![]() |
Lobsta' Boats and trust
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 07:38:00 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: I'm glad I cut way back on reading and participation here. The netcops have really turned it into a ****-er-ee. Well, Chuck does have a point about the OT stuff - it does get to be a little, well, off-puting I guess is a good way to describe it. On the other hand, the world is still spinning, the sun came up this morning and life is still worth living. I think it's perfectly natural for people with a common interest to get off track once in a while, particularly when the issue is an emotionally charged, important item like the election next week. Name calling is not necessary, but the events of the world today are important to all of us. I've learned from being involved in some of these "debates". If it's any consolation .... rec.boats isn't the only NG that is currently fired up with political posts. Just about all of the popular ones are, regardless of the official NG topic. Eisboch |
Lobsta' Boats and trust
Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. The info Harry sent was concerning his Parker. Harry never sent Chuck or anyone else any info concerning the Lobster Boat. "Wayne.B" wrote in message ... I could be wrong on this but my recollection is that the documentation in question was for the Parker. "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... I believe that it was the Parker's purchase order that Harry sent to Chuck for Chuck to confirm that Harry had actually purchased a boat with the stipulation that Harry's name, address and purchase price not be revealed. I do not believe that Harry has ever sent anyone information regarding the 36' Zimmerman like lobsta' boat. Well, then aren't I the horse's ass? My apologies to Gould. I thought it was the Lobsta' boat. Eisboch No, you are not a horse's ass, but the Lobster Boat has and will always be a deep dark secret. |
North Carolina Online Tide Charts with Moon Phase
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
I will allow you to hold me to a higher standard. It shouldn't be that hard to meet - I mean after all, you are Canadian. :) ba da boom - ~~ rimshot ~~ You'd have to stop smokin' those cheap stinky cigars first. |
Lobsta' Boats and trust
On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 22:22:26 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote: Eisboch wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... Speaking of writing things: Next time I'm back east I'll look you up and do a good report on your lobster boat. Been a long time since you mentioned that here. You ever going to come clean on that issue? It would be good for the soul. :-) Gould, this post of yours says a lot. Do you know why? During the great debate about Harry's Zimmerman-like Lobsta' boat many questioned it's existence. If fact, if I recall correctly some wagers were proposed by some pertaining to him proving it's existence. At some point Harry supposedly sent you some documentation that either proved or disproved it's existence. He selected you to receive this information based on his feeling that you could be trusted and would keep the information confidential, only to be revealed on his say so. So, are you now on the verge of not honoring that trust? Or threatening to do so? Hope not. Eisboch The info Harry sent was concerning his Parker. Harry never sent Chuck or anyone else any info concerning the Lobster Boat. I don't recall Harry sending any info on the Parker to anyone. I verified his ownership of the Parker by talking to the guy who sold it to him. He also kept it in the same marina I was using. |
Lobsta' Boats and trust
On 4 Nov 2006 01:03:55 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote: Eisboch wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... Speaking of writing things: Next time I'm back east I'll look you up and do a good report on your lobster boat. Been a long time since you mentioned that here. You ever going to come clean on that issue? It would be good for the soul. :-) Gould, this post of yours says a lot. Do you know why? During the great debate about Harry's Zimmerman-like Lobsta' boat many questioned it's existence. If fact, if I recall correctly some wagers were proposed by some pertaining to him proving it's existence. At some point Harry supposedly sent you some documentation that either proved or disproved it's existence. He selected you to receive this information based on his feeling that you could be trusted and would keep the information confidential, only to be revealed on his say so. So, are you now on the verge of not honoring that trust? Or threatening to do so? Hope not. Eisboch Your memory is faulty. The paperwork Harry sent my verified that he bought his Parker, the YoHo. I never saw any evidence that he owned his lobster boat. If you will recall, when Harry bought his Parker a group of posters, led by Karen of Oz, all claimed he was lying about buying a boat. Take a look back in the archives if you would care to. You're just plain wrong. Sorry. I guess I should have read your post before I made mine. I didn't recall the sending of any Parker paperwork after I'd verified his ownership. I do recall Karen not believing me either! |
North Carolina Online Tide Charts with Moon Phase
On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 23:01:52 GMT, Don White wrote:
JohnH wrote: What cheap shot? Hell, if he'd offer to do a write up of my boat, I think it would be cool! Come on John. You know a number of disruptive posters try to irritate Harry by inferring he really doesn't have his lobster boat. Don, I think Chuck was inferring that Harry *had* a lobster boat, not that he *didn't* have one. |
North Carolina Online Tide Charts with Moon Phase
JohnH wrote:
Don, I think Chuck was inferring that Harry *had* a lobster boat, not that he *didn't* have one. I think I'd be willing to bet a 'toonie' on that one. Me right...you wrong! |
Lobsta' Boats and trust
On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 10:30:45 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote: Eisboch wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. The info Harry sent was concerning his Parker. Harry never sent Chuck or anyone else any info concerning the Lobster Boat. "Wayne.B" wrote in message ... I could be wrong on this but my recollection is that the documentation in question was for the Parker. "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... I believe that it was the Parker's purchase order that Harry sent to Chuck for Chuck to confirm that Harry had actually purchased a boat with the stipulation that Harry's name, address and purchase price not be revealed. I do not believe that Harry has ever sent anyone information regarding the 36' Zimmerman like lobsta' boat. Well, then aren't I the horse's ass? My apologies to Gould. I thought it was the Lobsta' boat. Eisboch No, you are not a horse's ass, but the Lobster Boat has and will always be a deep dark secret. What I think is funny is the fact that Harry has been totally silent about the ficticious lobsta boat he "owned". The guy's not as dumb as he posts. |
Lobsta' Boats and trust
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Eisboch wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message . .. The info Harry sent was concerning his Parker. Harry never sent Chuck or anyone else any info concerning the Lobster Boat. "Wayne.B" wrote in message ... I could be wrong on this but my recollection is that the documentation in question was for the Parker. "Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... I believe that it was the Parker's purchase order that Harry sent to Chuck for Chuck to confirm that Harry had actually purchased a boat with the stipulation that Harry's name, address and purchase price not be revealed. I do not believe that Harry has ever sent anyone information regarding the 36' Zimmerman like lobsta' boat. Well, then aren't I the horse's ass? My apologies to Gould. I thought it was the Lobsta' boat. Eisboch No, you are not a horse's ass, but the Lobster Boat has and will always be a deep dark secret. Let's just call it a lie and leave it at that. |
Lobsta' Boats and trust
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 08:41:08 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: On 11/4/2006 8:30 AM, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 4 Nov 2006 08:02:48 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 07:38:00 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: I'm glad I cut way back on reading and participation here. The netcops have really turned it into a ****-er-ee. Well, Chuck does have a point about the OT stuff - it does get to be a little, well, off-puting I guess is a good way to describe it. On the other hand, the world is still spinning, the sun came up this morning and life is still worth living. I think it's perfectly natural for people with a common interest to get off track once in a while, particularly when the issue is an emotionally charged, important item like the election next week. Name calling is not necessary, but the events of the world today are important to all of us. I've learned from being involved in some of these "debates". Correctomundo. When it devolves into trying to score points based on faith, party or person then the issues aren't as important as being able to put a "snap" on who ever decides to take up the cause. That's when it becomes uninteresting and silly. If it's any consolation .... rec.boats isn't the only NG that is currently fired up with political posts. Just about all of the popular ones are, regardless of the official NG topic. I tried telling Chuck that two/three weeks ago when he went off on one of his crusades, but it didn't sink in I guess. It's infected everything and it's really up to the participants to pick and choose that which interests them. Indeed. I read most of your posts, because even when you are snotty, I know it is in jest, and is part of your acerbic personality. Acerbic? Me? I have some film critic friends who would find that highly amusing. Not to mention that them 'thar's fightin' words... :) ~~ cough ~~ I much prefer - well, weird. :) I've referenced this before - there are a few folk here who don't take themselves seriously - I'm one of them. I also can prove, without being "snarky" that this newsgroup is completely devoid - call it a wasteland if you will - of humor. If you can't laugh at yourself for being a buffoon - or like Calif Bill says - weird, then what's the point? We're all pompous dorks at one time or another. When we don't recognize that, or take it as an article of faith that we cannot have the moral/intellectual high ground all the time, then we are purely here for the argument and not the discussions. Or it is a result of your being shorter than the other guys in your group. At 6'3", not likely. :) Maybe it is all the short people that are humor challenged. And you are shorter than me, shortie. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:44 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com