RJSmithers wrote:


Sigh. The twerp changed his handle again...well, we'll just make up
another bozobin entry for Smithers.

Harry Krause wrote:
RJSmithers wrote:


Sigh. The twerp changed his handle again...well, we'll just make up
another bozobin entry for Smithers.

Harry,
You need to learn how to filter by IP, my IP has never changed, it
really would make your life easier. You really should also filter
Chuck, then you wouldn't have any reason to visit rec.boats.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
RJSmithers wrote:


Sigh. The twerp changed his handle again...well, we'll just make up
another bozobin entry for Smithers.


Was he responding to something I posted? I would not doubt it was some sort
of smart ass smarmy comment.

On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:41:04 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Jim wrote:
Harry,
Was that an actual word count, or were you just guestimating? How do you
know it was whining bull****?
Chuckie's loyal supporter,
Florida Jim

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Chuck Gould wrote:

...another 300 words of whining b.s. :


Whine, whine, whine. You hang up a politically oriented cut 'n paste
and then moan how your free speech is infringed upon. Here's a flash,
Tom- you've got to say something to be speaking- not just dredging up
some crap that you hope will serve your admitted purpose; fostering
"chaos" in the newsgroup.


It was a guesstimate. I'm pretty good at guesstimating the number of
words in a paragraph. Been doing it for 40 years.

How do I know it was whining B.S.? Easy. It was one of Chuck's
overwrought, overwritten tomes posted in response to one of his
netcopping tirades. Whenever Chuck plays netcop, he's overwrought and
whining, and his posts are too long.

Are you good at judging BS cause you've been doing it for 40 years?
--
***** Hope your day is better than decent! *****

John H

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 23:13:43 -0400, RJSmithers wrote:

JimH wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 16:58:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:


Noted and answered.
Don't get carried away - I'm on your side on this remember.

Post away - you have my complete support.

I would donate, but I already have supported two friends of Mrs. Wave
and one of my oldest - there is only so much to go around. And I'll
be honest with you - the fact that you will match contributions is a
wonderful and very admirable thing to do - I have nothing but respect
for your efforts.

It was only an illustration of my take on the whole what is and isn't
appropriate and to tell the truth, my annoyance over Chuck's apparent
inability to see anything other than his own truth.

That's it and I'll shut up about it now.

Capice? :)
To any reasonable person this post would be more acceptable than
many/most others. We have people who post about their operating
systems, cameras, and even their desk chairs. I'll skip the obvious
off-topic political posts.

It's great to see that you donate to charities close to your heart. Just
for grins, why not drop $10.00 or $20.00 so John has to match it? I
donate to the same charity every year but I would rather spend a few
dollars here to see if John can keep up with it.

Good point.

Our daughter is running in the 5/17/07 event in Columbus and we are
sponsoring her team, as we always do. We donated to John's daughter's
cause over and beyond that, modest as it may be, last year and this year.
In the end it is a worthy cause to donate to.

The other ones we contribute to without question are the Salvation Army
and our Church.

Whether or not requests for charitable contributions are acceptable to
post in a boating NG are acceptable is not my call. I brought it up last
year and was blasted for do so.

So...................it is your call. But do consider donating to the
cause.
I donated to John's daughters team. Post a like for yours.


Your suggestion is appreciated but this is not the proper forum to request
charitable donations Dan. Thanks anyway.

Your donations to John's daughters cause is certainly
impressive..............nice work!



JimH,
I would like to contribute to your daughters site also, go ahead and
post a link. After all, you have been doing this for years, and it is
always nice to be able to contribute to a worthy cause.

It's quite surprising that JimH is suddenly worried about what is proper to
post here!
--
***** Hope your day is better than decent! *****

John H

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
RJSmithers wrote:


Sigh. The twerp changed his handle again...well, we'll just make up
another bozobin entry for Smithers.


Was he responding to something I posted? I would not doubt it was some sort
of smart ass smarmy comment.




JimH,
Why don't you show Harry how to set up his filters properly, he seems to
be having trouble setting it up.

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
RJSmithers wrote:


Sigh. The twerp changed his handle again...well, we'll just make up
another bozobin entry for Smithers.


Was he responding to something I posted? I would not doubt it was some sort
of smart ass smarmy comment.




I dunno. I saw that a "Smitherscrap" post snuck through the filter, so I
just added the particulars to that filter. I don't read his crap.

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...


Chuck,

You often post pertinent and informative info here.
The problem for me, and for others I suspect, is that it is buried in 500 or
more
words of prose that quickly bores me to tears.

This is not a magazine article, it's a newsgroup.

Get to the point and forget the fluff.

Eisboch

On Mar 26, 9:36?am, Harry Krause wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Mar 26, 7:41?am, Harry Krause wrote:
Jim wrote:
Harry,
Was that an actual word count, or were you just guestimating? How do you
know it was whining bull****?
Chuckie's loyal supporter,
Florida Jim
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
om...
Chuck Gould wrote:
...another 300 words of whining b.s. :
Whine, whine, whine. You hang up a politically oriented cut 'n paste
and then moan how your free speech is infringed upon. Here's a flash,
Tom- you've got to say something to be speaking- not just dredging up
some crap that you hope will serve your admitted purpose; fostering
"chaos" in the newsgroup.
It was a guesstimate. I'm pretty good at guesstimating the number of
words in a paragraph. Been doing it for 40 years.

How do I know it was whining B.S.? Easy. It was one of Chuck's
overwrought, overwritten tomes posted in response to one of his
netcopping tirades. Whenever Chuck plays netcop, he's overwrought and
whining, and his posts are too long.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Then don't read them, Krause.

Oh, wait----- your entire purpose for participating in this group is
to make nasty personal remarks in response to various people. I guess
if you filtered everybody you rail against here you'd have nothing to
do. :-)

Not to worry, Chuck. I usually do not read more than a couple of words
of your netcopping posts, and rarely more than a couple of sentences of
your pimping for boat manufacturers' purple prose posts.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So your scathing commentaries are based on reading either a "couple of
words" or a "couple of sentences"? I'm not surprised. Once again, you
don't really know what you're going on and on about. It's true that I
don't write incredibly well, and have never claimed that I do. But if
you hope to have your criticisms respected you shouldn't admit to
firing off your negative stink bombs without actually reading the
material upon which you're remarking.

Of course you won't reply to this, you'll stop reading after "So
your." :-)

Chuck Gould wrote:

Not to worry, Chuck. I usually do not read more than a couple of words
of your netcopping posts, and rarely more than a couple of sentences of
your pimping for boat manufacturers' purple prose posts.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So your scathing commentaries are based on reading either a "couple of
words" or a "couple of sentences"? I'm not surprised. Once again, you
don't really know what you're going on and on about. It's true that I
don't write incredibly well, and have never claimed that I do. But if
you hope to have your criticisms respected you shouldn't admit to
firing off your negative stink bombs without actually reading the
material upon which you're remarking.

Of course you won't reply to this, you'll stop reading after "So
your." :-)


Not to worry, Chuck. I've been editing copy for a long time. I can tell
after reading a sentence or three whether what follows is going to be
wheat or chaff. Most of your posts are chaff.