On May 30, 6:53*am, wrote:
On May 30, 8:58*am, HK wrote:





wrote:
On May 30, 8:20 am, HK wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Fri, 30 May 2008 05:04:31 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
That the three stooges are back in earnest trying to take the group
into the sewer. The group was harmonious, everyone got along when they
were at Chucks, now look. And they think that others were to blame. I
noticed that they are trying to ruin Chuck's site too.
And you're falling right into the crap they drop. Ignore them.
Well, you could always pepper everyone you don't like with idiotic
emails every day, like Herring does.

Liar. If he's doing so, post them.

What's in it for me if I do?

Will you get on your skateboard and ride on the freeway the wrong way?

That would be an incentive, hey now.

Never mind, everyone knows it yet another in your long years of lies,
kind of like your father's fireboat welcome in NYC, you Zimmerman like
lobster boat, your rounding the horn, and on and on......... Go back
to Chuck's. Oh, wait, they won't believe your bull**** either.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And what about YOUR lies, you ****TARD COWARD???

Shut your mouth, COWARD.
Everythings fine at Chucks. Your ****ed cause they KICKED YOUR LYING
COWARDLY ASS OUT.
When are you coming to Canada...ASSHOLE?

I'm waiting...you chicken-**** COCKSUCKER.
Tell; John H to STOP E-MAILING ME ON YOUR BEHALF.

wrote:
On May 30, 8:58 am, HK wrote:
wrote:
On May 30, 8:20 am, HK wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Fri, 30 May 2008 05:04:31 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
That the three stooges are back in earnest trying to take the group
into the sewer. The group was harmonious, everyone got along when they
were at Chucks, now look. And they think that others were to blame. I
noticed that they are trying to ruin Chuck's site too.
And you're falling right into the crap they drop. Ignore them.
Well, you could always pepper everyone you don't like with idiotic
emails every day, like Herring does.
Liar. If he's doing so, post them.
What's in it for me if I do?

Will you get on your skateboard and ride on the freeway the wrong way?

That would be an incentive, hey now.

Never mind, everyone knows it yet another in your long years of lies,
kind of like your father's fireboat welcome in NYC, you Zimmerman like
lobster boat, your rounding the horn, and on and on......... Go back
to Chuck's. Oh, wait, they won't believe your bull**** either.



Whatever floats your non-existent boat.

On May 30, 5:04�am, wrote:
I
noticed that they are trying to ruin Chuck's site too.


Really? If so, it blew right past me. Maybe I should ask you to come
over and help moderate..........naw, on second thought probably
not. :-)

Most of the attempts to "ruin the site" in the last few days have been
some opinionated but very civil discussions about the advantages and
disadvantages of bow thrusters on small boats, transom savers on
trailers, and the relative merits of various boating hats. There is
some historic tension between a few posters, but it almost never
breaks out into the sort of content that fans of other venues seem to
promote and enjoy. What's more, the natural momentum of the site is
finally kicking in and even though I have been too busy this week to
post as often as I would like, other members are posting more freely,
spontaneously, and informatively than folks who spend no time there
might imagine possible.

No magic, just a site where "the golden rule" is SOP and there is a
small amount of organization and structure. While that "ruins" it for
some, others seem to be enjoying it and the modest amount of structure
has allowed folks who don't get along elsewhere (or haven't in the
past) to converse in a civil fashion.

FYI, wrecked boats is seldom mentioned on the other site. In my
opinion, it would be entirely OK if the other site were never
mentioned here. I'd respectfully suggest that you folks have enough
problems of your own to iron out on this board without trying to
comment on problems you think exist elsewhere.

Have a wonderful day, one and all.

On May 30, 11:31*am, Chuck Gould wrote:

FYI, wrecked boats is seldom mentioned on the other site. In my
opinion, it would be entirely OK if the other site were never
mentioned here. I'd respectfully suggest that you folks have enough
problems of your own to iron out on this board without trying to
comment on problems you think exist elsewhere.

Have a wonderful day, one and all.

We are dealing with our problems just fine chuckie, thank you so much
for your concern. But really, your backhanded insults don't really
help much anyway. If you are so disinterested in this site you should
probably stop coming here and reading/posting them here.

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...

FYI, wrecked boats is seldom mentioned on the other site. In my
opinion, it would be entirely OK if the other site were never
mentioned here. I'd respectfully suggest that you folks have enough
problems of your own to iron out on this board without trying to
comment on problems you think exist elsewhere.

Have a wonderful day, one and all.

Right back at you Sir Charles. Thanks for stopping by.

wrote:


We are dealing with our problems just fine...



You sent Guido and his brothers out to take care of Loogy, Herring, DK,
Florida Jim, Mike, and the rest of the lowbrainoutput turds that the
plumbing here won't flush? :)

On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:31:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On May 30, 5:04?am, wrote:
I
noticed that they are trying to ruin Chuck's site too.


Really? If so, it blew right past me. Maybe I should ask you to come
over and help moderate..........naw, on second thought probably
not. :-)

Most of the attempts to "ruin the site" in the last few days have been
some opinionated but very civil discussions about the advantages and
disadvantages of bow thrusters on small boats, transom savers on
trailers, and the relative merits of various boating hats. There is
some historic tension between a few posters, but it almost never
breaks out into the sort of content that fans of other venues seem to
promote and enjoy. What's more, the natural momentum of the site is
finally kicking in and even though I have been too busy this week to
post as often as I would like, other members are posting more freely,
spontaneously, and informatively than folks who spend no time there
might imagine possible.

No magic, just a site where "the golden rule" is SOP and there is a
small amount of organization and structure. While that "ruins" it for
some, others seem to be enjoying it and the modest amount of structure
has allowed folks who don't get along elsewhere (or haven't in the
past) to converse in a civil fashion.

FYI, wrecked boats is seldom mentioned on the other site. In my
opinion, it would be entirely OK if the other site were never
mentioned here. I'd respectfully suggest that you folks have enough
problems of your own to iron out on this board without trying to
comment on problems you think exist elsewhere.

Have a wonderful day, one and all.

That post was totally unnecessary and counterproductive. If your desire is
simply to inflame, Harry, JimH, and Don are doing just fine, thank you.

I notice you make no comments about their continuous name-calling, fight
provoking, and otherwise immature behavior over here, Chuck.

Shame on you.
--
John *H*

John H. wrote:
On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:31:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On May 30, 5:04?am, wrote:
I
noticed that they are trying to ruin Chuck's site too.

Really? If so, it blew right past me. Maybe I should ask you to come
over and help moderate..........naw, on second thought probably
not. :-)

Most of the attempts to "ruin the site" in the last few days have been
some opinionated but very civil discussions about the advantages and
disadvantages of bow thrusters on small boats, transom savers on
trailers, and the relative merits of various boating hats. There is
some historic tension between a few posters, but it almost never
breaks out into the sort of content that fans of other venues seem to
promote and enjoy. What's more, the natural momentum of the site is
finally kicking in and even though I have been too busy this week to
post as often as I would like, other members are posting more freely,
spontaneously, and informatively than folks who spend no time there
might imagine possible.

No magic, just a site where "the golden rule" is SOP and there is a
small amount of organization and structure. While that "ruins" it for
some, others seem to be enjoying it and the modest amount of structure
has allowed folks who don't get along elsewhere (or haven't in the
past) to converse in a civil fashion.

FYI, wrecked boats is seldom mentioned on the other site. In my
opinion, it would be entirely OK if the other site were never
mentioned here. I'd respectfully suggest that you folks have enough
problems of your own to iron out on this board without trying to
comment on problems you think exist elsewhere.

Have a wonderful day, one and all.

That post was totally unnecessary and counterproductive. If your desire is
simply to inflame, Harry, JimH, and Don are doing just fine, thank you.

I notice you make no comments about their continuous name-calling, fight
provoking, and otherwise immature behavior over here, Chuck.

Shame on you.



Just put Chuck on the list to whom you send your foul little emails,
Herring... :)

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:31:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On May 30, 5:04?am, wrote:
I
noticed that they are trying to ruin Chuck's site too.


Really? If so, it blew right past me. Maybe I should ask you to come
over and help moderate..........naw, on second thought probably
not. :-)

Most of the attempts to "ruin the site" in the last few days have been
some opinionated but very civil discussions about the advantages and
disadvantages of bow thrusters on small boats, transom savers on
trailers, and the relative merits of various boating hats. There is
some historic tension between a few posters, but it almost never
breaks out into the sort of content that fans of other venues seem to
promote and enjoy. What's more, the natural momentum of the site is
finally kicking in and even though I have been too busy this week to
post as often as I would like, other members are posting more freely,
spontaneously, and informatively than folks who spend no time there
might imagine possible.

No magic, just a site where "the golden rule" is SOP and there is a
small amount of organization and structure. While that "ruins" it for
some, others seem to be enjoying it and the modest amount of structure
has allowed folks who don't get along elsewhere (or haven't in the
past) to converse in a civil fashion.

FYI, wrecked boats is seldom mentioned on the other site. In my
opinion, it would be entirely OK if the other site were never
mentioned here. I'd respectfully suggest that you folks have enough
problems of your own to iron out on this board without trying to
comment on problems you think exist elsewhere.

Have a wonderful day, one and all.

That post was totally unnecessary and counterproductive. If your desire is
simply to inflame, Harry, JimH, and Don are doing just fine, thank you.

I notice you make no comments about their continuous name-calling, fight
provoking, and otherwise immature behavior over here, Chuck.

Shame on you.
--
John *H*

When you look behind his holier than thou attitude, Chuck is really a decent
guy, whose unselfish desire to enrich us poor unwashed heathens with his
insight, is commendable.
I also want to thank Chuck for providing a safe haven where Harry can
retreat and practice his decorum. Perhaps Harry will one day learn to be
civil enough to return to usenet and post like an adult, in an unmoderated
newsgroup.

On May 30, 12:16*pm, "Jim" wrote:
"John H." wrote in message

...





On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:31:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On May 30, 5:04?am, wrote:
I
noticed that they are trying to ruin Chuck's site too.

Really? If so, it blew right past me. Maybe I should ask you to come
over and help moderate..........naw, on second thought probably
not. :-)

Most of the attempts to "ruin the site" in the last few days have been
some opinionated but very civil discussions about the advantages and
disadvantages of bow thrusters on small boats, transom savers on
trailers, and the relative merits of various boating hats. There is
some historic tension between a few posters, but it almost never
breaks out into the sort of content that fans of other venues seem to
promote and enjoy. What's more, the natural momentum of the site is
finally kicking in and even though I have been too busy this week to
post as often as I would like, other members are posting more freely,
spontaneously, and informatively than folks who spend no time there
might imagine possible.

No magic, just a site where "the golden rule" is SOP and there is a
small amount of organization and structure. While that "ruins" it for
some, others seem to be enjoying it and the modest amount of structure
has allowed folks who don't get along elsewhere (or haven't in the
past) to converse in a civil fashion.

FYI, wrecked boats is seldom mentioned on the other site. In my
opinion, it would be entirely OK if the other site were never
mentioned here. I'd respectfully suggest that you folks have enough
problems of your own to iron out on this board without trying to
comment on problems you think exist elsewhere.

Have a wonderful day, one and all.

That post was totally unnecessary and counterproductive. If your desire is
simply to inflame, Harry, JimH, and Don are doing just fine, thank you.

I notice you make no comments about their continuous name-calling, fight
provoking, and otherwise immature behavior over here, Chuck.

Shame on you.
--
John *H*

When you look behind his holier than thou attitude, Chuck is really a decent
guy, whose unselfish desire to enrich us poor unwashed heathens with his
insight, is commendable.
I also want to thank Chuck for providing a safe haven where Harry can
retreat and practice his decorum. Perhaps Harry will one day learn to be
civil enough to return to usenet and post like an adult, in an unmoderated
newsgroup.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As you can see from just this morning, that ain't happening! And it's
SO easy to figure out. If you believe his lies, or at least tolerate
them, he's fine with you. If you call bull****, then all of a sudden
you're a dumb foch, don't own a boat, etc.