![]() |
Diaster in waiting....
NOYB wrote: I stayed away for awhile, and upon my return I feel like I fell down the rabbit hole. Thinks just get curiouser and curiouser. Can anybody post a chart listing whose side every one is on? It was so much easier when it was liberal/conservative. The two sides: 1. The "side" that feels the NG is best used as a format for discussion of boats and boating related topics. (Boating related *not* stretched to the point where the Iraq War is considered on topic because "boats use fuel and we get crude oil from the middle east"). 2. The "side" that feels posts should routinely begin with OT, should consist of cut 'n paste political editorials, and isn't above launching a thread to make a personal attack or pursue a long-standing feud. As far as who is on which side, most people here now seem to be trying to stay on side #1. (A few toe stubs here and there, but the effort is evident). The few who are on side #2 are now glaringly obvious. Welcome back NOYB. If you're looking for "easier" posting, I know there are a lot of groups in the same shape this one was last year where the liberal/conservative arguments continue to prevail. However, you're a bright enough guy who actually goes boating and I suspect you could offer a lot of on topic stuff here. I, for one, am looking forward to a greater number of boating related posts from down Naples way. Or, if you feel that it's truly a matter of choosing up "sides", you could choose side #2. |
Diaster in waiting....
NOYB wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message . .. basskisser wrote: Harry Krause wrote: basskisser wrote: JimH wrote: Yes, I agree 100%. You've ruined more threads than I care to count, Why not give it a rest? That's odd. Seems as though I remember you and he getting along like cats and dogs. Now that everyone else has dismissed him because of his bipolar rants, you and he have become best of buds. If you condone HIS past behavior here, you have nothing to say to anyone about their actions in this newsgroup. D'oh. I'm not condoning anything, but all you seem to do here these days is "pick, pick, pick." To what end? Give it a rest. I stayed away for awhile, and upon my return I feel like I fell down the rabbit hole. Thinks just get curiouser and curiouser. Can anybody post a chart listing whose side every one is on? It was so much easier when it was liberal/conservative. You can leave again, if you so choose. I don't think anyone missed you. |
Diaster in waiting....
Harry Krause wrote: basskisser wrote: Harry Krause wrote: basskisser wrote: JimH wrote: Yes, I agree 100%. You've ruined more threads than I care to count, Why not give it a rest? That's odd. Seems as though I remember you and he getting along like cats and dogs. Now that everyone else has dismissed him because of his bipolar rants, you and he have become best of buds. If you condone HIS past behavior here, you have nothing to say to anyone about their actions in this newsgroup. D'oh. I'm not condoning anything, but all you seem to do here these days is "pick, pick, pick." To what end? Give it a rest. To what end?? Holy Mackerel! JimH comes here and stirs so much **** for so long of a time that he turned EVERYBODY against him. Then he comes back and acts like a nice little puppy who has never done anything wrong, and abmonishes anybody who even dares to post something off topic or inflammatory. He needs to clean up his own yard before bitching about somebody else's. And it appears that you're eating it up like chum! |
Diaster in waiting....
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com... NOYB wrote: I stayed away for awhile, and upon my return I feel like I fell down the rabbit hole. Thinks just get curiouser and curiouser. Can anybody post a chart listing whose side every one is on? It was so much easier when it was liberal/conservative. The two sides: 1. The "side" that feels the NG is best used as a format for discussion of boats and boating related topics. (Boating related *not* stretched to the point where the Iraq War is considered on topic because "boats use fuel and we get crude oil from the middle east"). 2. The "side" that feels posts should routinely begin with OT, should consist of cut 'n paste political editorials, and isn't above launching a thread to make a personal attack or pursue a long-standing feud. As far as who is on which side, most people here now seem to be trying to stay on side #1. (A few toe stubs here and there, but the effort is evident). The few who are on side #2 are now glaringly obvious. Welcome back NOYB. If you're looking for "easier" posting, I know there are a lot of groups in the same shape this one was last year where the liberal/conservative arguments continue to prevail. However, you're a bright enough guy who actually goes boating and I suspect you could offer a lot of on topic stuff here. I, for one, am looking forward to a greater number of boating related posts from down Naples way. Or, if you feel that it's truly a matter of choosing up "sides", you could choose side #2. Harry *does* have a point about the price/politics connection, Chuck. I keep asking a question that the 54% are uncomfortable with, and do not answer. But, you, of all people, should be able to answer it. |
Diaster in waiting....
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 15:26:14 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote: Harry *does* have a point about the price/politics connection, Chuck. I keep asking a question that the 54% are uncomfortable with, and do not answer. But, you, of all people, should be able to answer it. ========== He did answer it, told you it was off topic in a boating group, and he is correct. Current high prices are a political failure of the 70s and 80s, nothing recent. The supply side is realtively fixed for any given price point, opportunities are on the demand side. |
Diaster in waiting....
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
... On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 15:26:14 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: Harry *does* have a point about the price/politics connection, Chuck. I keep asking a question that the 54% are uncomfortable with, and do not answer. But, you, of all people, should be able to answer it. ========== He did answer it, told you it was off topic in a boating group, and he is correct. Current high prices are a political failure of the 70s and 80s, nothing recent. The supply side is realtively fixed for any given price point, opportunities are on the demand side. Here...grab this rope before you sink any further in the mud, Wayne. Do you listen to the news at all? Think of the last 100 times you've heard about price increases for a barrel of oil during the last 24 months. Now, forget the reports you heard when hurricanes were a threat. That leaves 90% of the reports. A hurricane around oil rigs is a valid reason for price jitters. Now, for the remaining 90%, what's the reason mentioned almost 100% of the time? |
Diaster in waiting....
"JohnH" wrote in message ... On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 13:47:51 GMT, "NOYB" wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message m... basskisser wrote: Harry Krause wrote: basskisser wrote: JimH wrote: Yes, I agree 100%. You've ruined more threads than I care to count, Why not give it a rest? That's odd. Seems as though I remember you and he getting along like cats and dogs. Now that everyone else has dismissed him because of his bipolar rants, you and he have become best of buds. If you condone HIS past behavior here, you have nothing to say to anyone about their actions in this newsgroup. D'oh. I'm not condoning anything, but all you seem to do here these days is "pick, pick, pick." To what end? Give it a rest. I stayed away for awhile, and upon my return I feel like I fell down the rabbit hole. Thinks just get curiouser and curiouser. Can anybody post a chart listing whose side every one is on? It was so much easier when it was liberal/conservative. Were you on a boat trip? Fishing? What? Of course. Spring and early summer is the best time for fishing down here. In the last couple of months, I've caught a couple of personal bests: a 35lb. bull dolphin, a 30 lb. kingfish, and a 9 foot nurse shark. I also caught YT snapper to 4 lbs., grouper to 5 lbs, and countless other snapper, grunts, bonito, and spanish mackeral...but I consider those just "bait". |
Diaster in waiting....
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... I, for one, am looking forward to a greater number of boating related posts from down Naples way. When I'm boating and fishing, I spend less time here talking about boating and fishing. But red tide is pretty thick here right now, so expect more frequent posts...but don't hold your breath that they're all about boating. |
Diaster in waiting....
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... I, for one, am looking forward to a greater number of boating related posts from down Naples way. When I'm boating and fishing, I spend less time here talking about boating and fishing. But red tide is pretty thick here right now, so expect more frequent posts...but don't hold your breath that they're all about boating. I figured you were busy trying to figure out how to help your president out of the strategic corner he painted himself into. |
Diaster in waiting....
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 15:26:14 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: Harry *does* have a point about the price/politics connection, Chuck. I keep asking a question that the 54% are uncomfortable with, and do not answer. But, you, of all people, should be able to answer it. ========== He did answer it, told you it was off topic in a boating group, and he is correct. Current high prices are a political failure of the 70s and 80s, nothing recent. The supply side is realtively fixed for any given price point, opportunities are on the demand side. Here...grab this rope before you sink any further in the mud, Wayne. Do you listen to the news at all? Think of the last 100 times you've heard about price increases for a barrel of oil during the last 24 months. Now, forget the reports you heard when hurricanes were a threat. That leaves 90% of the reports. A hurricane around oil rigs is a valid reason for price jitters. Now, for the remaining 90%, what's the reason mentioned almost 100% of the time? According to the NY Times, Washington Post, CBS, etc.? Or according to those without a political axe to grind? |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com