"Jack Goff" wrote in message
...
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".



Is this what you were hoping for Chuck?

You got your wish.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
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.

BS. You just wanted to stir the crap John and you know it.

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 00:39:18 GMT, "CalifBill"
wrote:

Maybe it is all the short people that are humor challenged. And you are
shorter than me, shortie.

Probably - but I'm better looking, smarter and just a much more
worthwhile person. :)


Maybe more worthwhile. But my daughters may argue that.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
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.

Stir the pot John...stir the pot.

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 00:39:18 GMT, "CalifBill"
wrote:

Maybe it is all the short people that are humor challenged. And you are
shorter than me, shortie.

Probably - but I'm better looking, smarter and just a much more
worthwhile person. :)


I used to be taller than I am now. I also am losing my sense of humor and
am not anywhere near as worthwhile as I used to be. Just ask Mrs.E.

Eisboch

"CalifBill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
news
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.

Most folks here are humor challenged.

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 4 Nov 2006 20:16:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


I used to be taller than I am now. I also am losing my sense of humor and
am not anywhere near as worthwhile as I used to be. Just ask Mrs.E.

Funny you should mention that. I'm actually almost a inch and a half
shorter than I was at age 20.



My Navy records indicate I was exactly 72 inches (at 19-20 years).

I don't know what I am right now, but I know I am shorter. Either that or
it's an optical illusion.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:

I used to be taller than I am now. I also am losing my sense of humor and
am not anywhere near as worthwhile as I used to be. Just ask Mrs.E.

Eisboch



Oh oh! Hope she won't trade you in... like her cars.

" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..

"CalifBill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
news
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.

Most folks here are humor challenged.


Lots may be vertically challenged.

On Sat, 4 Nov 2006 20:16:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

I used to be taller than I am now. I also am losing my sense of humor and
am not anywhere near as worthwhile as I used to be. Just ask Mrs.E.

Maybe you could make amends by helping to care for the horses?