..................inconsistent.

I was *officially* reprimanded by some folks here for posting a non
political article about a current event. Everyone participating in the
discussion offered reasonable comments and there were not flames. OK. Fair
enough. This is a boating NG.

I continue to read numerous posts/threads about cameras, photography, dogs,
pigs, etc. (non boating). However, I read no reprimands about those posts.

A bit confusing. Very inconsistent.

Could someone please explain what the new and improved *rules* of this NG
are?

JimH wrote:
.................inconsistent.

I was *officially* reprimanded by some folks here for posting a non
political article about a current event. Everyone participating in the
discussion offered reasonable comments and there were not flames. OK. Fair
enough. This is a boating NG.

I continue to read numerous posts/threads about cameras, photography, dogs,
pigs, etc. (non boating). However, I read no reprimands about those posts.

A bit confusing. Very inconsistent.

Could someone please explain what the new and improved *rules* of this NG
are?

How about *do unto others as you would have them do unto you*?
One of your problems, Jim, is that you preach to the choir, then don't
heed your own advice.

On 11 Jan 2006 05:32:50 -0800, wrote:


JimH wrote:
.................inconsistent.

I was *officially* reprimanded by some folks here for posting a non
political article about a current event. Everyone participating in the
discussion offered reasonable comments and there were not flames. OK. Fair
enough. This is a boating NG.

I continue to read numerous posts/threads about cameras, photography, dogs,
pigs, etc. (non boating). However, I read no reprimands about those posts.

A bit confusing. Very inconsistent.

Could someone please explain what the new and improved *rules* of this NG
are?

How about *do unto others as you would have them do unto you*?

I agree with that line!

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

wrote:
JimH wrote:

.................inconsistent.

I was *officially* reprimanded by some folks here for posting a non
political article about a current event. Everyone participating in the
discussion offered reasonable comments and there were not flames. OK. Fair
enough. This is a boating NG.

I continue to read numerous posts/threads about cameras, photography, dogs,
pigs, etc. (non boating). However, I read no reprimands about those posts.

A bit confusing. Very inconsistent.

Could someone please explain what the new and improved *rules* of this NG
are?


How about *do unto others as you would have them do unto you*?
One of your problems, Jim, is that you preach to the choir, then don't
heed your own advice.

How about "practice what you preach", Kevin? Notice the clever use of
those fancy quotation marks?

Dan Krueger wrote:


How about "practice what you preach", Kevin? Notice the clever use of
those fancy quotation marks?

Who are you quoting?

Don White wrote:

Dan Krueger wrote:


How about "practice what you preach", Kevin? Notice the clever use of
those fancy quotation marks?


Who are you quoting?

I REALLY hope you are trying to be funny and not stupid.

Dan

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
ink.net...
wrote:
JimH wrote:

.................inconsistent.

I was *officially* reprimanded by some folks here for posting a non
political article about a current event. Everyone participating in the
discussion offered reasonable comments and there were not flames. OK.
Fair
enough. This is a boating NG.

I continue to read numerous posts/threads about cameras, photography,
dogs,
pigs, etc. (non boating). However, I read no reprimands about those
posts.

A bit confusing. Very inconsistent.

Could someone please explain what the new and improved *rules* of this NG
are?


How about *do unto others as you would have them do unto you*?
One of your problems, Jim, is that you preach to the choir, then don't
heed your own advice.

How about "practice what you preach", Kevin? Notice the clever use of
those fancy quotation marks?


I was thinking the exact same thing Dan. Kevin has flamed me several times
today.

"Do unto others........" How funny.

JimH wrote:
"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
ink.net...
wrote:
JimH wrote:

.................inconsistent.

I was *officially* reprimanded by some folks here for posting a non
political article about a current event. Everyone participating in the
discussion offered reasonable comments and there were not flames. OK.
Fair
enough. This is a boating NG.

I continue to read numerous posts/threads about cameras, photography,
dogs,
pigs, etc. (non boating). However, I read no reprimands about those
posts.

A bit confusing. Very inconsistent.

Could someone please explain what the new and improved *rules* of this NG
are?


How about *do unto others as you would have them do unto you*?
One of your problems, Jim, is that you preach to the choir, then don't
heed your own advice.

How about "practice what you preach", Kevin? Notice the clever use of
those fancy quotation marks?


I was thinking the exact same thing Dan. Kevin has flamed me several times
today.

"Do unto others........" How funny.

Here we go again, Jim is doing his damnest to flame me. It starts with
him calling me kevin, then goes on from there. Next he'll be lying
about others, etc.

wrote:

JimH wrote:

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
hlink.net...

wrote:

JimH wrote:


.................inconsistent.

I was *officially* reprimanded by some folks here for posting a non
political article about a current event. Everyone participating in the
discussion offered reasonable comments and there were not flames. OK.
Fair
enough. This is a boating NG.

I continue to read numerous posts/threads about cameras, photography,
dogs,
pigs, etc. (non boating). However, I read no reprimands about those
posts.

A bit confusing. Very inconsistent.

Could someone please explain what the new and improved *rules* of this NG
are?


How about *do unto others as you would have them do unto you*?
One of your problems, Jim, is that you preach to the choir, then don't
heed your own advice.


How about "practice what you preach", Kevin? Notice the clever use of
those fancy quotation marks?


I was thinking the exact same thing Dan. Kevin has flamed me several times
today.

"Do unto others........" How funny.


Here we go again, Jim is doing his damnest to flame me. It starts with
him calling me kevin, then goes on from there. Next he'll be lying
about others, etc.



"Others" choose to post their real name or a screen name. People
respond to them, at times, by the name they use. You chose *Kevin
Noble* and, if I have to do it for the third time, I can post a copy of
that.

I know, you are "borrowing" someone's name, right? Doesn't that seem
really, really stupid by now, Kevin?

Dan

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:30:25 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudadATyahooDOT com
wrote:

.................inconsistent.

I was *officially* reprimanded by some folks here for posting a non
political article about a current event. Everyone participating in the
discussion offered reasonable comments and there were not flames. OK. Fair
enough. This is a boating NG.

I continue to read numerous posts/threads about cameras, photography, dogs,
pigs, etc. (non boating). However, I read no reprimands about those posts.

A bit confusing. Very inconsistent.

Could someone please explain what the new and improved *rules* of this NG
are?


Gosh, could you post the official reprimand?

He

Suggested new and improved rules---

1.Be nice.
2. When a thread becomes acrimonious, acerbic, or filled with asperity,
move on.
3. As political threads soon lead to 2, above, don't start them.

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes