On Jul 4, 3:59*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 18:52:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing



wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:09:58 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:02:38 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:22:23 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:31:08 -0400, wrote:

By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.

But the entertainment value is totally lost. * :-)

That's half the fun of Usenet - the entertainment value.

We are not talking about usenet. We're talking about private forums run by
individuals or organizations.

I'm begining to suspect that you are a Harry clone. *:)

Then I suspect you are not very perceptive.

Tom does not like it when he is corrected by others.

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:59:52 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 18:52:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:09:58 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:02:38 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:22:23 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:31:08 -0400, wrote:

By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.

But the entertainment value is totally lost. :-)

That's half the fun of Usenet - the entertainment value.

We are not talking about usenet. We're talking about private forums run by
individuals or organizations.

I'm begining to suspect that you are a Harry clone. :)

Then I suspect you are not very perceptive.

Talk about losing perspective.

Wayne made a comment about losing entertainment value once a user has
been booted from a private forum.

I mentioned that, with respect to entertainment value, Usenet provides
plenty of same.

To which you replied that we weren't talking about Usenet.

I would point out that I WAS talking about Usenet in reference to
relative entertainment values of the two forms of discourse - this
being more open and free form which private forums prefer not to
provide being more focused and topic specific.

I'm fairly certain that most people here understood that.

Now that I know you have a cognition problem with respect to comparing
A to B I'll be sure to explain it to you in future posts.

On Jul 4, 5:23*pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:59:52 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 18:52:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:09:58 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:02:38 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:22:23 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:31:08 -0400, wrote:

By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.

But the entertainment value is totally lost. * :-)

That's half the fun of Usenet - the entertainment value.

We are not talking about usenet. We're talking about private forums run by
individuals or organizations.

I'm begining to suspect that you are a Harry clone. *:)

Then I suspect you are not very perceptive.

Talk about losing perspective.

Wayne made a comment about losing entertainment value once a user has
been booted from a private forum.

I mentioned that, with respect to entertainment value, Usenet provides
plenty of same.

To which you replied that we weren't talking about Usenet.

I would point out that I WAS talking about Usenet in reference to
relative entertainment values of the two forms of discourse - this
being *more open and free form which private forums prefer not to
provide being more focused and topic specific.

I'm fairly certain that most people here understood that.

Now that I know you have a cognition problem with respect to comparing
A to B I'll be sure to explain it to you in future posts.

Another whiner.

On Jul 4, 7:42*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:23:23 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing



wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:59:52 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 18:52:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:09:58 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:02:38 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:22:23 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:31:08 -0400, wrote:

By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.

But the entertainment value is totally lost. * :-)

That's half the fun of Usenet - the entertainment value.

We are not talking about usenet. We're talking about private forums run by
individuals or organizations.

I'm begining to suspect that you are a Harry clone. *:)

Then I suspect you are not very perceptive.

Talk about losing perspective.

Wayne made a comment about losing entertainment value once a user has
been booted from a private forum.

I mentioned that, with respect to entertainment value, Usenet provides
plenty of same.

To which you replied that we weren't talking about Usenet.

I would point out that I WAS talking about Usenet in reference to
relative entertainment values of the two forms of discourse - this
being *more open and free form which private forums prefer not to
provide being more focused and topic specific.

I'm fairly certain that most people here understood that.

Now that I know you have a cognition problem with respect to comparing
A to B I'll be sure to explain it to you in future posts.

Holy Crap!

I repeat............Tom does not like it when he is corrected by
others.

On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:51:56 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 16:53:12 -0700 (PDT), JimH wrote:

On Jul 4, 7:42*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:23:23 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing



wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:59:52 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 18:52:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:09:58 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:02:38 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:22:23 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:31:08 -0400, wrote:

By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.

But the entertainment value is totally lost. * :-)

That's half the fun of Usenet - the entertainment value.

We are not talking about usenet. We're talking about private forums run by
individuals or organizations.

I'm begining to suspect that you are a Harry clone. *:)

Then I suspect you are not very perceptive.

Talk about losing perspective.

Wayne made a comment about losing entertainment value once a user has
been booted from a private forum.

I mentioned that, with respect to entertainment value, Usenet provides
plenty of same.

To which you replied that we weren't talking about Usenet.

I would point out that I WAS talking about Usenet in reference to
relative entertainment values of the two forms of discourse - this
being *more open and free form which private forums prefer not to
provide being more focused and topic specific.

I'm fairly certain that most people here understood that.

Now that I know you have a cognition problem with respect to comparing
A to B I'll be sure to explain it to you in future posts.

Holy Crap!

I repeat............Tom does not like it when he is corrected by
others.

Yeah, but you didn't warn me it turned him into a babbling mass of idiocy!


Yay, Jimmy finally got a follower. You've definitely put a smile on the
boy's face with that comment. He's been whining about Tom for a couple
weeks because Tom gave him what he deserved.

You go, guy!

wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 07:36:29 -0400, John H. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:51:56 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 16:53:12 -0700 (PDT), JimH wrote:

On Jul 4, 7:42 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:23:23 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing



wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:59:52 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 18:52:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:09:58 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:02:38 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:22:23 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:31:08 -0400, wrote:
By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.
But the entertainment value is totally lost. :-)
That's half the fun of Usenet - the entertainment value.
We are not talking about usenet. We're talking about private forums run by
individuals or organizations.
I'm begining to suspect that you are a Harry clone. :)
Then I suspect you are not very perceptive.
Talk about losing perspective.
Wayne made a comment about losing entertainment value once a user has
been booted from a private forum.
I mentioned that, with respect to entertainment value, Usenet provides
plenty of same.
To which you replied that we weren't talking about Usenet.
I would point out that I WAS talking about Usenet in reference to
relative entertainment values of the two forms of discourse - this
being more open and free form which private forums prefer not to
provide being more focused and topic specific.
I'm fairly certain that most people here understood that.
Now that I know you have a cognition problem with respect to comparing
A to B I'll be sure to explain it to you in future posts.
Holy Crap!
I repeat............Tom does not like it when he is corrected by
others.
Yeah, but you didn't warn me it turned him into a babbling mass of idiocy!

Yay, Jimmy finally got a follower. You've definitely put a smile on the
boy's face with that comment. He's been whining about Tom for a couple
weeks because Tom gave him what he deserved.

You go, guy!

Neither of them is that impressive. I'm quite sure you care a lot more what they
say than I do.






I position what *you* say about a hair above what Loogy says.

On Jul 4, 5:39*pm, JimH wrote:
On Jul 4, 5:23*pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:





On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:59:52 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 18:52:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:09:58 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:02:38 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:22:23 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:31:08 -0400, wrote:

By doing it all without public
humiliation, the perp can save face, and either shape up with a lesson learned,
or slink away.

But the entertainment value is totally lost. * :-)

That's half the fun of Usenet - the entertainment value.

We are not talking about usenet. We're talking about private forums run by
individuals or organizations.

I'm begining to suspect that you are a Harry clone. *:)

Then I suspect you are not very perceptive.

Talk about losing perspective.

Wayne made a comment about losing entertainment value once a user has
been booted from a private forum.

I mentioned that, with respect to entertainment value, Usenet provides
plenty of same.

To which you replied that we weren't talking about Usenet.

I would point out that I WAS talking about Usenet in reference to
relative entertainment values of the two forms of discourse - this
being *more open and free form which private forums prefer not to
provide being more focused and topic specific.

I'm fairly certain that most people here understood that.

Now that I know you have a cognition problem with respect to comparing
A to B I'll be sure to explain it to you in future posts.

Another whiner.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

All you DO here is whine, warp17

It may have been you, but someone suggested that Harry, JimmyH, and Donny be
the moderators.

I think that's a great idea, then we could just watch them jerk each other
off, since that's all that would be happening over there.

--Mike

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 00:17:10 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:54:31 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Jul 3, 7:25 pm, "Jim" wrote:
It's melting away. Check it out.

Nothing personal, and I admit I don't like this Gould sockpuppet, but
I knew he couldn't do it. Moderation, is for moderates.

I knew it was going to happen and I even told Chuck so. It's not that
Chuck isn't capable of moderating, but his dream was to have a lightly
moderated forum in which everybody got along with the occasional spat
that would dissolve quickly. It's a very "New Age" approach to forum
moderating and doesn't work worth a damn because of three members in
particular just couldn't drop what went on here and dragged it over
there.

Secondarily, it was too easy to just drop down to the last fifty posts
which compacted the latest activity and became the defacto forum
without reference to the various thread categories. I could have told
Chuck that would happen too - been there, done that.

Thirdly (thirdly?), he shouldn't have even gone with an off topic
thread category - told him that too.

Chuck wanted it to go his way and it didn't. He's also stubborn
because this was evident two months ago shortly after he got it up and
running, but he kept hoping. Instead of banning people or barring
them for a day, three days, week, month, he deleted the posts and that
never works.

He had the resources if he only asked for some advice before he set it
up and gotten some advice from former moderators who have been through
the wars.

Chuck needs to be the last court of appeal for the actions of a
moderator or maybe two moderators who become the bad guys. That way he
can isolate himself from his group and act as a "El Supremo Grande"
when complaints come flying. He doesn't even have to be personally
involved - he can read through the posts and give instructions to the
moderators if there is something that he doens't like.

I gave Chuck an idea for a couple moderators. He didn't like it, I guess,
'cause he deleted the post.

Mike wrote:
It may have been you, but someone suggested that Harry, JimmyH, and Donny be
the moderators.

I think that's a great idea, then we could just watch them jerk each other
off, since that's all that would be happening over there.

--Mike


Actually, being the group jerk-off would be a good job for you. You seem
to do it a lot.

On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 17:51:04 -0700, "Mike" wrote:

It may have been you, but someone suggested that Harry, JimmyH, and Donny be
the moderators.

I think that's a great idea, then we could just watch them jerk each other
off, since that's all that would be happening over there.

--Mike

"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 00:17:10 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:54:31 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Jul 3, 7:25 pm, "Jim" wrote:
It's melting away. Check it out.

Nothing personal, and I admit I don't like this Gould sockpuppet, but
I knew he couldn't do it. Moderation, is for moderates.

I knew it was going to happen and I even told Chuck so. It's not that
Chuck isn't capable of moderating, but his dream was to have a lightly
moderated forum in which everybody got along with the occasional spat
that would dissolve quickly. It's a very "New Age" approach to forum
moderating and doesn't work worth a damn because of three members in
particular just couldn't drop what went on here and dragged it over
there.

Secondarily, it was too easy to just drop down to the last fifty posts
which compacted the latest activity and became the defacto forum
without reference to the various thread categories. I could have told
Chuck that would happen too - been there, done that.

Thirdly (thirdly?), he shouldn't have even gone with an off topic
thread category - told him that too.

Chuck wanted it to go his way and it didn't. He's also stubborn
because this was evident two months ago shortly after he got it up and
running, but he kept hoping. Instead of banning people or barring
them for a day, three days, week, month, he deleted the posts and that
never works.

He had the resources if he only asked for some advice before he set it
up and gotten some advice from former moderators who have been through
the wars.

Chuck needs to be the last court of appeal for the actions of a
moderator or maybe two moderators who become the bad guys. That way he
can isolate himself from his group and act as a "El Supremo Grande"
when complaints come flying. He doesn't even have to be personally
involved - he can read through the posts and give instructions to the
moderators if there is something that he doens't like.

I gave Chuck an idea for a couple moderators. He didn't like it, I guess,
'cause he deleted the post.


I forgot to include Donnie. But that'd be OK.