|
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
"RCE" wrote in message ... " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message . .. "RCE" wrote in message ... " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message ... "basskisser" wrote in message ups.com... My Jeep is a go anywhere, do anything type of vehicle. I still like driving it. I've kept in in good shape, runs like a clock, is very low maintenence. I'll bet I'm a lot better off than a lot of people who think they need to be seen in an expensive new-every-year car because of their lack of manhood. I think you just insulted Richly Rich RCE. Nope. In addition to new, I also drive a 60 year old car regularly. Must make me very secure in my manhood. Now, you, on the other hand .... RCE I am sure you dropped it off immediately to Chip Foose to do a full frame up restoration. After all, one must maintain standards in the Richly Rich household.........eh? ;-) I maintain certain standards, but none that would be of interest to you. RCE Agreed. ;-) |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message groups.com... I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times. I bought it with 57 miles on it. I know how they were and still are. Next time I'll take a picture to prove to you. I am not talking about anybody else's vehicle, I'm talking about mine. Care to wager? Because the brakes on *your* Jeep are on backwards proves nothing. Either you, or the factory installed them backwards. Yes, I will wager that your brakes are installed incorrectly and we will use the manufacturers service manual as the final word. Once you agree to the bet, we can both post our supporting documentation. The loser sends $500 to JohnH to be donated to the Race for the cure in care in his daughter's name. $500 might be a stretch for someone who is complaining about brakes on an 11 year old vehicle. Dan Dan, where was I "complaining about brakes" on my Jeep. I choose to keep my vehicle. I love it. You should try a Jeep sometime. I've got a friend who has a '76 CJ he might part with. I've owned two. A '94 Jeep GC Laredo (6 cyl) and a '98 Jeep CG Limited (8 cyl). They were both good vehicles but I prefer my current and last SUV's over both of them. I would rather pay to drive a new vehicle than keep an older car that is far more likely to break down without warning with an expired warranty. I've put a quarter million miles on my Cherokee, and outside of routine maintenance, the only thing I've done is I put a new radiator in it (theold one cracked at the flange), while I had it apart, I went ahead and put a water pump in it. I've owned it for 11 years, so thats $150.00 that I've spent outside of routine maintenance. It's a simple vehicle, and not much to "break down". On the other hand, you drive a new vehicle off the lot, you lose approx. 20% in depreciation right there, or for a $30,000 vehicle, approx. $6000. Tell me again how that math is sound? You still haven't told me where I was "complaining about brakes" on myJeep. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Black Dog wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message legroups.com... I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times. I bought it with 57 miles on it. I know how they were and still are. Next time I'll take a picture to prove to you. I am not talking about anybody else's vehicle, I'm talking about mine. Care to wager? Because the brakes on *your* Jeep are on backwards proves nothing. Either you, or the factory installed them backwards. Yes, I will wager that your brakes are installed incorrectly and we will use the manufacturers service manual as the final word. Once you agree to the bet, we can both post our supporting documentation. The loser sends $500 to JohnH to be donated to the Race for the cure in care in his daughter's name. $500 might be a stretch for someone who is complaining about brakes on an 11 year old vehicle. Dan I personally don't need a vehicle as a symbol of my manhood. Me neither! Stella And I'm glad you don't!!!! Spoken (written) like a true child. Yes, you are a child. Again, you are JUST like JimH. When you are losing a debate the first thing you do is start insulting, and then you call me Kevin, when if you had HALF a brain, you'd know I'm not him. But, alas, I understand that you aren't bright enough. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
On Mon, 15 May 2006 13:49:10 GMT, Don White wrote:
Harry Krause wrote: basskisser wrote: Reginald P. Smithers wrote: You have no interest in the "cause",you have done everything to discourage JohnH and others from contributing to the "cause", you only have an interest in belittling JohnH for his efforts. You are a little person and you prove this with every one of your posts concerning this matter. Fair enough? Now can we move on? Jim can not understand how his claims are flawed. I don't understand why he can't it's so damned simple. If he'd just factor time into his idiotic conclusions, he'd find that John has done exactly as he said he would, AFTER he made statements. Someone has to say it, in order to raise the level of this conversation: George W. Bush sucks. Big time. Lets get back to the usual things we scrap about. What's with the hockey fans in California booing the Canadian National Anthem? Didn't we go through this exercise a few years ago when some French fans in Montreal booed the US anthem & tit for tat episodes followed. Always thought Californians were more progressive. (must have been Colic Bill & his two friends causing trouble) A very few American hockey fans are assholes. Please don't take it personally. Don't judge all Americans by some looney Californians. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message legroups.com... I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times. I bought it with 57 miles on it. I know how they were and still are. Next time I'll take a picture to prove to you. I am not talking about anybody else's vehicle, I'm talking about mine. Care to wager? Because the brakes on *your* Jeep are on backwards proves nothing. Either you, or the factory installed them backwards. Yes, I will wager that your brakes are installed incorrectly and we will use the manufacturers service manual as the final word. Once you agree to the bet, we can both post our supporting documentation. The loser sends $500 to JohnH to be donated to the Race for the cure in care in his daughter's name. $500 might be a stretch for someone who is complaining about brakes on an 11 year old vehicle. Dan Dan, where was I "complaining about brakes" on my Jeep. I choose to keep my vehicle. I love it. You should try a Jeep sometime. I've got a friend who has a '76 CJ he might part with. I've owned two. A '94 Jeep GC Laredo (6 cyl) and a '98 Jeep CG Limited (8 cyl). They were both good vehicles but I prefer my current and last SUV's over both of them. I would rather pay to drive a new vehicle than keep an older car that is far more likely to break down without warning with an expired warranty. I've put a quarter million miles on my Cherokee, and outside of routine maintenance, the only thing I've done is I put a new radiator in it (theold one cracked at the flange), while I had it apart, I went ahead and put a water pump in it. I've owned it for 11 years, so thats $150.00 that I've spent outside of routine maintenance. It's a simple vehicle, and not much to "break down". On the other hand, you drive a new vehicle off the lot, you lose approx. 20% in depreciation right there, or for a $30,000 vehicle, approx. $6000. Tell me again how that math is sound? You still haven't told me where I was "complaining about brakes" on myJeep. There are no flaws in your math and I have no idea what you want me to tell you "again". Some people choose to forego the problems associated with older cars and buy, or lease, new vehicles more often. If we didn't do this there would be far fewer affordable cars for people with less to spend. My point is that our loss is their gain. The benefit for us is the reliability of a new car. I just bought my first used car in almost 20 years. It was a birthday present for the wife. The car she wanted was no longer in production so I found a low mileage car in excellent condition. The lease was up on our other car so the timing was right. If that wasn't you who said "I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times." then I was wrong. Someone edited this post so I can't tell who said what. On Topic: I doubt I would ever purchase a used boat. Initial depreciation aside, there are so many things a boat owner can neglect that I wouldn't want to deal with it - with, or without a survey. Dan |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Black Dog wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message oglegroups.com... I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times. I bought it with 57 miles on it. I know how they were and still are. Next time I'll take a picture to prove to you. I am not talking about anybody else's vehicle, I'm talking about mine. Care to wager? Because the brakes on *your* Jeep are on backwards proves nothing. Either you, or the factory installed them backwards. Yes, I will wager that your brakes are installed incorrectly and we will use the manufacturers service manual as the final word. Once you agree to the bet, we can both post our supporting documentation. The loser sends $500 to JohnH to be donated to the Race for the cure in care in his daughter's name. $500 might be a stretch for someone who is complaining about brakes on an 11 year old vehicle. Dan I personally don't need a vehicle as a symbol of my manhood. Me neither! Stella And I'm glad you don't!!!! Spoken (written) like a true child. Yes, you are a child. Again, you are JUST like JimH. When you are losing a debate the first thing you do is start insulting, and then you call me Kevin, when if you had HALF a brain, you'd know I'm not him. But, alas, I understand that you aren't bright enough. "Alas"? Wow. Weird stuff. Read the post again. My response was directed at yours. Here it is again: "And I'm glad you don't!!!!" Read your reply now. |
Is so...........is not..........is so..........is not..........
Good grief!
|
Is so...............oh yeah, is not...............is so...........is not..........
OMG.
Next I expect to see "my dad can kick your dad's ass"................ |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
"JohnH" wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 May 2006 13:49:10 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: basskisser wrote: Reginald P. Smithers wrote: You have no interest in the "cause",you have done everything to discourage JohnH and others from contributing to the "cause", you only have an interest in belittling JohnH for his efforts. You are a little person and you prove this with every one of your posts concerning this matter. Fair enough? Now can we move on? Jim can not understand how his claims are flawed. I don't understand why he can't it's so damned simple. If he'd just factor time into his idiotic conclusions, he'd find that John has done exactly as he said he would, AFTER he made statements. Someone has to say it, in order to raise the level of this conversation: George W. Bush sucks. Big time. Lets get back to the usual things we scrap about. What's with the hockey fans in California booing the Canadian National Anthem? Didn't we go through this exercise a few years ago when some French fans in Montreal booed the US anthem & tit for tat episodes followed. Always thought Californians were more progressive. (must have been Colic Bill & his two friends causing trouble) A very few American hockey fans are assholes. Please don't take it personally. Don't judge all Americans by some looney Californians. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** I have not been even looking at this thread for days, and now I find that Harry is still being an ASSHOLE! |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
On 19 May 2006 22:01:20 -0700, "Tim" wrote:
No, john, when ever I type that into the browser window, it takes me to a menue of alt. groups provided by google. could you post a link that will work for me? JohnH wrote: Hey Schnautzer, were you ever able to get 'over there' and check out the pics? On 14 May 2006 12:56:35 -0700, wrote: Pardon me, bt, "where" is "over there" and how do you get, "there"??? JohnH wrote: On 14 May 2006 06:42:13 -0700, " wrote: JohnH wrote: In an earlier post, Jim, you stated, "John does have a history of reneging on promises." That accusation was a lie. You've not shown one promise on which I've reneged, and your stupid accusations/mathematical wizardry failed to account for the fact that, as Don White said, many people made their donations *before* my offer was put on the table. You, in a cowardly fashion, decided to cut and run from the thread in which you made the accusations. Was it because you realized you'd opened your mouth once too often? I see you're now puppy-dogging Harry around the group. I'm sure he'll provide you some motherly support. -- 'Til next time, John H Why don't you guys take it to email? "So and So is a Such and Such" threads are always bad medicine. It's over. If you get a chance, check out the 'runners and donors' picture over there, especially the top name in the fourth column from the left. I have no idea how to get there using a web browser. I use Forte Agent, a newsreader, which makes life amongst the news groups pretty easy. Perhaps we can enlist the aid of one of the more knowledgeable members, but I'm stumped. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
Google does not include any binary NG's and I while therer are many web
sites that include NG posts, I am not aware of any web sites that include binary. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
Reginald P. Smithers wrote: Google does not include any binary NG's and I while therer are many web sites that include NG posts, I am not aware of any web sites that include binary. Thanks Guys: I'll check out Forte Agent and see what happens. Tim |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message legroups.com... I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times. I bought it with 57 miles on it. I know how they were and still are. Next time I'll take a picture to prove to you. I am not talking about anybody else's vehicle, I'm talking about mine. Care to wager? Because the brakes on *your* Jeep are on backwards proves nothing. Either you, or the factory installed them backwards. Yes, I will wager that your brakes are installed incorrectly and we will use the manufacturers service manual as the final word. Once you agree to the bet, we can both post our supporting documentation. The loser sends $500 to JohnH to be donated to the Race for the cure in care in his daughter's name. $500 might be a stretch for someone who is complaining about brakes on an 11 year old vehicle. Dan Dan, where was I "complaining about brakes" on my Jeep. I choose to keep my vehicle. I love it. You should try a Jeep sometime. I've got a friend who has a '76 CJ he might part with. I've owned two. A '94 Jeep GC Laredo (6 cyl) and a '98 Jeep CG Limited (8 cyl). They were both good vehicles but I prefer my current and last SUV's over both of them. I would rather pay to drive a new vehicle than keep an older car that is far more likely to break down without warning with an expired warranty. I've put a quarter million miles on my Cherokee, and outside of routine maintenance, the only thing I've done is I put a new radiator in it (theold one cracked at the flange), while I had it apart, I went ahead and put a water pump in it. I've owned it for 11 years, so thats $150.00 that I've spent outside of routine maintenance. It's a simple vehicle, and not much to "break down". On the other hand, you drive a new vehicle off the lot, you lose approx. 20% in depreciation right there, or for a $30,000 vehicle, approx. $6000. Tell me again how that math is sound? You still haven't told me where I was "complaining about brakes" on myJeep. There are no flaws in your math and I have no idea what you want me to tell you "again". Some people choose to forego the problems associated with older cars and buy, or lease, new vehicles more often. If we didn't do this there would be far fewer affordable cars for people with less to spend. My point is that our loss is their gain. The benefit for us is the reliability of a new car. I just bought my first used car in almost 20 years. It was a birthday present for the wife. The car she wanted was no longer in production so I found a low mileage car in excellent condition. The lease was up on our other car so the timing was right. If that wasn't you who said "I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times." then I was wrong. Someone edited this post so I can't tell who said what. what does that have to do with anything? Brakes wear out, it's a maintenence item. Do you trade for a new car before your brakes wear out??? On Topic: I doubt I would ever purchase a used boat. Initial depreciation aside, there are so many things a boat owner can neglect that I wouldn't want to deal with it - with, or without a survey. Fortunatly, and I thank my lucky stars when I see people's bills for repairs, I grew up knowing how to fix almost anything, and still do. I grew up in a rural area, and if something broke on the farm, you fixed it. I still do all my own work. My used boat works flawlessly. I looked it all over, did compression checks, etc. and bought it knowing that it needed some work. I got it for a song, and fixed what needed fixing. Dan |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Black Dog wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message oglegroups.com... I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times. I bought it with 57 miles on it. I know how they were and still are. Next time I'll take a picture to prove to you. I am not talking about anybody else's vehicle, I'm talking about mine. Care to wager? Because the brakes on *your* Jeep are on backwards proves nothing. Either you, or the factory installed them backwards. Yes, I will wager that your brakes are installed incorrectly and we will use the manufacturers service manual as the final word. Once you agree to the bet, we can both post our supporting documentation. The loser sends $500 to JohnH to be donated to the Race for the cure in care in his daughter's name. $500 might be a stretch for someone who is complaining about brakes on an 11 year old vehicle. Dan I personally don't need a vehicle as a symbol of my manhood. Me neither! Stella And I'm glad you don't!!!! Spoken (written) like a true child. Yes, you are a child. Again, you are JUST like JimH. When you are losing a debate the first thing you do is start insulting, and then you call me Kevin, when if you had HALF a brain, you'd know I'm not him. But, alas, I understand that you aren't bright enough. "Alas"? Wow. Weird stuff. Read the post again. My response was directed at yours. Here it is again: "And I'm glad you don't!!!!" Read your reply now. Uh, what is childish about that statement? I AM glad that *SHE* don't need a symbol of HER manhood. |
Time to change this very negative header? (was Jim H is a..........)
Looks like this whole thread has wandered off into chatroom, personal correspondence territory. Would it be OK to use a different header? Threads based on name calling and personal attack are never a helpful thing, and once the focus has shifted from the alleged personality traits of the unfortunate target there isn't a single reason to continue dragging his name through the mud. My 2 cents worth, keep the change. :-) |
Name Change under review by NSA Time to change this very negative header?
|
Name Change under review by NSA Time to change this very negative header?
On 20 May 2006 11:38:29 -0700, "Reginald P. Smithers"
wrote: wrote: Looks like this whole thread has wandered off into chatroom, personal correspondence territory. Would it be OK to use a different header? Threads based on name calling and personal attack are never a helpful thing, and once the focus has shifted from the alleged personality traits of the unfortunate target there isn't a single reason to continue dragging his name through the mud. My 2 cents worth, keep the change. :-) Reggie, you spoke too softly. I couldn't hear what you said. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Time to change this very negative header? (was Jim H is a..........)
On 20 May 2006 09:38:27 -0700, "
wrote: Looks like this whole thread has wandered off into chatroom, personal correspondence territory. Would it be OK to use a different header? Threads based on name calling and personal attack are never a helpful thing, and once the focus has shifted from the alleged personality traits of the unfortunate target there isn't a single reason to continue dragging his name through the mud. My 2 cents worth, keep the change. :-) So if a post shows up under this header it should be disregarded because of the header? What's wrong with the header? It's an honest, succinct header that states a fact, not an allegation. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Time to change this very negative header? (was Jim H is a..........)
On Sat, 20 May 2006 16:31:42 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote: JohnH wrote: On 20 May 2006 09:38:27 -0700, " wrote: Looks like this whole thread has wandered off into chatroom, personal correspondence territory. Would it be OK to use a different header? Threads based on name calling and personal attack are never a helpful thing, and once the focus has shifted from the alleged personality traits of the unfortunate target there isn't a single reason to continue dragging his name through the mud. My 2 cents worth, keep the change. :-) So if a post shows up under this header it should be disregarded because of the header? What's wrong with the header? It's an honest, succinct header that states a fact, not an allegation. -- 'Til next time, John H You're quite the piece of work. Thanks, Harry. Is the Parker in the water yet? -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Time to change this very negative header? (was Jim H is a..........)
wrote in message ups.com... Looks like this whole thread has wandered off into chatroom, personal correspondence territory. Would it be OK to use a different header? Threads based on name calling and personal attack are never a helpful thing, and once the focus has shifted from the alleged personality traits of the unfortunate target there isn't a single reason to continue dragging his name through the mud. My 2 cents worth, keep the change. :-) I agree. It was a juvenile nanananabooboo thread anyway. He started a similar one sometime last year, that time involving Harry and filled with the "F" word. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message oglegroups.com... I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times. I bought it with 57 miles on it. I know how they were and still are. Next time I'll take a picture to prove to you. I am not talking about anybody else's vehicle, I'm talking about mine. Care to wager? Because the brakes on *your* Jeep are on backwards proves nothing. Either you, or the factory installed them backwards. Yes, I will wager that your brakes are installed incorrectly and we will use the manufacturers service manual as the final word. Once you agree to the bet, we can both post our supporting documentation. The loser sends $500 to JohnH to be donated to the Race for the cure in care in his daughter's name. $500 might be a stretch for someone who is complaining about brakes on an 11 year old vehicle. Dan Dan, where was I "complaining about brakes" on my Jeep. I choose to keep my vehicle. I love it. You should try a Jeep sometime. I've got a friend who has a '76 CJ he might part with. I've owned two. A '94 Jeep GC Laredo (6 cyl) and a '98 Jeep CG Limited (8 cyl). They were both good vehicles but I prefer my current and last SUV's over both of them. I would rather pay to drive a new vehicle than keep an older car that is far more likely to break down without warning with an expired warranty. I've put a quarter million miles on my Cherokee, and outside of routine maintenance, the only thing I've done is I put a new radiator in it (theold one cracked at the flange), while I had it apart, I went ahead and put a water pump in it. I've owned it for 11 years, so thats $150.00 that I've spent outside of routine maintenance. It's a simple vehicle, and not much to "break down". On the other hand, you drive a new vehicle off the lot, you lose approx. 20% in depreciation right there, or for a $30,000 vehicle, approx. $6000. Tell me again how that math is sound? You still haven't told me where I was "complaining about brakes" on myJeep. There are no flaws in your math and I have no idea what you want me to tell you "again". Some people choose to forego the problems associated with older cars and buy, or lease, new vehicles more often. If we didn't do this there would be far fewer affordable cars for people with less to spend. My point is that our loss is their gain. The benefit for us is the reliability of a new car. I just bought my first used car in almost 20 years. It was a birthday present for the wife. The car she wanted was no longer in production so I found a low mileage car in excellent condition. The lease was up on our other car so the timing was right. If that wasn't you who said "I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times." then I was wrong. Someone edited this post so I can't tell who said what. what does that have to do with anything? Brakes wear out, it's a maintenence item. Do you trade for a new car before your brakes wear out??? I haven't paid a dime for a brake job in years. Fortunately the vehicles I own have included maintenance coverage for the term of the lease. Whoever was complaining about three brake repairs should either find a different shop or get a new car. Dan |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: basskisser wrote: Black Dog wrote: basskisser wrote: Dan Krueger wrote: SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message news:1147880896.549035.76410@y43g2000cwc. googlegroups.com... I have changed the rear brakes on my Jeep three (3) times. I bought it with 57 miles on it. I know how they were and still are. Next time I'll take a picture to prove to you. I am not talking about anybody else's vehicle, I'm talking about mine. Care to wager? Because the brakes on *your* Jeep are on backwards proves nothing. Either you, or the factory installed them backwards. Yes, I will wager that your brakes are installed incorrectly and we will use the manufacturers service manual as the final word. Once you agree to the bet, we can both post our supporting documentation. The loser sends $500 to JohnH to be donated to the Race for the cure in care in his daughter's name. $500 might be a stretch for someone who is complaining about brakes on an 11 year old vehicle. Dan I personally don't need a vehicle as a symbol of my manhood. Me neither! Stella And I'm glad you don't!!!! Spoken (written) like a true child. Yes, you are a child. Again, you are JUST like JimH. When you are losing a debate the first thing you do is start insulting, and then you call me Kevin, when if you had HALF a brain, you'd know I'm not him. But, alas, I understand that you aren't bright enough. "Alas"? Wow. Weird stuff. Read the post again. My response was directed at yours. Here it is again: "And I'm glad you don't!!!!" Read your reply now. Uh, what is childish about that statement? I AM glad that *SHE* don't need a symbol of HER manhood. Nice try. Read your response to me. Better yet: Yes, you are a child. Again, you are JUST like JimH. When you are losing a debate the first thing you do is start insulting, and then you call me Kevin, when if you had HALF a brain, you'd know I'm not him. But, alas, I understand that you aren't bright enough. But, alas, you seem to define yourself... |
Time to change this very negative header? (was Jim H is a..........)
JohnH,
Chuck was not commenting one way or the other about the veracity of this or any header based upon name calling or personal attacks, he was commenting on the damage to the NG by perpetuating name calling and personal attacks, especially when it highlighted by using a header where the subject is a personal battle. |
Time to change this very negative header? (was Jim H is a..........)
On 20 May 2006 20:31:35 -0700, "Reginald P. Smithers"
wrote: JohnH, Chuck was not commenting one way or the other about the veracity of this or any header based upon name calling or personal attacks, he was commenting on the damage to the NG by perpetuating name calling and personal attacks, especially when it highlighted by using a header where the subject is a personal battle. I wonder which is more damaging, the header or the acts themselves. In any case, I don't care if the header goes the way of all good, honest headers. Think on it, you and Chuck have kept it alive for two or three more days! It would not be polite of me to disregard messages addressed at me. BTW, the donations are still coming in: http://www.active.com/donate/varace4cure/RacingforRenee -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Time to change this very negative header? (was Jim H is a..........)
JimH wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Looks like this whole thread has wandered off into chatroom, personal correspondence territory. Would it be OK to use a different header? Threads based on name calling and personal attack are never a helpful thing, and once the focus has shifted from the alleged personality traits of the unfortunate target there isn't a single reason to continue dragging his name through the mud. My 2 cents worth, keep the change. :-) I agree. It was a juvenile nanananabooboo thread anyway. He started a similar one sometime last year, that time involving Harry and filled with the "F" word. Oh, for God's sake, Jim grow up! |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
"I did brakes and such for a long time professionally. I looked it up in
my Wagner book to confirm, just incase I'm getting foggy.1995 Jeep Cherokee rear brake shoes, short shoe to the front, long shoe in the rear.This is a rule of thumb with Cherokees, there are exceptions with some vehicles.Your best bet is to do your vehicle correctly, and let the idiot foul his up.Keep your rear brakes properly adjusted." Funny, from this so-called expert, when in fact the Jeep was NEW when I got it. Are you saying that the brakes were put in by the factory incorrectly? I'm saying you're wrong- and they didn't come that way. I suppose all the service manuals, experts, and the manufacturer are all wrong and you're right? Then how do you account for the fact that the parking brake hardware is in fact hooked up correctly? Because they're designed that way. The same backing plates are used for each side. The mounting patterns, holes, etc are identical on the primary and secondary shoes so that they will fit on each side of the vehicle. The size and composition of the friction surface is the only difference. Lets look at some of the other responses from the experts- "You are correct. The longer secondary shoe holds the parking brake hardware." Never said that the longer shoe DIDN'T hold the parking brake hardware. See above- the parking brake hardware will fit on either shoe. "There is a clear diagram in the Haynes Manual that labels the shoes and shows the shorter lining on the front or primary shoe. I could take a digital photo of the page and email it to you if you would like." Okay. And (now THINK for a second) remember "there are exceptions." These exeptions being different rear ends, etc. Not on your vehicle there's not. The only exceptions to the smaller primary to the front rule I've been able to find are on vehicles that have multiple wheel cylinders per axel, or some vehicles that have the wheel cylinder on the bottom, neither of which was ever available on the Cherokee. I can also take a digital picture of the damned brakes on mine, which makes me correct in any and all of my statements. A picture proves nothing. As stated- the shoes can be installed backwards as easily as they can be installed correctly. Can you provide *any* other source to back up your statements? Why not move this thread over to the jeep forum? You can tell everyone how they're all wrong. Are you ready to put your money where your mouth is? |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
Yes Kevin, how dare I try to change the topic in a boating NG to a boating related one and ask to see a picture of his boat. The shame! His name's not Kevin. This I know. -- 'Til next time, John H John- You can help basskisser prove his Professional Engineer status without disclosing his name! Go to https://secure.sos.state.ga.us/myverification/ and put his name into the search fields. If he indeed has the license it must come up in the search. I see he has said in the past he would prove it if he could, but he didn't want to post his identity. Here's his chance. I'll donate $100 to the Race for the cure if he is :-) |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
SamJenson wrote: "I did brakes and such for a long time professionally. I looked it up in my Wagner book to confirm, just incase I'm getting foggy.1995 Jeep Cherokee rear brake shoes, short shoe to the front, long shoe in the rear.This is a rule of thumb with Cherokees, there are exceptions with some vehicles.Your best bet is to do your vehicle correctly, and let the idiot foul his up.Keep your rear brakes properly adjusted." Funny, from this so-called expert, when in fact the Jeep was NEW when I got it. Are you saying that the brakes were put in by the factory incorrectly? I'm saying you're wrong- and they didn't come that way. I suppose all the service manuals, experts, and the manufacturer are all wrong and you're right? Then how do you account for the fact that the parking brake hardware is in fact hooked up correctly? Because they're designed that way. The same backing plates are used for each side. The mounting patterns, holes, etc are identical on the primary and secondary shoes so that they will fit on each side of the vehicle. The size and composition of the friction surface is the only difference. Lets look at some of the other responses from the experts- "You are correct. The longer secondary shoe holds the parking brake hardware." Never said that the longer shoe DIDN'T hold the parking brake hardware. See above- the parking brake hardware will fit on either shoe. "There is a clear diagram in the Haynes Manual that labels the shoes and shows the shorter lining on the front or primary shoe. I could take a digital photo of the page and email it to you if you would like." Okay. And (now THINK for a second) remember "there are exceptions." These exeptions being different rear ends, etc. Not on your vehicle there's not. The only exceptions to the smaller primary to the front rule I've been able to find are on vehicles that have multiple wheel cylinders per axel, or some vehicles that have the wheel cylinder on the bottom, neither of which was ever available on the Cherokee. I can also take a digital picture of the damned brakes on mine, which makes me correct in any and all of my statements. A picture proves nothing. As stated- the shoes can be installed backwards as easily as they can be installed correctly. Can you provide *any* other source to back up your statements? Why not move this thread over to the jeep forum? You can tell everyone how they're all wrong. Are you ready to put your money where your mouth is? Again, now learn to read. I bought the Jeep BRAND NEW....... I CHANGED THE SHOES THE FIRST TIME THEY CAN'T BE BACKWARDS BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE PARKING BRAKE CABLE ENTERS FROM THE BACKING PLATE.(unless someone at the factory or the dealership thought it would be cool to switch backing plates and went to that trouble!) Now again please learn to read. Where have I said that "everyone" is wrong? I said and I STILL say, my jeep's brakes are just as I've described and ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. Again, the ONLY WAY they can be wrong is if someone switched backing plates on the axle. Think that happened? So, sure, I'll put my money where my mouth is. I know how they've ALWAYS been. And again, I can take a picture showing you how they can't possibly be installed wrong unless the axle is backwards (which of course isn't the case) or the backing plates were changed (which of course isn't the case). Go for it. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
SamJenson wrote: Yes Kevin, how dare I try to change the topic in a boating NG to a boating related one and ask to see a picture of his boat. The shame! His name's not Kevin. This I know. -- 'Til next time, John H John- You can help basskisser prove his Professional Engineer status without disclosing his name! Go to https://secure.sos.state.ga.us/myverification/ and put his name into the search fields. If he indeed has the license it must come up in the search. I see he has said in the past he would prove it if he could, but he didn't want to post his identity. Here's his chance. I'll donate $100 to the Race for the cure if he is :-) How about making it worth my revealing my identity? $5000??? |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
"basskisser" wrote in message ups.com... SamJenson wrote: Yes Kevin, how dare I try to change the topic in a boating NG to a boating related one and ask to see a picture of his boat. The shame! His name's not Kevin. This I know. -- 'Til next time, John H John- You can help basskisser prove his Professional Engineer status without disclosing his name! Go to https://secure.sos.state.ga.us/myverification/ and put his name into the search fields. If he indeed has the license it must come up in the search. I see he has said in the past he would prove it if he could, but he didn't want to post his identity. Here's his chance. I'll donate $100 to the Race for the cure if he is :-) How about making it worth my revealing my identity? $5000??? I don't care about your identity. I'm just curious to see if someone as thick-headed as you could be an Engineer. I'm betting not. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
BTW basskisser-
Do you give JohnH the permission to do the search and post the results here? (minus your true identity of course) |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
On Mon, 22 May 2006 18:50:43 GMT, "SamJenson" wrote:
Yes Kevin, how dare I try to change the topic in a boating NG to a boating related one and ask to see a picture of his boat. The shame! His name's not Kevin. This I know. -- 'Til next time, John H John- You can help basskisser prove his Professional Engineer status without disclosing his name! Go to https://secure.sos.state.ga.us/myverification/ and put his name into the search fields. If he indeed has the license it must come up in the search. I see he has said in the past he would prove it if he could, but he didn't want to post his identity. Here's his chance. I'll donate $100 to the Race for the cure if he is :-) As the 'fundraiser' at that web site, I received confirmations for all donors. It would be most inappropriate for me to use that information for anything other than a 'thank you' note to them. Make a nice donation anyway. It's for a good cause, and then you'll get a nice 'thank you' note from me! http://www.active.com/donate/varace4cure/RacingforRenee And...I'll match it! -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
"JohnH" wrote in message ... As the 'fundraiser' at that web site, I received confirmations for all donors. It would be most inappropriate for me to use that information for anything other than a 'thank you' note to them. I fully agree- that's why I think you should have basskissers approval first. He has absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain. People have been riding him for years on this and he has the chance to redeem himself without exposing his true identity. Make a nice donation anyway. It's for a good cause, and then you'll get a nice 'thank you' note from me! Either way- when this is settled- you'll be getting a donation from me. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
SamJenson wrote: BTW basskisser- Do you give JohnH the permission to do the search and post the results here? (minus your true identity of course) Yes, for your donation of $5000 I do. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message ups.com... SamJenson wrote: Yes Kevin, how dare I try to change the topic in a boating NG to a boating related one and ask to see a picture of his boat. The shame! His name's not Kevin. This I know. -- 'Til next time, John H John- You can help basskisser prove his Professional Engineer status without disclosing his name! Go to https://secure.sos.state.ga.us/myverification/ and put his name into the search fields. If he indeed has the license it must come up in the search. I see he has said in the past he would prove it if he could, but he didn't want to post his identity. Here's his chance. I'll donate $100 to the Race for the cure if he is :-) How about making it worth my revealing my identity? $5000??? I don't care about your identity. I'm just curious to see if someone as thick-headed as you could be an Engineer. I'm betting not. Are you betting $5 grand? |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
"basskisser" wrote in message ups.com... SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message ups.com... SamJenson wrote: Yes Kevin, how dare I try to change the topic in a boating NG to a boating related one and ask to see a picture of his boat. The shame! His name's not Kevin. This I know. -- 'Til next time, John H John- You can help basskisser prove his Professional Engineer status without disclosing his name! Go to https://secure.sos.state.ga.us/myverification/ and put his name into the search fields. If he indeed has the license it must come up in the search. I see he has said in the past he would prove it if he could, but he didn't want to post his identity. Here's his chance. I'll donate $100 to the Race for the cure if he is :-) How about making it worth my revealing my identity? $5000??? I don't care about your identity. I'm just curious to see if someone as thick-headed as you could be an Engineer. I'm betting not. Are you betting $5 grand? I don't want to know your ID, just curious as to your Engineer status. I thought you would want to prove it once and for all? Hiding something? |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
"basskisser" wrote in message oups.com... SamJenson wrote: BTW basskisser- Do you give JohnH the permission to do the search and post the results here? (minus your true identity of course) Yes, for your donation of $5000 I do. You're beginning to look foolish. |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
On Mon, 22 May 2006 19:12:47 GMT, "SamJenson" wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message .. . As the 'fundraiser' at that web site, I received confirmations for all donors. It would be most inappropriate for me to use that information for anything other than a 'thank you' note to them. I fully agree- that's why I think you should have basskissers approval first. He has absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain. People have been riding him for years on this and he has the chance to redeem himself without exposing his true identity. Make a nice donation anyway. It's for a good cause, and then you'll get a nice 'thank you' note from me! Either way- when this is settled- you'll be getting a donation from me. His permission wouldn't help. I've deleted all the confirmations. Had no use for them once I sent the 'thank you' notes and confirmations of my matching donations. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Jim Hertvic - a liar...
SamJenson wrote: "basskisser" wrote in message oups.com... SamJenson wrote: BTW basskisser- Do you give JohnH the permission to do the search and post the results here? (minus your true identity of course) Yes, for your donation of $5000 I do. You're beginning to look foolish. No, YOU are beginning to look foolish. Wasn't it you that said "put your money where your mouth is"??? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:26 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com