insist that I revealed your address and phone number?
I can do so with just a few keystrokes. It's up to you. I'm willing to
help your fantasies become reality, even if it's in arrears.

wrote in message
oups.com...



Bull****. My address and phone number was in the ad and you know it.
After
you posted it, I went back and edited the ad to remove that information.
I
also killed the email address and it is no longer active. I am also
trying
to get the ad removed from that site entirely.

*You* knew the ad contained that personal information about me yet you
chose
to post it here. *You* deliberately sought it out and posted it here.

Yes, you are an internet stalker and lack morals and ethics.

That, Mr. Hert, is *another phucking lie!*


Bull****, and you know better. I removed the address and phone number after
you had the balls to post it here. And soon the entire ad will be removed.

Others saw the address and phone number too before I removed it.

Stop the spin Chuck. You were caught as an internet stalker and are now no
better than Harry Krause, the king of internet stalking.

"Yo Ho" wrote in message
...

Harry,
Why do you think social worker is not a noble enough profession for your
wife?

Didn't you say your wife was a Dr. Dr.?

I thought you said she had a MD with a PHD? I thought that was why you
were
able to provide rec.boats with a medical expert to diagnose the current
mental health of the regulars in rec.boats.

I think a social worker is a noble profession, but I am sure your wife
would
be upset if she knew you did not.



http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...bda8?dmode=sou
rce&hl=en



"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Yo Ho wrote:
Harry,
You are correct, you said you wife (the social worker) was a MD with a
PHD.



Wrong again, scheisskopf.



--
If it is Bad for Bush,
It is Good for the United States.

Don White wrote:
wrote:



Looks like the Moped warrior sent out for reinforcements. :-)


Looks like they plan to 'Smither' you into submission. Don't you feel a
slimy feeling developing on your skin?

Actually I feel like I've driven poor JimH to the brink of insanity.
That's too bad.

Did you see his latest claim, that the ad originally contained his home
address and phone number when I posted the link and that the only
reason it isn't there now is because he went back and "edited" it?

Poor deluded JimH. How will he ever explain that the website form
doesn't even *offer* a line upon which one could enter a home address
or phone number? Perhaps he'll claim that he forced the Swarm and
Destroy Moped Army website to reengineer their entire website, in
arrears, to bolster his blatant lie that my link revealed his home
address and phone number.

One of the problems with pathological liars is that when they get
caught they get desperate. When they get desperate they get careless.
When they get careless, they claim to have "edited" information off a
form that doesn't even have a blank to carry that information in the
first place.

With the claim that he "edited" his home address and phone number,
(from a form with no capacity to show home address and phone number),
JimH has revealed who and what he is for all who care to see it. What a
joke that he
yaks away at others about morals.

wrote in message
oups.com...


Don White wrote:
wrote:



Looks like the Moped warrior sent out for reinforcements. :-)


Looks like they plan to 'Smither' you into submission. Don't you feel a
slimy feeling developing on your skin?

Actually I feel like I've driven poor JimH to the brink of insanity.
That's too bad.

Did you see his latest claim, that the ad originally contained his home
address and phone number when I posted the link and that the only
reason it isn't there now is because he went back and "edited" it?

Which I did, and you know it as do the others who saw my address and phone
number in the ad shortly after you posted it.

Now go ahead and start bashing me and spinning the story. That is, the
thing to do when cornered.

Yo Ho wrote:
Chuck,
What was your purpose of publishing a 2 yr old ad?


Careful YO HO, you'll blow hell out of JimH's daily story. You rather
obviously saw the ad when the last time JimH had logged on was in 2003.
When pressed yesterday, you backed off your claim that the ad you saw
had JimH's home phone number and you never mentioned his home address.
The latest
version of the truth from Ohio is that the "ad had my home address and
phone number when Gould put up the link, but I went in and edited them
off".
JimH has logged on again since you saw the ad from 2003, and his claim
is now that he edited or erased his home address and phone number from
the ad. I'm going to be fascinated to learn how his name and home
address ever appeared (as he falsely claims) on a standardized form
with *no* category for either item.








wrote in message
oups.com...




More proof that Harry Krause is indeed an internet stalker. Chuck Gould
proved it today to everyone by finding then posting my address and phone
number here.


Yet another blatant lie from the Moped warrior. Nobody has posted your
address and phone number here. Have you no regard for the truth at all?
How dare you call someone else immoral?

wrote in message
ups.com...


Yo Ho wrote:
Chuck,
What was your purpose of publishing a 2 yr old ad?


Careful YO HO, you'll blow hell out of JimH's daily story. You rather
obviously saw the ad when the last time JimH had logged on was in 2003.
When pressed yesterday, you backed off your claim that the ad you saw
had JimH's home phone number and you never mentioned his home address.
The latest
version of the truth from Ohio is that the "ad had my home address and
phone number when Gould put up the link, but I went in and edited them
off".
JimH has logged on again since you saw the ad from 2003, and his claim
is now that he edited or erased his home address and phone number from
the ad. I'm going to be fascinated to learn how his name and home
address ever appeared (as he falsely claims) on a standardized form
with *no* category for either item.




Bull****.

Name, email address, suject, attachment, comments. Those are the fields.
Address and phone number were in the comments section.

You know what you did. Too bad you are not man enough to admit it.

wrote in message
ups.com...


Yo Ho wrote:
Chuck,
What was your purpose of publishing a 2 yr old ad?


Careful YO HO, you'll blow hell out of JimH's daily story. You rather
obviously saw the ad when the last time JimH had logged on was in 2003.
When pressed yesterday, you backed off your claim that the ad you saw
had JimH's home phone number and you never mentioned his home address.
The latest
version of the truth from Ohio is that the "ad had my home address and
phone number when Gould put up the link, but I went in and edited them
off".
JimH has logged on again since you saw the ad from 2003, and his claim
is now that he edited or erased his home address and phone number from
the ad. I'm going to be fascinated to learn how his name and home
address ever appeared (as he falsely claims) on a standardized form
with *no* category for either item.




Not possible? Go check again because I "totally" edited it.

Here is the original link that you posted....you know the one that had my
name, address and phone number in it.

http://www.mopedarmy.com/resources/mod/boatnut/

I await your apology for stalking me and then posting personal information
about me here, including my address and phone number.

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


Yo Ho wrote:
Chuck,
What was your purpose of publishing a 2 yr old ad?


Careful YO HO, you'll blow hell out of JimH's daily story. You rather
obviously saw the ad when the last time JimH had logged on was in 2003.
When pressed yesterday, you backed off your claim that the ad you saw
had JimH's home phone number and you never mentioned his home address.
The latest
version of the truth from Ohio is that the "ad had my home address and
phone number when Gould put up the link, but I went in and edited them
off".
JimH has logged on again since you saw the ad from 2003, and his claim
is now that he edited or erased his home address and phone number from
the ad. I'm going to be fascinated to learn how his name and home
address ever appeared (as he falsely claims) on a standardized form
with *no* category for either item.




Bull****.

Name, email address, suject, attachment, comments. Those are the fields.
Address and phone number were in the comments section.

You know what you did. Too bad you are not man enough to admit it.


Too late, JimH. Many, many people saw your ad when your last log-on was
in 2003. Those who did know that the comments section contained
information that it was your son's moped and that it had 1100 miles on
it. Those who did know that it did *not* contain your home address and
phone number. Piling lie upon lie upon lie is simply digging you in
deeper.

"The comments section" indeed. How very predictable and pathological of
you.
Consider admitting that you lied- it would be easier than digging
yourself ever deeper.

Ask yourself: How believable would it even be for a guy who is
obviously frantic that his home address and phone number be kept off
the internet
to voluntarily offer that information in the comment section of a form
that doesn't ask for it? Not only are you proving yourself a liar, but
you are reproving it again, and again, and again, and again.

I feel so sorry for you in your desperation that I'm halfway inclined
to out
your home address and phone number now and vindicate your
claims.......but I'd be sorry for that in the future so I won't. You,
however, have made your bed with this new round of lies that the ad as
originally linked carried your name and phone number and that you
"erased" them (long after) I posted a link to your classified ad. You
are nothing more than a sociopathic liar.
Even you can't really believe your line of BS on this thing, and
challenging my "manhood" is a very weak dodge.

Boating related questions:
What sort of fire extinguisher do you recommend for pants?
How would you extract a boat tangled in telephone wires?

wrote in message
ups.com...


*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


Yo Ho wrote:
Chuck,
What was your purpose of publishing a 2 yr old ad?


Careful YO HO, you'll blow hell out of JimH's daily story. You rather
obviously saw the ad when the last time JimH had logged on was in 2003.
When pressed yesterday, you backed off your claim that the ad you saw
had JimH's home phone number and you never mentioned his home address.
The latest
version of the truth from Ohio is that the "ad had my home address and
phone number when Gould put up the link, but I went in and edited them
off".
JimH has logged on again since you saw the ad from 2003, and his claim
is now that he edited or erased his home address and phone number from
the ad. I'm going to be fascinated to learn how his name and home
address ever appeared (as he falsely claims) on a standardized form
with *no* category for either item.




Bull****.

Name, email address, suject, attachment, comments. Those are the fields.
Address and phone number were in the comments section.

You know what you did. Too bad you are not man enough to admit it.


Too late, JimH. Many, many people saw your ad when your last log-on was
in 2003. Those who did know that the comments section contained
information that it was your son's moped and that it had 1100 miles on
it. Those who did know that it did *not* contain your home address and
phone number. Piling lie upon lie upon lie is simply digging you in
deeper.

Bull****. Even you commented that it showed that I logged onto the account
yesterday. I was removing my address and phone number (editing the ad) when
I did.

So then you said there was no field for phone number and address and I
showed you where.

So then you said I did not edit it. So showed you how easily it could be
done.

So now you say it the last log on was 2003 before I totally edited it today.

So now you continue to pile on the insults and personal attacks on me.

You are an internet stalker Chuck. You posted my address and phone number
and now deny every doing so, even though several folks here saw it.

Spin away Chucky. You might some day become as good as your buddy Krause.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 11:44:10 -0400, *JimH* wrote:


Not possible? Go check again because I "totally" edited it.

Here is the original link that you posted....you know the one that had my
name, address and phone number in it.

http://www.mopedarmy.com/resources/mod/boatnut/

I await your apology for stalking me and then posting personal information
about me here, including my address and phone number.


You know, Jim, this is the internet. That web page has been cached as it
was originally written. I don't see any need to post the link, do you?

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 11:44:10 -0400, *JimH* wrote:


Not possible? Go check again because I "totally" edited it.

Here is the original link that you posted....you know the one that had my
name, address and phone number in it.

http://www.mopedarmy.com/resources/mod/boatnut/

I await your apology for stalking me and then posting personal
information
about me here, including my address and phone number.


You know, Jim, this is the internet. That web page has been cached as it
was originally written. I don't see any need to post the link, do you?

Sure, to show the truth.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:19:07 -0400, *JimH* wrote:


Sure, to show the truth.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache...+hertvik&hl=en

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


Yo Ho wrote:
Chuck,
What was your purpose of publishing a 2 yr old ad?


Careful YO HO, you'll blow hell out of JimH's daily story. You rather
obviously saw the ad when the last time JimH had logged on was in 2003.
When pressed yesterday, you backed off your claim that the ad you saw
had JimH's home phone number and you never mentioned his home address.
The latest
version of the truth from Ohio is that the "ad had my home address and
phone number when Gould put up the link, but I went in and edited them
off".
JimH has logged on again since you saw the ad from 2003, and his claim
is now that he edited or erased his home address and phone number from
the ad. I'm going to be fascinated to learn how his name and home
address ever appeared (as he falsely claims) on a standardized form
with *no* category for either item.




Not possible? Go check again because I "totally" edited it.

Here is the original link that you posted....you know the one that had my
name, address and phone number in it.

http://www.mopedarmy.com/resources/mod/boatnut/

I await your apology for stalking me and then posting personal information
about me here, including my address and phone number.


But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.

You had two possibilities to make your case: 1) If your home address
and phone number were really in the initial ad and had *already* been
revealed, as you falsely claim, you would have had nothing to lose by
leaving the ad alone and saying "Look in the comments section,
dip****". You did not.

2) You could have outed your own home address and phone number when you
logged onto the ad yesterday by adding them to the comments section and
then you could have falsely claimed they had been there all along. Too
late! You did not. Good grief, not only are you not subtle, but not the
least bit clever, either.

You have blown the only two chances that I could see where you would
have been able to make your case. All your fellow travelers who logged
onto that ad
yesterday, (such as Smithers who acknowledges that he saw the 2003
version), would have been on my butt like a case of acne each time I
pointed out that the ad never contained your home address and phone
number if it had been in the "comments" section.

I suppose you *have* taken the only (very weak) course of action open
to you when confronted with the truth. Change the ad as it existed, and
then hope to
turn this into a "did-so/ did-not" discussion after the actual evidence
was destroyed. Wow. This whole episode is so very revealing.

I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?

wrote in message
oups.com...


But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.

I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?


Yes. I got caught up in this and I thought I had no other way out. I made
a mistake accusing you , although at the time I did think the ad contained
that information. I dug myself deeper and deeper and made you the
scapegoat.

I am ashamed of what I did and have lost all credibility here for doing it.
I should have known better after I discovered I was initially wrong.

I apologize Chuck. I have no excuse.

My wife the doctor is back in school part-time, getting, of all things,
a doctorate. In a couple of years, I'll either have to address her as
Doctor Doctor or Major Major.


Just call me...Yossarian.


And you'll still be a jail guard.


--
Harry Krause
- -
Conservatives tell us that if the workers want to share profits, it is
communism, but if management wants to share profits, it is a bonus.


"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Yo Ho" wrote in message
...

Harry,
Why do you think social worker is not a noble enough profession for your
wife?

Didn't you say your wife was a Dr. Dr.?

I thought you said she had a MD with a PHD? I thought that was why you
were
able to provide rec.boats with a medical expert to diagnose the current
mental health of the regulars in rec.boats.

I think a social worker is a noble profession, but I am sure your wife
would
be upset if she knew you did not.



http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...bda8?dmode=sou
rce&hl=en



"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Yo Ho wrote:
Harry,
You are correct, you said you wife (the social worker) was a MD with
a
PHD.



Wrong again, scheisskopf.



--
If it is Bad for Bush,
It is Good for the United States.

I just skimmed over the ad, so I would not bet the farm if he had his
address, but as you stated with the info available on the web site 90% of
those who read rec.boats could find it in 10 secs.

So what was the purpose of posting the 2 yr old ad in here?


wrote in message
ups.com...


Yo Ho wrote:
Chuck,
What was your purpose of publishing a 2 yr old ad?


Careful YO HO, you'll blow hell out of JimH's daily story. You rather
obviously saw the ad when the last time JimH had logged on was in 2003.
When pressed yesterday, you backed off your claim that the ad you saw
had JimH's home phone number and you never mentioned his home address.
The latest
version of the truth from Ohio is that the "ad had my home address and
phone number when Gould put up the link, but I went in and edited them
off".
JimH has logged on again since you saw the ad from 2003, and his claim
is now that he edited or erased his home address and phone number from
the ad. I'm going to be fascinated to learn how his name and home
address ever appeared (as he falsely claims) on a standardized form
with *no* category for either item.








wrote in message
oups.com...




More proof that Harry Krause is indeed an internet stalker. Chuck
Gould
proved it today to everyone by finding then posting my address and
phone
number here.


Yet another blatant lie from the Moped warrior. Nobody has posted your
address and phone number here. Have you no regard for the truth at all?
How dare you call someone else immoral?

Yo Ho wrote:
I just skimmed over the ad, so I would not bet the farm if he had his
address, but as you stated with the info available on the web site 90% of
those who read rec.boats could find it in 10 secs.

So what was the purpose of posting the 2 yr old ad in here?


After I expressed a (slight- that's all I could really muster)
displeasure that somebody posted a photo to flame JimH, he jumped in to
attack me for applauding and condoning the practice. See the top of
this ridiculously long thread.

If'm I'm going to get the blame, I may as well have the game. I posted
a link to a photo that JimH *himself* had published on the internet,
where he self-identified as a member of the Swarm and Destroy Moped
Army. That's far more humorous than a photo that really has no
connection to JimH except for a slanderous allegation.

Jim's full name and the city of his residence have been common
knowledge here almost forever. Harry commonly addresses JimH with his
last name, and JimH confirms that by protesting the use of it. There
was no new information in that ad. His street address and his phone
number were not there. Posters earlier in this same thread yesterday
confirmed that his street address and phone number were not in the ad.

If you have been here long enough, you will remember when JimH's name,
phone number, and home address actually *did* appear in rec.boats. JimH
had placed a classified ad for the Maxum he was selling when he got out
of boating, on the rec.boats.marketplace website. That ad, unlike the
moped ad, contained his phone number and street address. If I recall
correctly, JimH was disappointed with the number of hits he was getting
from the rec.boats.marketplace site (all four people there had seen his
boat and decided not to call) and he linked the ad into rec.boats to
see about stirring up some additional response.
I could be hazy on the detail about how the ad actually got posted here
and wouldn't "bet the farm" either after these several years, but
that's as I remember it and I know for a fact the ad had his address
and phone number listed.

So anybody who wants to contact JimH at his home address or phone
number has several options. There are free, public websites where even
so-called "unlisted" phone numbers are available in a matter of
seconds. Some of them will disclose the street address of the
residence, and more than a few will print out a map and driving
directions to that location- on a turn by turn basis- from anywhere in
the country. This isn't news to anybody who has owned a computer for
more than a week. I could call JimH, send him some mail, or drive to
his house for a visit if I so desired. Sure as heck, I don't desire and
I wouldn't expect to be welcomed. Nor do I think it important or
appropriate to "out" this information, and it wouldn't even be useful
as it is so easily and publicly available to anybody who might want it.

Chuck,

I have mentioned it before and I will say it again. This is exactly the
reason why internet security people recommend you keep your personal info
off of NG's. Someone who wanted to screw someone could do it very easy.

Harry has always used any personal info in a negative manner. Name, address
and telephone numbers in the wrong hands can be dangerous.





wrote in message
oups.com...


Yo Ho wrote:
I just skimmed over the ad, so I would not bet the farm if he had his
address, but as you stated with the info available on the web site 90% of
those who read rec.boats could find it in 10 secs.

So what was the purpose of posting the 2 yr old ad in here?


After I expressed a (slight- that's all I could really muster)
displeasure that somebody posted a photo to flame JimH, he jumped in to
attack me for applauding and condoning the practice. See the top of
this ridiculously long thread.

If'm I'm going to get the blame, I may as well have the game. I posted
a link to a photo that JimH *himself* had published on the internet,
where he self-identified as a member of the Swarm and Destroy Moped
Army. That's far more humorous than a photo that really has no
connection to JimH except for a slanderous allegation.

Jim's full name and the city of his residence have been common
knowledge here almost forever. Harry commonly addresses JimH with his
last name, and JimH confirms that by protesting the use of it. There
was no new information in that ad. His street address and his phone
number were not there. Posters earlier in this same thread yesterday
confirmed that his street address and phone number were not in the ad.

If you have been here long enough, you will remember when JimH's name,
phone number, and home address actually *did* appear in rec.boats. JimH
had placed a classified ad for the Maxum he was selling when he got out
of boating, on the rec.boats.marketplace website. That ad, unlike the
moped ad, contained his phone number and street address. If I recall
correctly, JimH was disappointed with the number of hits he was getting
from the rec.boats.marketplace site (all four people there had seen his
boat and decided not to call) and he linked the ad into rec.boats to
see about stirring up some additional response.
I could be hazy on the detail about how the ad actually got posted here
and wouldn't "bet the farm" either after these several years, but
that's as I remember it and I know for a fact the ad had his address
and phone number listed.

So anybody who wants to contact JimH at his home address or phone
number has several options. There are free, public websites where even
so-called "unlisted" phone numbers are available in a matter of
seconds. Some of them will disclose the street address of the
residence, and more than a few will print out a map and driving
directions to that location- on a turn by turn basis- from anywhere in
the country. This isn't news to anybody who has owned a computer for
more than a week. I could call JimH, send him some mail, or drive to
his house for a visit if I so desired. Sure as heck, I don't desire and
I wouldn't expect to be welcomed. Nor do I think it important or
appropriate to "out" this information, and it wouldn't even be useful
as it is so easily and publicly available to anybody who might want it.

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


Don White wrote:

wrote:

Looks like the Moped warrior sent out for reinforcements. :-)


Looks like they plan to 'Smither' you into submission. Don't you feel a
slimy feeling developing on your skin?

Actually I feel like I've driven poor JimH to the brink of insanity.
That's too bad.

Did you see his latest claim, that the ad originally contained his home
address and phone number when I posted the link and that the only
reason it isn't there now is because he went back and "edited" it?


Which I did, and you know it as do the others who saw my address and phone
number in the ad shortly after you posted it.

Now go ahead and start bashing me and spinning the story. That is, the
thing to do when cornered.


It just might be time for those who honestly saw your phone
number/address on the ad to put their names forward.
I looked at the ad twice and all I saw was an e-mail address. Was there
some button to click on that I missed?

thunder wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:19:07 -0400, *JimH* wrote:



Sure, to show the truth.


http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache...+hertvik&hl=en



Thank you Thunder for performing a community service. I was starting to
wonder if I had overlooked it. Do you think JimH is actually talking
about the 'members forum"? It lists all the members of his 'Swarm &
Destroy' Army in Ohio.

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 20:25:08 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

John H wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:21:25 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:


"Yo Ho" wrote in message
...

Why would I want to email you? Doesn't make any sense at all.


"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

Yo Ho wrote:

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...


I've not posted your name, address, phone number, or SSN, either.


Yes, but if you knew it I am sure you would have. I know you phone
numbers, but have keep them off the internet..

If you knew what I know about you, you'd have a heart attack, fella.
It's only my good nature...



More proof that Harry Krause is indeed an internet stalker. Chuck Gould
proved it today to everyone by finding then posting my address and phone
number here.

Why the need to collect personal data on folks here Krause? Do you get your
jollies from it?



Now Krause is posting his hate-mail on a Chesapeake Bay fishing forum. Getting
caught constantly has got to be a bitch!

Hate mail? Why don't you repost what you think is hate mail here,
Herring Brain.

You've got it bad, don't you Krause?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 09:31:46 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

*JimH* wrote:
"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

*JimH* wrote:

wrote in message
egroups.com...


HarryKrause wrote:


Yo Ho wrote:


Harry,
I know you are not the brightest bulb in rec.boats, so you might not
understand the joke.

You got on your soap box and asked why people don't talk about
personal
information in rec.boats. You specifically asked about career
choices. I
picked a career choice out of the air ( I own an art studio). You
immediately turned that around to I am into kiddy porn.

Even you could see the humor.

You are way too predictable.


D'oh. I didn't think for a New York second that you worked at or owned
an art studio, or anything else creative. But there's no reason for me
to doubt you're into kiddie porn. It suits your personality here.

Try to remember, I know who you are.

Hell, he's even tried to tell people here that he had a PhD.



He did it in a kidding way after Krause made up the story about his wife
having 2 doctorate degrees. I guess you missed that point Kevin.

Sorry, crapforbrains, I never ever said my wife had "2 doctorate
degrees."



Sure you did Krause. Just like you lied about your house, your custom made
36 foot lobster boat, your education and fishing trips you supposedly took
(in your bathtub) this season. You got caught on all those lies.

It must really suck being you.

So how is the fishing lately?


Poor Jim. Boatless and green with envy.

Here's one of my boats and the garage part of my house, Jim:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y13...at-Fish/yo.jpg


Which part of my garage, which, apparently, is partially reflected in
the boat photo I posted the other day, looks like a trailer to you?
Go ahead, Hertvik: use your words.

As I have stated here numerous times, fishing in Chesapeake Bay is, at
best, so-so, at least in relation to fishing in Florida. There aren't
that many interesting species to catch, there isn't a lot of natural
substantial bottom structure, there are few rocky outcroppings into the
water, the water quality is only fair, and so forth. If you are
satisfied catching stripers, croakers, and pinfish in the mid Bay, I
goess it is ok. I like more aggressive fish.

When will you be buying a boat, Hertvik, so as to end your state of
boatlessness?

Why, given your attitude towards fishing in the bay, do you make up stories
about same?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 07:26:05 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...



More proof that Harry Krause is indeed an internet stalker. Chuck Gould
proved it today to everyone by finding then posting my address and phone
number here.


Yet another blatant lie from the Moped warrior. Nobody has posted your
address and phone number here. Have you no regard for the truth at all?
How dare you call someone else immoral?



Bull****. My address and phone number was in the ad and you know it. After
you posted it, I went back and edited the ad to remove that information. I
also killed the email address and it is no longer active. I am also trying
to get the ad removed from that site entirely.


The wind blew, the crap flew, and out walked Hertvik.

You're a slimeball liar, Hertvik.

Glass houses, Harry????
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:24:15 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

Yo Ho wrote:
That must explain why I thought I saw address and phone number. I still
can't figure out what Gould thought was funny about his post. A group of
people who use mopeds (a low cost, low energy consumption means of
transportation) make up a fun name for their online group along with a
tongue in cheek motto (Moped Army - Swarm and Destroy) and Gould acts like a
little girl jumping up and down because JimH is selling his son's bike on
the site.


"*JimH*" wrote in message
...


The only thing worse than an asshole like you is an unctuous asshole
like you.

Solid glass houses, Harry??
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:38:37 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

Yo Ho wrote:
"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

The only thing worse than an asshole like you is an unctuous asshole like
you.


Harry,
Why do you insist on using profanity in rec.boats. ; )




I believe in "truth in description." You are an unctuous asshole.
You are "insincerely, self-servingly, abd smugly agreeable or earnest:
an unctuous toady; full of oily praise, oleaginous hypocrisy and smarmy
self-importance."

That would be you.

Perhaps Swedish crystal houses, Harry?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

*JimH* wrote:

wrote in message
legroups.com...


HarryKrause wrote:


Yo Ho wrote:


Harry,
I know you are not the brightest bulb in rec.boats, so you might
not
understand the joke.

You got on your soap box and asked why people don't talk about
personal
information in rec.boats. You specifically asked about career
choices. I
picked a career choice out of the air ( I own an art studio). You
immediately turned that around to I am into kiddy porn.

Even you could see the humor.

You are way too predictable.


D'oh. I didn't think for a New York second that you worked at or
owned
an art studio, or anything else creative. But there's no reason for
me
to doubt you're into kiddie porn. It suits your personality here.

Try to remember, I know who you are.

Hell, he's even tried to tell people here that he had a PhD.



He did it in a kidding way after Krause made up the story about his
wife
having 2 doctorate degrees. I guess you missed that point Kevin.

Sorry, crapforbrains, I never ever said my wife had "2 doctorate
degrees."



Sure you did Krause. Just like you lied about your house, your custom
made
36 foot lobster boat, your education and fishing trips you supposedly
took
(in your bathtub) this season. You got caught on all those lies.

It must really suck being you.

So how is the fishing lately?


Poor Jim. Boatless and green with envy.

Here's one of my boats and the garage part of my house, Jim:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y13...at-Fish/yo.jpg


Which part of my garage, which, apparently, is partially reflected in
the boat photo I posted the other day, looks like a trailer to you?
Go ahead, Hert: use your words.

As I have stated here numerous times, fishing in Chesapeake Bay is, at
best, so-so, at least in relation to fishing in Florida. There aren't
that many interesting species to catch, there isn't a lot of natural
substantial bottom structure, there are few rocky outcroppings into the
water, the water quality is only fair, and so forth. If you are
satisfied catching stripers, croakers, and pinfish in the mid Bay, I
goess it is ok. I like more aggressive fish.

When will you be buying a boat, Hertv, so as to end your state of
boatlessness?


Why are you so infatuated with the fact that, for the time being, we do not
own a boat Krause? I guess I could make up a story about owning a custom
made 36 foot lobster boat......but I will leave that to you.

Nice side picture of your house Krause. Is it a one bedroom on slab?

How's the fishing Krause? And did your wife finally get her second
doctorate?

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:53:11 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.


I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?



Yes. I got caught up in this and I thought I had no other way out. I made
a mistake accusing you , although at the time I did think the ad contained
that information. I dug myself deeper and deeper and made you the
scapegoat.

I am ashamed of what I did and have lost all credibility here for doing it.
I should have known better after I discovered I was initially wrong.

I apologize Chuck. I have no excuse.



Still think my house looks like a travel trailer, Hertvik?

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y13...at-Fish/yo.jpg

At least he had the balls to apologize, Harry.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:53:11 -0400, HarryKrause
wrote:

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.


I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?



Yes. I got caught up in this and I thought I had no other way out. I
made
a mistake accusing you , although at the time I did think the ad
contained
that information. I dug myself deeper and deeper and made you the
scapegoat.

I am ashamed of what I did and have lost all credibility here for doing
it.
I should have known better after I discovered I was initially wrong.

I apologize Chuck. I have no excuse.



Still think my house looks like a travel trailer, Hert?

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y13...at-Fish/yo.jpg

At least he had the balls to apologize, Harry.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

Thanks John.

And Krause, your house looks like a tiny one bedroom ranch on slab with a
small boat parked in front of it.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 06:30:41 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

John H wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:21:25 -0400, "*JimH*" wrote:


"Yo Ho" wrote in message
...

Why would I want to email you? Doesn't make any sense at all.


"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

Yo Ho wrote:

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...


I've not posted your name, address, phone number, or SSN, either.


Yes, but if you knew it I am sure you would have. I know you phone
numbers, but have keep them off the internet..

If you knew what I know about you, you'd have a heart attack, fella.
It's only my good nature...



More proof that Harry Krause is indeed an internet stalker. Chuck Gould
proved it today to everyone by finding then posting my address and phone
number here.

Why the need to collect personal data on folks here Krause? Do you get your
jollies from it?



Now Krause is posting his hate-mail on a Chesapeake Bay fishing forum. Getting
caught constantly has got to be a bitch!


You're lying again, Herring. No hate mail was posted there by me.
Let's see your proof.

Here's what I posted...you consider this "hate" mail?

"I see that in addition to croakers, I also caught a Herring."

"Hang tough, John...hire a good guide and one day you, too, will catch
that fish of your dreams."

"Yer good buddy, HK. "


That's it. Real hateful, eh?

Lying? Lying, Harry? *You* are actually calling someone a 'liar'?

I could have used the phrase 'smart assed', I guess. But 'hate-mail' seemed to
fit the bill just fine. If you consider your post having been made in the spirit
of friendship that normally exists on tidalfish, then you should talk to your
wife. She's the one you said was studying to get another PhD, remember?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

John H wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:53:11 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:


*JimH* wrote:

wrote in message
egroups.com...



But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.


I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?



Yes. I got caught up in this and I thought I had no other way out. I made
a mistake accusing you , although at the time I did think the ad contained
that information. I dug myself deeper and deeper and made you the
scapegoat.

I am ashamed of what I did and have lost all credibility here for doing it.
I should have known better after I discovered I was initially wrong.

I apologize Chuck. I have no excuse.



Still think my house looks like a travel trailer, Hertvik?

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y13...at-Fish/yo.jpg


At least he had the balls to apologize, Harry.


Nice that he did...but it's disturbing how long it took.....
Look what he put Chuck through for a couple of days. You have to wonder
at exactly what point did he realize he was wrong and how many accusing
posts did he make knowing he was wrong.

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.

I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?


Yes. I got caught up in this and I thought I had no other way out. I made
a mistake accusing you , although at the time I did think the ad contained
that information. I dug myself deeper and deeper and made you the
scapegoat.

I am ashamed of what I did and have lost all credibility here for doing it.
I should have known better after I discovered I was initially wrong.

I apologize Chuck. I have no excuse.


Dang.

What to say?

Apology accepted, of course.

I must also shoulder some of the blame for this last bout of acrimony.
I responded badly (to something I felt may have been an inappropriate
response to the second post in this thread) when I introduced a link
that I suspected you would find at least slightly discomforting. Had I
known that it would have proven almost mortifying, rather than just a
bit of wicked humor at your own, self-inflicted expense, I would hope
that I might have reconsidered at the time. So I must apologize as well
for lighting this fire and not standing down early on when it became
apparent the discussion was unlikely to be resolved in a positive
manner.

As wew both know, this thing took on a life of its own.

I'm willing to bury the (very bloody) hatchet and just move on. That
will, of course, require some mutual effort but rec.boats would be a
better NG without JimH and Gould gunning for one another all the time.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:21:01 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:53:11 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:


*JimH* wrote:

wrote in message
legroups.com...



But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.


I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?



Yes. I got caught up in this and I thought I had no other way out. I made
a mistake accusing you , although at the time I did think the ad contained
that information. I dug myself deeper and deeper and made you the
scapegoat.

I am ashamed of what I did and have lost all credibility here for doing it.
I should have known better after I discovered I was initially wrong.

I apologize Chuck. I have no excuse.



Still think my house looks like a travel trailer, Hertvik?

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y13...at-Fish/yo.jpg


At least he had the balls to apologize, Harry.


Nice that he did...but it's disturbing how long it took.....
Look what he put Chuck through for a couple of days. You have to wonder
at exactly what point did he realize he was wrong and how many accusing
posts did he make knowing he was wrong.

Knowing Chuck as little as I do, Don, I doubt if he went through a whole lot of
stressful turmoil. He'll survive!

What JimH did was wrong. He admitted it and apologized for it.

Your good buddy, Harry, has spent hours making accusing, name-calling, vicious
posts. Have you ever said a word to him about it? Chuck has.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

wrote in message
ups.com...


*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.

I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?


Yes. I got caught up in this and I thought I had no other way out. I
made
a mistake accusing you , although at the time I did think the ad
contained
that information. I dug myself deeper and deeper and made you the
scapegoat.

I am ashamed of what I did and have lost all credibility here for doing
it.
I should have known better after I discovered I was initially wrong.

I apologize Chuck. I have no excuse.


Dang.

What to say?

Apology accepted, of course.

I must also shoulder some of the blame for this last bout of acrimony.
I responded badly (to something I felt may have been an inappropriate
response to the second post in this thread) when I introduced a link
that I suspected you would find at least slightly discomforting. Had I
known that it would have proven almost mortifying, rather than just a
bit of wicked humor at your own, self-inflicted expense, I would hope
that I might have reconsidered at the time. So I must apologize as well
for lighting this fire and not standing down early on when it became
apparent the discussion was unlikely to be resolved in a positive
manner.

As wew both know, this thing took on a life of its own.

I'm willing to bury the (very bloody) hatchet and just move on. That
will, of course, require some mutual effort but rec.boats would be a
better NG without JimH and Gould gunning for one another all the time.


Thank you Chuck. You are indeed a real gentleman.

And the blame falls on me, not you.

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


But you have screwed yourself, JimH. Don't you realize that? The link
now goes to the ad as you claim to have changed it on June 29. How does
that establish your lie that the ad from 2003 contained your address
and phone number in the comments section. You, I, and everybody else
who saw that ad from 2003 know that it did not.

I will not apologize for doing something that I did not do.

Will you apologize for piling lie, upon lie, upon lie, upon lie?


Yes. I got caught up in this and I thought I had no other way out. I made
a mistake accusing you , although at the time I did think the ad contained
that information. I dug myself deeper and deeper and made you the
scapegoat.

I am ashamed of what I did and have lost all credibility here for doing it.
I should have known better after I discovered I was initially wrong.

I apologize Chuck. I have no excuse.

Good for you. At least you now know that you are an habitual liar. I
hope you get help. You've gone over the edge once again, or else just
plain lied about your vow to quit lying, and childish insulting in the
newsgroup.

Good for you. At least you now know that you are an habitual liar. I
hope you get help. You've gone over the edge once again, or else just
plain lied about your vow to quit lying, and childish insulting in the
newsgroup.


Say Bass- why not consider this a sort of "watershed" moment and take
advantage of the fact to forget the past and put away the anger?

JimH is one of only a handful of people who have shown the courage to
apologize
in this public forum. I think there's plenty of blame on both sides of
all these running NG flame wars, with the situation between JimH and I
a classic example (for which we have both expressed our regrets). It's
hard to say how mnay hours, days, weeks, or months this current "cease
fire" will last- but I hope not to be the one to break it and I
wouldn't be surprised if JimH doesn't feel about the same way.

There are no virgins in this whorehouse of flame. As John Lennon would
say,
why not "give peace a chance"? :-)

Have a happy 4th.

"Yo Ho" wrote in message
...
Harry,
Does your wife know you were so embarrassed about her being an on staff
social worker for the Bricklayers Union, you had to fabricate a story
about
her being a MD with a PHD?

Why can't you accept her just the way she is?

And why does he keep stalking JimH? What need is there to know what one
does for a living?




"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
*JimH* wrote:


HErt and several others here are embarrassed about what they do for a
living, and won't tell us.


Why should I be embarrassed about what I do for a living? It has
provided me with a great income and respect in my field.


What do you do for a living, Hertvik?


And why should I tell you what I do? You and Chuck Gould are proven
internet stalkers and the more you know about someone the more you use
it
against them.


How is disclosing what you do for a living going to reveal any personal
information about you? I mean, let's say you sold men's suits, an
honorable way to make a living. Why would your saying you are a clothier
tell us anything personal about you?

My guess is that you're just embarrassed by what you do. Or did.


How's the fishing lately Krause?

OK. That's all it ever is in Chesapeake Bay.



I see John caught you in another big lie,
this time about a fishing trip you recently reported on (see the thread
"25 fish later"). Using a sock puppet to support your lie and getting
caught. Sort of like when you did the same think with your imaginary
custom made 36 foot lobster boat.


A sock puppet? I used my alternate email address, to leave Herring a
clue.
The alternate email address I use here. If I were operating sub rosa, I
would have used a new email address. D'oh.

I trolled for a Herring fish and I caught one on the first sweep.

By the way, was your house designed by a committee? What is with that
garage treatment and the silly little gazebo on the other end?








--
If it is Bad for Bush,
It is Good for the United States.

"*JimH*" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...



I will ask again. And don't spin the answer this time but answer it
directly.

Exactly what personal comments did I make about you Chuck?


I don't care to repeat them, or to spend the next several weeks looking
up your thousands of personal remarks and reposting them.

Sure. But it is easy to claim that I have made personal attacks on you.



Go right ahead and claim you have never made any personal remarks, that
will be just as credible as everything else you "contribute" here.

I never said I *never* did. Your claim was supposedly about recent
personal attacks I made (specific to your fluff review and SeaRay threads.

You have yet to produce any evidence of recent personal attacks on you by
me.

So once again I will ask:

Exactly what personal comments/attacks did I make about you Chuck?


How
would one sit on that tiny little motorbike with such great big 'nads?


Easy. I had almost as much fun using it as my son did.

Now why the personal insult to me Chuck? I thought this was just the
thing you were whining to me about.


Nothing. I figured as much Chuckie.

*JimH* wrote:
"*JimH*" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...



I will ask again. And don't spin the answer this time but answer it
directly.

Exactly what personal comments did I make about you Chuck?


I don't care to repeat them, or to spend the next several weeks looking
up your thousands of personal remarks and reposting them.

Sure. But it is easy to claim that I have made personal attacks on you.



Go right ahead and claim you have never made any personal remarks, that
will be just as credible as everything else you "contribute" here.

I never said I *never* did. Your claim was supposedly about recent
personal attacks I made (specific to your fluff review and SeaRay threads.

You have yet to produce any evidence of recent personal attacks on you by
me.

So once again I will ask:

Exactly what personal comments/attacks did I make about you Chuck?


How
would one sit on that tiny little motorbike with such great big 'nads?


Easy. I had almost as much fun using it as my son did.

Now why the personal insult to me Chuck? I thought this was just the
thing you were whining to me about.


Nothing. I figured as much Chuckie.

What were you expecting, Jimbo?

Allow me to jog your selective memory:

This is the thread where you demanded that I apologize for revealing
your phone number and home address. Remember?

This is the thread where, when you realized the link to the ad did
*not* reveal your phone number and home address you then claimed that
you had somehow "edited" the ad between the time I had posted the link
and the following day. Remember?

This is the thread where, when nobody- not even your usually devoted
sidekicks- stepped forward to confirm that the ad had ever contained
your home address and phone number and others said that when they
followed the link they did *not* see the phone number and address that
you claimed had been revealed, you finally apologized for lying about
the supposed revelation of your phone number (as well as the
non-existant editing) and explained to one and all that you only did so
because you felt "cornered" by your original false (or erroneous)
charge and couldn't think of an alternative. Remember?

I am really surprised that you would refresh this thread. Do you wear a
"kick me" sign when you visit a biker bar? Do they even have biker bars
for mopeds?