Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
MGG wrote:
Do you agree to stop this Don, or do you want to continue the
name-calling?

PLEASE...just stop, even if he doesn't. If he doesn't then just killfile him
and be done with it.

Yeah, everyone here knows that the only person who can engage in name
calling and petty insults without being called to the carpet is JimH.


I see you made it to work safely again.

Since you state you are self-employed how do you make money when all you
do all week is post to this newsgroup?

Easily. Unlike you, it only takes me a couple of minutes to type
something out in the newsgroup. I spend probably all together an hour a
day making you look silly.


I believe that you are charging
your clients for time you spend posting.

Have any evidence of your wild allegations? Huh? Do you? If not, then I
suggest you quit posting in ignorance. For your information, my fee has
nothing to do with time.

I hope you don't send them
bills through the US mail.

Why?

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
MGG wrote:
Do you agree to stop this Don, or do you want to continue the
name-calling?

PLEASE...just stop, even if he doesn't. If he doesn't then just killfile him
and be done with it.

Yeah, everyone here knows that the only person who can engage in name
calling and petty insults without being called to the carpet is JimH.


I see you made it to work safely again.

Since you state you are self-employed how do you make money when all you
do all week is post to this newsgroup? I believe that you are charging
your clients for time you spend posting. I hope you don't send them
bills through the US mail.

Oh, and shouldn't you be brushing your TOOTH before you go to work?

JohnH wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:56:32 GMT, Don White wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:


This is all quite funny. Don, you're saying that I come here just to
stir the pot, but over the past couple of days, you've made several
replies to my posts that were just to stir the pot yourself. Replies
to posts that had nothing to do with you, and said nothing about you
in any way. Yet you felt the need to jump in with your childish
insults.

It would be quite easy to count them up and show that you and a couple
of others on this NG, not me, are the most prolific pot stirrers here.

In any case, you'd find that if you did not insult me, I would not
insult you. Indeed, I think that taking care of one's mom in her
waning years is a noble and giving gesture. Surely you'll agree that
making childish insults on this NG is not in line with that.

So, you quit, and I'll quit. We'll draw the line here. It's totally
up to you. But understand that a shot over my bow, even if you're
just doing a follow-up for Harry, will negate it all. Your choice.

Hmmm.. I get the feeling that entering a deal with you would be akin to
Israel entering an agreement with Hezbollah.
I will pledge that I will never degrade your mother ..or any other
member of your family.
I will not belittle your boat, whether it's a 100 foot trawler or an 8
foor pram, as that is the one thing most of us have in common and should
be the reason why we're here.


Unreal.

Maybe... but he seems to be trying . We'll see how well he does over
the long haul. A bit of effective unbiased law enforcement would go a
long ways.

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 13:56:57 GMT, Don White
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:56:32 GMT, Don White wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:


This is all quite funny. Don, you're saying that I come here just to
stir the pot, but over the past couple of days, you've made several
replies to my posts that were just to stir the pot yourself. Replies
to posts that had nothing to do with you, and said nothing about you
in any way. Yet you felt the need to jump in with your childish
insults.

It would be quite easy to count them up and show that you and a couple
of others on this NG, not me, are the most prolific pot stirrers here.

In any case, you'd find that if you did not insult me, I would not
insult you. Indeed, I think that taking care of one's mom in her
waning years is a noble and giving gesture. Surely you'll agree that
making childish insults on this NG is not in line with that.

So, you quit, and I'll quit. We'll draw the line here. It's totally
up to you. But understand that a shot over my bow, even if you're
just doing a follow-up for Harry, will negate it all. Your choice.

Hmmm.. I get the feeling that entering a deal with you would be akin to
Israel entering an agreement with Hezbollah.
I will pledge that I will never degrade your mother ..or any other
member of your family.
I will not belittle your boat, whether it's a 100 foot trawler or an 8
foor pram, as that is the one thing most of us have in common and should
be the reason why we're here.


Unreal.

Maybe... but he seems to be trying . We'll see how well he does over
the long haul. A bit of effective unbiased law enforcement would go a
long ways.

I'm a bit confused, Don. While you didn't agree to the cease-fire,
you seemed like you would be agreeable to it, as long as I was.

Now you're taking shots across my bow, and without me making a single
post.

I'll continue to hold my fire, as I realize that changing your stripes
may take a while. As I've repeatedly said, just say that you agree,
and it's over. Do you agree?

Maybe... but he seems to be trying . We'll see how well he does over
the long haul. A bit of effective unbiased law enforcement would go a
long ways.


I'm a bit confused, Don. While you didn't agree to the cease-fire,
you seemed like you would be agreeable to it, as long as I was.

Now you're taking shots across my bow, and without me making a single
post.

I'll continue to hold my fire, as I realize that changing your stripes
may take a while. As I've repeatedly said, just say that you agree,
and it's over. Do you agree?


I thought I clearly stated my pledge.
Do you consider my statement above to be 'firing a shot across your
bow'? You may be too sensitive for this rough & tumble newsgroup.

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 03:57:33 GMT, Don White
wrote:



Maybe... but he seems to be trying . We'll see how well he does over
the long haul. A bit of effective unbiased law enforcement would go a
long ways.


I'm a bit confused, Don. While you didn't agree to the cease-fire,
you seemed like you would be agreeable to it, as long as I was.

Now you're taking shots across my bow, and without me making a single
post.

I'll continue to hold my fire, as I realize that changing your stripes
may take a while. As I've repeatedly said, just say that you agree,
and it's over. Do you agree?


I thought I clearly stated my pledge.
Do you consider my statement above to be 'firing a shot across your
bow'? You may be too sensitive for this rough & tumble newsgroup.

Ahh.. I see. You pledge to not insult my family or my boat, but I'm
still on the table. Your intentions are clear. See ya.

Jack Goff wrote:
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 03:57:33 GMT, Don White
wrote:

Maybe... but he seems to be trying . We'll see how well he does over
the long haul. A bit of effective unbiased law enforcement would go a
long ways.

I'm a bit confused, Don. While you didn't agree to the cease-fire,
you seemed like you would be agreeable to it, as long as I was.

Now you're taking shots across my bow, and without me making a single
post.

I'll continue to hold my fire, as I realize that changing your stripes
may take a while. As I've repeatedly said, just say that you agree,
and it's over. Do you agree?

I thought I clearly stated my pledge.
Do you consider my statement above to be 'firing a shot across your
bow'? You may be too sensitive for this rough & tumble newsgroup.

Ahh.. I see. You pledge to not insult my family or my boat, but I'm
still on the table. Your intentions are clear. See ya.

I have to say, this a very cute thread. Sort of the Geneva Convention
of Newsgroup Insults, what is an acceptable targets of personal insults,
what is not an acceptable insults, "Ya Mama" jokes are off limits, "Jack
Off" jokes are on limits. What is even funnier is no is since no one's
mother who is being insulted probably ever reads reads rec.boats there
is a "no harm; no foul" clause that could be enforced into this Geneva
Convention. Once all parties agree what is acceptable insults we need
to have all parties have the agreement signed and notarized and
submitted to ........... ooooo wait who do we submit the Geneva
Convention agreement to?

Wouldn't it just be easier to agree not to insult each other than to
agree what is acceptable and what is not acceptable targets of insults?

Reginal P. Smithers III wrote:


I have to say, this a very cute thread. Sort of the Geneva Convention
of Newsgroup Insults, what is an acceptable targets of personal insults,
what is not an acceptable insults, "Ya Mama" jokes are off limits, "Jack
Off" jokes are on limits. What is even funnier is no is since no one's
mother who is being insulted probably ever reads reads rec.boats there
is a "no harm; no foul" clause that could be enforced into this Geneva
Convention. Once all parties agree what is acceptable insults we need
to have all parties have the agreement signed and notarized and
submitted to ........... ooooo wait who do we submit the Geneva
Convention agreement to?

Wouldn't it just be easier to agree not to insult each other than to
agree what is acceptable and what is not acceptable targets of insults?


If we had proper law enforcement for such accords we could put this to rest.
I don't trust those big belly Southern sheriffs to be unbiased.
Maybe we need a Mountie in here to bring back respect for law & order.

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:32:39 -0400, "Reginal P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 03:57:33 GMT, Don White
wrote:

Maybe... but he seems to be trying . We'll see how well he does over
the long haul. A bit of effective unbiased law enforcement would go a
long ways.

I'm a bit confused, Don. While you didn't agree to the cease-fire,
you seemed like you would be agreeable to it, as long as I was.

Now you're taking shots across my bow, and without me making a single
post.

I'll continue to hold my fire, as I realize that changing your stripes
may take a while. As I've repeatedly said, just say that you agree,
and it's over. Do you agree?

I thought I clearly stated my pledge.
Do you consider my statement above to be 'firing a shot across your
bow'? You may be too sensitive for this rough & tumble newsgroup.

Ahh.. I see. You pledge to not insult my family or my boat, but I'm
still on the table. Your intentions are clear. See ya.

I have to say, this a very cute thread. Sort of the Geneva Convention
of Newsgroup Insults, what is an acceptable targets of personal insults,
what is not an acceptable insults, "Ya Mama" jokes are off limits, "Jack
Off" jokes are on limits. What is even funnier is no is since no one's
mother who is being insulted probably ever reads reads rec.boats there
is a "no harm; no foul" clause that could be enforced into this Geneva
Convention. Once all parties agree what is acceptable insults we need
to have all parties have the agreement signed and notarized and
submitted to ........... ooooo wait who do we submit the Geneva
Convention agreement to?

Wouldn't it just be easier to agree not to insult each other than to
agree what is acceptable and what is not acceptable targets of insults?


Sounds fair to me!
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:03:25 GMT, Don White wrote:

Reginal P. Smithers III wrote:


I have to say, this a very cute thread. Sort of the Geneva Convention
of Newsgroup Insults, what is an acceptable targets of personal insults,
what is not an acceptable insults, "Ya Mama" jokes are off limits, "Jack
Off" jokes are on limits. What is even funnier is no is since no one's
mother who is being insulted probably ever reads reads rec.boats there
is a "no harm; no foul" clause that could be enforced into this Geneva
Convention. Once all parties agree what is acceptable insults we need
to have all parties have the agreement signed and notarized and
submitted to ........... ooooo wait who do we submit the Geneva
Convention agreement to?

Wouldn't it just be easier to agree not to insult each other than to
agree what is acceptable and what is not acceptable targets of insults?


If we had proper law enforcement for such accords we could put this to rest.
I don't trust those big belly Southern sheriffs to be unbiased.
Maybe we need a Mountie in here to bring back respect for law & order.

How about mature self-restraint?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John