Deja Vu all over again.
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.

oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??


You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.

I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?

Deja Vu all over again.
 

basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.
oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??

You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.

I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?


Kevin, you need to look at your recent posting history and figure out
what you are trying to do and whether it is having the desired effect.

Deja Vu all over again.
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.
oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??

You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.

I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?


Kevin, you need to look at your recent posting history and figure out
what you are trying to do and whether it is having the desired effect.

I'm not Kevin, nitwit.

Deja Vu all over again.
 

Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:

basskisser wrote:


Dan Krueger wrote:


basskisser wrote:


JimH wrote:



"Don White" wrote in message
...



Here we go again.
Somebody has to teach these flyboys how to read a chart.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...nfriendly.html



Sorry to hear about that Don. I am sure the US pilots involved in this
accident feel worse than you can believe and will have a hard time
forgetting it.


You could be right, Bipolar Boy!


Insert Kevin's signature phrase here --- "Grow up".


Not quite bright enough to show some originality, huh?


Why are you responding? Are you Kevin?


It's quite simple. A person, using google groups can respond to any
thread, whether or not it is a direct post to them. Understand? Take
for instance if you were to post a question to JimH, aka Bipolar Boy, I
could simply reply to it, just like I am replying to this post. Again,
you just aren't great at originality, are you?


Google groups have nothing to do with it.

Yes, it certainly does! I'm using it, so it's quite relevant.

Any news reader can post to
the group.

"aren't great at originality"?? What does that have to do with this
thread or this group?

Again, it's quite simple, even for you. It seems that you can't figure
out that anyone can post to any thread.

You are way out there, Kevin.

Far out, man........

Deja Vu all over again.
 

basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.
oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??

You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.
I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?

Kevin, you need to look at your recent posting history and figure out
what you are trying to do and whether it is having the desired effect.

I'm not Kevin, nitwit.


Kevin, why do you keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?

Deja Vu all over again.
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.
oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??

You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.
I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?

Kevin, you need to look at your recent posting history and figure out
what you are trying to do and whether it is having the desired effect.

I'm not Kevin, nitwit.


Kevin, why do you keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?

Why do YOU keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?
See how stupid you're being?

Deja Vu all over again.
 

basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.
oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??

You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.
I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?

Kevin, you need to look at your recent posting history and figure out
what you are trying to do and whether it is having the desired effect.
I'm not Kevin, nitwit.

Kevin, why do you keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?

Why do YOU keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?
See how stupid you're being?


Kevin,

You have stumbled upon the the answer.

This is USENET and there are essentially no rules. You can post what you
want, when you want and with any content you want.

The fact that you keep responding to posts that are directed to Kevin
means that you are Kevin to many people. If you don't want to be known
as Kevin then stop responding to posts directed to Kevin. It is as
simple as that.

Deja Vu all over again.
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.
oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??

You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.
I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?

Kevin, you need to look at your recent posting history and figure out
what you are trying to do and whether it is having the desired effect.
I'm not Kevin, nitwit.

Kevin, why do you keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?

Why do YOU keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?
See how stupid you're being?


Kevin,

You have stumbled upon the the answer.

This is USENET and there are essentially no rules. You can post what you
want, when you want and with any content you want.

The fact that you keep responding to posts that are directed to Kevin
means that you are Kevin to many people. If you don't want to be known
as Kevin then stop responding to posts directed to Kevin. It is as
simple as that.

If you don't want to be known as "idiot", then stop responding to posts
where I call you just that, idiot. You respond to posts to others also.
So does that mean that if you respond to a post to, say, Harry, that
you ARE Harry? Do you not see your absurdity? If not, you certainly
aren't very bright.

Deja Vu all over again.
 

basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.
oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??

You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.
I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?

Kevin, you need to look at your recent posting history and figure out
what you are trying to do and whether it is having the desired effect.
I'm not Kevin, nitwit.

Kevin, why do you keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?
Why do YOU keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?
See how stupid you're being?

Kevin,

You have stumbled upon the the answer.

This is USENET and there are essentially no rules. You can post what you
want, when you want and with any content you want.

The fact that you keep responding to posts that are directed to Kevin
means that you are Kevin to many people. If you don't want to be known
as Kevin then stop responding to posts directed to Kevin. It is as
simple as that.

If you don't want to be known as "idiot", then stop responding to posts
where I call you just that, idiot. You respond to posts to others also.
So does that mean that if you respond to a post to, say, Harry, that
you ARE Harry? Do you not see your absurdity? If not, you certainly
aren't very bright.


If you direct the posts to Idiot, I will not respond because I, unlike
you, am not an idiot.

Deja Vu all over again.
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.
If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.

Sucks to be Kevin.
YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!
Wrong again.

His name is Dan.
How do you know that?

Oooh, somebody did a Krause on Kevin.
oooh, somebody is still an idiot.....
Were you able to make your brain actually work a tad to understand why
I respond to posts that are replying to me??

You are still the punching bag of the group. You have been abandoned and
or shuned by all of your friends. Why don't you stop being a JimH and
be a normal person.
I've never stooped to the low level of JimH, or you for that matter.
But you didn't answer my question. Were you finally able to understand
why I respond to posts that are a direct reply to ME?

Kevin, you need to look at your recent posting history and figure out
what you are trying to do and whether it is having the desired effect.
I'm not Kevin, nitwit.

Kevin, why do you keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?
Why do YOU keep responding to posts that are not addressed to you?
See how stupid you're being?

Kevin,

You have stumbled upon the the answer.

This is USENET and there are essentially no rules. You can post what you
want, when you want and with any content you want.

The fact that you keep responding to posts that are directed to Kevin
means that you are Kevin to many people. If you don't want to be known
as Kevin then stop responding to posts directed to Kevin. It is as
simple as that.

If you don't want to be known as "idiot", then stop responding to posts
where I call you just that, idiot. You respond to posts to others also.
So does that mean that if you respond to a post to, say, Harry, that
you ARE Harry? Do you not see your absurdity? If not, you certainly
aren't very bright.


If you direct the posts to Idiot, I will not respond because I, unlike
you, am not an idiot.

Uh, you have....
Many times in the past, idiot.