On Jul 7, 2:05*pm, wrote:
On Jul 7, 2:01*pm, "Don White" wrote:





wrote in message

....
On Jul 7, 1:02 pm, "Don White" wrote:

"John H." wrote in message

.. .

It would seem that a simple rule would suffice: Anything that may ****
off
Harry will cause one to be booted.

No?

Sigh! Wasn't Harry 'binned' (as the dwarfs say) for posting something
thet might offend you or your loyal but disobedient army.

You claim to have knowledge of Harry's Zimmerman like lobster boat, so
how is it inflammatory to ask a question about someone's boat? It is a
boating forum after all.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------**---------------
Huh? *What knowledge have I claimed to have?

You've said you've seen proof in pictures of it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not really, he has been quite careful to never quite say that..
Carefully worded, it's a subtle nuance thing.. If he were a
conservative it would be called a lie

wrote:
On Jul 7, 2:05 pm, wrote:
On Jul 7, 2:01 pm, "Don White" wrote:





wrote in message
...
On Jul 7, 1:02 pm, "Don White" wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...
It would seem that a simple rule would suffice: Anything that may ****
off
Harry will cause one to be booted.
No?
Sigh! Wasn't Harry 'binned' (as the dwarfs say) for posting something
thet might offend you or your loyal but disobedient army.
You claim to have knowledge of Harry's Zimmerman like lobster boat, so
how is it inflammatory to ask a question about someone's boat? It is a
boating forum after all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------**---------------
Huh? What knowledge have I claimed to have?
You've said you've seen proof in pictures of it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not really, he has been quite careful to never quite say that..
Carefully worded, it's a subtle nuance thing.. If he were a
conservative it would be called a lie


Seven Dwarfs...at play.

Stop whining.

wrote in message
t...
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:51:36 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote:


If some of you guys don't like Chucks board... or just think you could
do better.... why don't you just start your own board.

This ProBoards stuff looks pretty easy and it is free:
http://www.proboards.com/

Fashion it YOUR way, talk about who and what you want to and, as
moderator, you can boot anybody you care to, for any reason
whatsoever...... You can have it YOUR way......

Damn, now ain't that an idea. ;-)


It could be a terrific recruiting tool for the Dwarf Army.

wrote:


Don, honest question for you, seeing how the others who laud Chuck's
place won't answer. Why would someone be binned for asking someone a
question about fuel burn rates on a boat that that person has stated
several hundred times over the years that he owns?

You are posting to the dumbest of the three stooges. He relies on the
other two for his "material". He will be non-responsive or reply with a
one-liner. Ignore him, too and life will go on.

On Jul 7, 2:53*pm, BAR wrote:
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|Gene Kearns wrote:
| Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
|
|Does said boat in questions exist?

I don't know, nor do I care.

I understand, integrity means nothing to you?

I agree with Gene on this one.. We all care, we just know that WAFA
doesn't so it's useless going over and over it.. Not to mention, that
is Chucks place, it is moderated and has rules and if you are
intellectually honest yourself about what you percieve Loogies post to
mean, you will admit he broke the rules, period....

wrote:
On Jul 7, 2:53 pm, BAR wrote:
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|Gene Kearns wrote:
| Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
|
|Does said boat in questions exist?
I don't know, nor do I care.
I understand, integrity means nothing to you?

I agree with Gene on this one.. We all care, we just know that WAFA
doesn't so it's useless going over and over it.. Not to mention, that
is Chucks place, it is moderated and has rules and if you are
intellectually honest yourself about what you percieve Loogies post to
mean, you will admit he broke the rules, period....



You Dwarf Boys ought to get together and get a group rate for help with
your obsession.

"DK" wrote in message
...
wrote:


Don, honest question for you, seeing how the others who laud Chuck's
place won't answer. Why would someone be binned for asking someone a
question about fuel burn rates on a boat that that person has stated
several hundred times over the years that he owns?

You are posting to the dumbest of the three stooges. He relies on the
other two for his "material". He will be non-responsive or reply with a
one-liner. Ignore him, too and life will go on.


Practice what you preach, dumbass.

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
. com...
On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 17:06:45 -0400, Jim penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|12:35 Harry gets out of jail
|12:56 Another of Harry's fans gets the boot

If some of you guys don't like Chucks board... or just think you could
do better.... why don't you just start your own board.

This ProBoards stuff looks pretty easy and it is free:
http://www.proboards.com/

Fashion it YOUR way, talk about who and what you want to and, as
moderator, you can boot anybody you care to, for any reason
whatsoever...... You can have it YOUR way......

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats

Chuck's board is just fine. I am among the many fans willing to pitch in and
help make the board run like a switch watch. You'll see. Once the 3 stooges
and a couple others are routed out, I will join in the discussions. Until
then, there is work to be done.

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 21:56:22 -0400, HK penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

wrote:
| On Jul 7, 2:53 pm, BAR wrote:
| Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
| I don't know, nor do I care.
| I understand, integrity means nothing to you?
|
| I agree with Gene on this one.. We all care, we just know that WAFA
| doesn't so it's useless going over and over it.. Not to mention, that
| is Chucks place, it is moderated and has rules and if you are
| intellectually honest yourself about what you percieve Loogies post to
| mean, you will admit he broke the rules, period....
|
|
|
|You Dwarf Boys ought to get together and get a group rate for help with
|your obsession.

You know..... that isn't a very good way to get this stopped....
assuming you want to.....



Gene, I know you have the best of intentions, but I really truly believe
rec.boats is so overpopulated with snarly little assholes like the Seven
Dwarfs there is no hope for its salvation. The future for those who want
to discuss boating in a reasonable fashion and still have fun is in
moderated newsgroups or in discussion groups.

Here's the final scene for an upcoming HBO movie:


....from "REC.BOATS...THE NEWSGROUP OF THE DWARFS..."



You Seven Dwarfs finally really did it.



You maniacs!



You blew it up!



God damn you!



God damn you all to hell!





:)

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:53:49 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
|
| I don't know, nor do I care.
|
|I understand, integrity means nothing to you?

After having assessed both sides of this childish, stupid, inane,
decade long discussion of the substance of a Zimmerman like lobster
boat, If you feel it collectively describes adherence to some sort of
code of moral values....... I guess your definition of "integrity" and
mine differ greatly.


Actually, Gene, there is only "one side" discussing this particular
issue, and it ain't me. :)