This will not be a reification of the old Cosby enquiry into the
philosophy of air, then again...
We Wreck initially because we have a common interest in WoodDorking.
This should pass without comment, as it should be a given.
Let me not let this pass without comment.
There are those who would seem to have no interest in WoodDorking who
have come to infest this newsgroup with their nefarious opinions and
interests.
These interest are not consanguinary with those of us who would work
wood.
The Political Scientologists are those of whom I speak.
Miller and Baldesrstone are true WoodDorkers who are occasionally
drawn towards the dark side. Watson is occasionally drawn there too,
and hates himself when he has allowed this.
Daneliuck, Barta, etc. have shown no WoodDorking interest and have
posted mostly shit.
This is also the case for Enoch root.
What is most disturbing to me is that all of these people seem to be
bright and engaging people.
They just don't seem to be able to confine themselves to the topic at
hand.
This is about the time that some asshole stands up and parrots, "It's
Usenet, Tom. Get over it." ("It's Chinatown, Jake. Get over it".)
You've seen the movie. You get the point.
What do I want out of all this?
I want everything.
I want the intelligence that is embodied in the aforementioned
gentlemen to be at least partially directed towards WoodDorking.
Certainly the Messrs Daneliuck, Barta, Root, et al, must have some
informed opinions on art, design, techniques, etc. - and I would be
damned glad to hear them.
Doug Miller knows a shitload about WoodDorking. So does Davey
Balderstone. This has been proven in past postings.
I want them back and on target and I want the newer guys to use their
obvious intellectual gifts in the furtherance of our Wrecklish
knowledge.
Frankly, I've given up on BAD.
Do I want the conversation to be totally directed towards WoodDorking?
Hell no!
I admire the model of the Wreck that describes it as a kind of
clubhouse that people gather at to shoot the shit.
Most of the shit is about WoodDorking but, as we are not only
WodoDorkers -we will not only speak of WoodDorking.
I enjoy brief interludes of conversation about the events of the day -
the recent problem with the Wreck has been that argumentation has
taken precedence over the good of the group.
This sort of thing would not occur, with the same people, in a face to
face situation - I am almost sure of that.
Why can we not apply the same restraint that we would use in a real
world clubhouse to this virtual one?
I stopped posting to the Wreck about a month ago.
Since then I have gotten quite a number of emails describing my action
as everything from self indulgent to cowardly.
I would not like to be either.
The kindest emails said that it was understandable.
I am trying to understand better than I have.
I have always enjoyed the Wreck in the past.
I hope that there is some possibility that I can do so in the future.
I will certainly miss the input of Keith Bohn and Paully Rad (rip),
and the reduced input of O'Deen, the almost lurkdom of Charlie Self is
much to be regretted, Tommy Plamann used to be around much more, as
was Phully.
Let's create an environment that would welcome most of them back to
full participation.
Let's be self-moderating to the degree that we do not upset our fellow
WoodDorkers.
Why Is There Wreck?
Because, at the most basic level, we share a passion for the activity
of WoodDorking.
Let's use this Newsgroup to celebrate that.
It is a worthy undertaking.
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
"Tim Daneliuk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tom Watson wrote:
> <SNIP>
>
>> These interest are not consanguinary with those of us who would work
>> wood.
>>
>> The Political Scientologists are those of whom I speak.
>
> As opposed, for example, to your personal history of remaining
> entirely on-topic and never giving voice to your own political
> fantasies?
>
<SNIP>
Tom's posts always remind me of a kid from the neighborhood where I grew up.
When we were about 9 years old and he was about 11 years old and was the
self proclaimed "Best Baseball Player" in the neighborhood. We played slow
pitch ball at the school field and he took great delight on being able to
hit home runs. Most of us tried out for Little League and played on
competitive teams in a league with real rules and fast pitch. The "King"
would never go to tryouts and continued to play with 9-10 year olds when he
was 12-14.
Tom Watson wrote:
<minor snippage>
> The Political Scientologists are those of whom I speak.
>
> Miller and Baldesrstone are true WoodDorkers who are occasionally
> drawn towards the dark side. Watson is occasionally drawn there too,
> and hates himself when he has allowed this.
>
> Daneliuck, Barta, etc. have shown no WoodDorking interest and have
> posted mostly shit.
>
> This is also the case for Enoch root.
>
> What is most disturbing to me is that all of these people seem to be
> bright and engaging people.
>
> They just don't seem to be able to confine themselves to the topic at
> hand.
<snip some apt comments>
There an elephant in the room you don't mention, Tom, and that lacuna
is glaring.
H
Tom Watson wrote:
> This will not be a reification of the old Cosby enquiry into the
> philosophy of air, then again...
>
> We Wreck initially because we have a common interest in WoodDorking.
>
> This should pass without comment, as it should be a given.
>
> Let me not let this pass without comment.
>
> There are those who would seem to have no interest in WoodDorking who
> have come to infest this newsgroup with their nefarious opinions and
> interests.
>
> These interest are not consanguinary with those of us who would work
> wood.
>
> The Political Scientologists are those of whom I speak.
>
> Miller and Baldesrstone are true WoodDorkers who are occasionally
> drawn towards the dark side. Watson is occasionally drawn there too,
> and hates himself when he has allowed this.
>
> Daneliuck, Barta, etc. have shown no WoodDorking interest and have
> posted mostly shit.
>
> This is also the case for Enoch root.
>
> What is most disturbing to me is that all of these people seem to be
> bright and engaging people.
>
> They just don't seem to be able to confine themselves to the topic at
> hand.
>
> This is about the time that some asshole stands up and parrots, "It's
> Usenet, Tom. Get over it." ("It's Chinatown, Jake. Get over it".)
>
> You've seen the movie. You get the point.
>
> What do I want out of all this?
>
> I want everything.
>
> I want the intelligence that is embodied in the aforementioned
> gentlemen to be at least partially directed towards WoodDorking.
>
> Certainly the Messrs Daneliuck, Barta, Root, et al, must have some
> informed opinions on art, design, techniques, etc. - and I would be
> damned glad to hear them.
>
> Doug Miller knows a shitload about WoodDorking. So does Davey
> Balderstone. This has been proven in past postings.
>
> I want them back and on target and I want the newer guys to use their
> obvious intellectual gifts in the furtherance of our Wrecklish
> knowledge.
>
> Frankly, I've given up on BAD.
>
> Do I want the conversation to be totally directed towards WoodDorking?
> Hell no!
>
> I admire the model of the Wreck that describes it as a kind of
> clubhouse that people gather at to shoot the shit.
>
> Most of the shit is about WoodDorking but, as we are not only
> WodoDorkers -we will not only speak of WoodDorking.
>
> I enjoy brief interludes of conversation about the events of the day -
> the recent problem with the Wreck has been that argumentation has
> taken precedence over the good of the group.
>
> This sort of thing would not occur, with the same people, in a face to
> face situation - I am almost sure of that.
>
> Why can we not apply the same restraint that we would use in a real
> world clubhouse to this virtual one?
>
> I stopped posting to the Wreck about a month ago.
>
> Since then I have gotten quite a number of emails describing my action
> as everything from self indulgent to cowardly.
>
> I would not like to be either.
>
> The kindest emails said that it was understandable.
>
> I am trying to understand better than I have.
>
> I have always enjoyed the Wreck in the past.
>
> I hope that there is some possibility that I can do so in the future.
>
> I will certainly miss the input of Keith Bohn and Paully Rad (rip),
> and the reduced input of O'Deen, the almost lurkdom of Charlie Self is
> much to be regretted, Tommy Plamann used to be around much more, as
> was Phully.
>
> Let's create an environment that would welcome most of them back to
> full participation.
>
> Let's be self-moderating to the degree that we do not upset our fellow
> WoodDorkers.
>
> Why Is There Wreck?
>
> Because, at the most basic level, we share a passion for the activity
> of WoodDorking.
>
> Let's use this Newsgroup to celebrate that.
>
> It is a worthy undertaking.
I liked the original Jerry Maguire mission statement, "The Things We
Think and Do Not Say: The Future of Our Business", better.
R
Joe Barta wrote:
> Phisherman wrote:
>
> > I know that true sawdust makers are very polite and easy-going by
> > nature, never understood this, they just are.
>
> Call me an asshole, but I just think that's utter pre-sweetened
> nonsense. In ANY group of people you'll find an array personality
> types. Plus, one man's good natured dude is another man's prick. But
> you keep tellin yerself such things if it makes ya feel good ;-)
You're new to the whole stereotyping thing, aren't you? ;)
R
here here and then some for the most part I left, just a bunch of crap and
BS
hylourgos wrote:
>
> Tom Watson wrote:
> <minor snippage>
>> The Political Scientologists are those of whom I speak.
>>
>> Miller and Baldesrstone are true WoodDorkers who are occasionally
>> drawn towards the dark side. Watson is occasionally drawn there too,
>> and hates himself when he has allowed this.
>>
>> Daneliuck, Barta, etc. have shown no WoodDorking interest and have
>> posted mostly shit.
>>
>> This is also the case for Enoch root.
>>
>> What is most disturbing to me is that all of these people seem to be
>> bright and engaging people.
>>
>> They just don't seem to be able to confine themselves to the topic at
>> hand.
> <snip some apt comments>
>
> There an elephant in the room you don't mention, Tom, and that lacuna
> is glaring.
>
> H
--
Richard Clements
Tom Watson wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2006 08:03:54 -0800, "hylourgos" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >There an elephant in the room you don't mention, Tom, and that lacuna
> >is glaring.
> >
> >H
>
> I would describe to you the Number Of The Beast - but it keeps
> changing...
Very slippery, that beast. I hear that at the End of Days he may find
peace. May it be sooner (perhaps election day?).
> Of course, the true Number Of The Beast was the phone number of Gloria
> Frankenheimer from my high school...(rimshot).
Very well, agreed: his name henceforth shall be known as Frank's Glory
(one tap of the bass, with a trombone bleating from high to low).
>
> btw - why "hylourgos", rather than "tekton"? (just idle curiosity on
> my part)
"tekton" seemed awkward to me. Jesus already took it (or at least Mark
gave it to him), it could be applied to many other types of builders,
and it's root implies joinery--whereas I seriously do butcher wood.
Really, I haven't made much that's tricky beyond a couple of sash
windows. It amuses me to point out to guests the drywall screws used in
the face-frames of my black walnut kitchen cabinets.
On the other hand, hylourgos has connotations of arborist-type
woodworking, which I have done.
It's nothing special to me. Call me Bill if you like.
H.
Hey Tom,
I just noticed, in my OP, the wording, "There an elephant in the room."
Swear to God, the Sonny Liston thing was unintentional--'just noticed
it now for the first time.
Eerily,
H
...who now amused by the idea and may gap esse whenever posting to Tom.
That it! Until we leave Iraq, I gonna gap esse for Tom. How you like me
now, 666?
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> This will not be a reification of the old Cosby enquiry into the
> philosophy of air, then again...
>
> We Wreck initially because we have a common interest in WoodDorking.
>
> This should pass without comment, as it should be a given.
>
> Let me not let this pass without comment.
esnppered///// for the sake of brevity...........
As a newbie woodworker ( recent start when a I was forced to retire 6 yrs
ago due to heart problems) and who has learned much from -almost- ALL the
contributors to this group, and who hopes to learn much much more from
the vast collective/storehouse knowledge contained in the heads of the
members of this group .. and the ' Reck comaradrie in general; I,
(infected with the woodworkers dream of replacing all furniture in our
house with self made stuff):- add as well, a "Well said Tom"!!! Carry on
y'all with the discussions and ideas.
IMHO. This is the MOST VALUABLE GROUP on usenet. Lets keep it free of
stuff, like negativity, etc, that deters from the exchange of knowledge
that has often ruined so many other groups! And Okay, Okay, I canna spel
so good, and I dinna look so hansome as JT who can ! <g>
.
Groggins
In article <[email protected]>, Tom Watson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Miller and Baldesrstone are true WoodDorkers who are occasionally
> drawn towards the dark side.
Tom, you gave us an eloquent goodbye not so very long ago. You said
you were leaving, tired of the wreck, and ready for a break.
And then, like JOAT, you're back in less than a month.
You've both done it before.
Honestly, I'd have left this alone entirely had you not used my name
(even if you'd spelled it correcthly)... But you just HAVE to, don't
you?
Learn to filter, learn to ignore, learn to help others to do the same.
Learn the Standard Advice.
I have a great deal of respect for your dorking ability and your
ability to spin a yarn, but dammmittohell you can sure be a pigheaded
SOB and you sure do piss me off on a regular basis.
So as a result, I'm taking you out of my killfile. Welcome back, you
miserable old coot. You talk too much sense than is good for you.
I'm also saving your post so I can skim it every now and then. Just to,
y'know, remember why you piss me off. No other reason. Nothing to do
with agreeing wiith your sentiment, respecting your opinion, being glad
you're still posting, or remembering why I started hanging around the
Wreck in the first place..
Nope. Not me. Nu-uh.
Now, get over it, Watson. This is USENET, after all.
;-)
djb
--
Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest.
- Mark Twain.
In article <54yJf.29620$%[email protected]>, stoutman
<.@.> wrote:
> Not that he will ever see my response.
>
> I think I got kill filed back when I tried to tell O'Deen how to use
> Sheelacky! Oops!
Who is he talking to?
And how does he make his voice DO that?
In article <[email protected]>,
hylourgos <[email protected]> wrote:
> > They just don't seem to be able to confine themselves to the topic at
> > hand.
> <snip some apt comments>
>
> There an elephant in the room you don't mention, Tom, and that lacuna
> is glaring.
Thanks for that chuckle...
--
Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest.
- Mark Twain.
In article <[email protected]>, Joe Barta
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Plus, one man's good natured dude is another man's prick.
Brokeback Mountain fan, are you?
--
Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest.
- Mark Twain.
In article <[email protected]>, Joe Barta
<[email protected]> wrote:
> (Didn't see the movie, so I suppose it's possible that this was more
> than just a lame dig and I'm just not getting it. Yes, I know it's
> about gay cowboys or something, but beyond that...?)
You're just not getting it. No worries.
--
Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest.
- Mark Twain.
Let's see. I've got the tools and the machines so don't
need recomendations. - anymore.
Can cut dovetails with the JoinTech fence, templates,
bits and router table, as well as with handsaws,
both push and pull, chisels and a mallet.
Know how to do proper stock prep - and not get
maimed or killed by the machines.
Learned about parts marking and reference faces,
edges and ends.
Acquired and went through DiCristafora's book on
many, but certainly not all, ways to stick two
pieces of wood together. Understand which are
to be used when and can make many of them. In
the process confirmed "suggestions" provided
by wreckers about layout tools and their uses.
Probably contributed significantly to Steve Knight's
daughter's college fund. Woodies are addictive.
Found out about BLO grain popping and the wonders
of bug spit - shellac.
Know about Krenov and have his books, along with
Nakashima - have his book too. And Maloof -
and have a couple of books about his stuff -
has he written a book?
Make dumb mistakes and know I'm not the
first to make any of them
Know how to turn most of my mistakes into
"features".
Know what DAMHIKT and SWMBO mean.
Same for Pooh Suit, The Cabal and Galoot.
Was inspired by the work - and attitude
of people I would probably not known about
except for The Wreck.
Was introduced to a lot of interesting
design considerations.
The list goes on and on.
So for me, that's Why The Wreck.
Now that I know everything and can
do everything - except finishing -
but I'm reading every thread on
the subject - I now have an
obligation to tell everyone what
to do and how to do it - the "right"
way"! (just kidding - but if I
can get a newbie to say "Hell,
if even he can do it, then I sure
as hell can." I'll be putting back
a little of what I've gotten from
this place).
I do miss Walt's tales and wonder
what Helga is doing. And if
Mr. Watson takes his leave, what
will become of the literary
part of The Wreck?
Still lots to learn - about wood
working and enjoying life in
general. This is a good place
to get that stuff.
charlie b
Thanks Tom.
It's not the same here as before, and the same is true in other
newsgroups. I have learned to resist responding to off-topic posts,
and to skip posts that are off-topic. This takes a bit more time and
I probably miss some good information but there is only so much
computer time per day and I'd rather be in the shop. I know that true
sawdust makers are very polite and easy-going by nature, never
understood this, they just are.
On 19 Feb 2006 07:51:35 -0800, "hylourgos" <[email protected]> wrote:
>...who now amused by the idea and may gap esse whenever posting to Tom.
>That it! Until we leave Iraq, I gonna gap esse for Tom. How you like me
>now, 666?
"People funny." "Life a funny t'ing."
Sonny Liston (c.middle 1900's CE)
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
On 19 Feb 2006 16:34:42 EST, Tim Daneliuk <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I repeat <small words/simple concepts> - I promise to abide by the
>common practices of this group. I will be still on all OT chatter
>so long as it is not otherwise introduced by others. If you are
>sincere in all the above, you'll likewise make a public committment to
>do the same AND to refrain from the foul and vulgar manner that has
>characterized your posts of late.
Res Ipsa Loquitur.
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 14:55:40 -0800, "Frank Drackman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tom's posts always remind me of a kid from the neighborhood where I grew up.
>When we were about 9 years old and he was about 11 years old and was the
>self proclaimed "Best Baseball Player" in the neighborhood. We played slow
>pitch ball at the school field and he took great delight on being able to
>hit home runs. Most of us tried out for Little League and played on
>competitive teams in a league with real rules and fast pitch. The "King"
>would never go to tryouts and continued to play with 9-10 year olds when he
>was 12-14.
>
I am sorry that you were never very good at baseball.
I also find it to be unfortunately appropriate that you post from
"Yahoo".
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Tom Watson wrote:
> This will not be a reification of the old Cosby enquiry into the
> philosophy of air, then again...
>
snip
Here, here Tom.
Well Said.
If I had only half the eloquence that you have with words I would have
said the same thing.
"Keep on Keeping on" Life's to short to let the bastards win.
regards
John
2006.2274.266 wrote:
> I do agree Barta is a real piece of work, I
> just think he's one of those wheelchair bound kids who makes
> things outa popsicle sticks!
All that blathering and *I'm* the one you single out. That's pretty
funny. I'm flattered in a weird, sick sorta way.
Carry on Beavis...
Joe Barta
Hey asshole if you knew what your were talking about, much less anything
else. The only creep around here are the stupid fucks like you!
see you woulda known that..................
"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Gee, Tom, an endorsement by the creep! What more could you ask for? You
> have arrived.
>
Phisherman wrote:
> I know that true sawdust makers are very polite and easy-going by
> nature, never understood this, they just are.
Call me an asshole, but I just think that's utter pre-sweetened
nonsense. In ANY group of people you'll find an array personality
types. Plus, one man's good natured dude is another man's prick. But
you keep tellin yerself such things if it makes ya feel good ;-)
Joe Barta
(as I hear a few distant plonking noises in the background)
RicodJour wrote:
> Joe Barta wrote:
>> Phisherman wrote:
>>
>> > I know that true sawdust makers are very polite and easy-going
>> > by nature, never understood this, they just are.
>>
>> Call me an asshole, but I just think that's utter pre-sweetened
>> nonsense. In ANY group of people you'll find an array personality
>> types. Plus, one man's good natured dude is another man's prick.
>> But you keep tellin yerself such things if it makes ya feel good
>> ;-)
>
> You're new to the whole stereotyping thing, aren't you? ;)
You mean, like, I've been PROFILED? Profiled as polite and easy going?
I'm not sure if I'm liking that. We'll see how it goes.
Joe Barta
Dave Balderstone wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Joe Barta
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Plus, one man's good natured dude is another man's prick.
>
> Brokeback Mountain fan, are you?
Surely you can do better than that.
(Didn't see the movie, so I suppose it's possible that this was more
than just a lame dig and I'm just not getting it. Yes, I know it's
about gay cowboys or something, but beyond that...?)
Joe Barta
Tom Watson wrote:
>>> Plus, one man's good natured dude is another man's prick.
>>
>>Brokeback Mountain fan, are you?
>
>
> Baaaaaaaahhhd.
>
> (but really, really funny)
Ok guys, now I'm interested in "getting" the joke... can you let me in
on it without my needing to go see the movie? Is it a "gay thing"
between woodworkers? C'mon... hook a brotha up.
Joe Barta
"Dave Balderstone" <dave***@balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:170220062331103752%dave***@balderstone.ca...
> In article <54yJf.29620$%[email protected]>, stoutman
> <.@.> wrote:
>
>> Not that he will ever see my response.
>>
>> I think I got kill filed back when I tried to tell O'Deen how to use
>> Sheelacky! Oops!
>
> Who is he talking to?
>
> And how does he make his voice DO that?
Who are YOU talking to?
Pay Attention........ Mark & Jose and Mike beat you out.
"Joe Barta" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 2006.2274.266 wrote:
>
>> I do agree Barta is a real piece of work, I
>> just think he's one of those wheelchair bound kids who makes
>> things outa popsicle sticks!
>
> All that blathering and *I'm* the one you single out. That's pretty
> funny. I'm flattered in a weird, sick sorta way.
>
> Carry on Beavis...
>
> Joe Barta
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:08:47 -0600, Dave Balderstone
<dave***@balderstone.ca> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, Joe Barta
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Plus, one man's good natured dude is another man's prick.
>
>Brokeback Mountain fan, are you?
Baaaaaaaahhhd.
(but really, really funny)
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Too bad I was away for three days.
I did an installation in Toronto on Friday, went to visit some friends, and we
had a whole lot of fun.
Upon my return home, I read this entire thread. (Balderstone owes me a keyboard.)
I like the Wreck the way it is in all its diversity, warts and all.
Leave it alone.. it's fine.
r
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 01:57:35 -0800, charlie b <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>Still lots to learn - about wood
>working and enjoying life in
>general. This is a good place
>to get that stuff.
Every time I learn something new, I usually also learn how much more
there is that I don't know.
I've learned a ton here. I hope I can help those newer than I, so
those who took the time to teach me can take a break from the
repetitiveness.
From where I sit, there's still much to learn from the 'wreck.
I've also met some nice folks in person, thanks to the 'wreck.
Barry
Well said Tom.
Thanks,
WoodWizzard
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 20:55:33 -0700, Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
I wonder if you can get online group therapy?
Definition
Group therapy is a form of psychosocial treatment where a small group of
patients (substitute for .rec members . . . ) meet regularly to talk,
interact, and discuss problems with each other and the group leader
(therapist).
Purpose
Group therapy attempts to give individuals a safe and comfortable place
where they can work out problems and emotional issues. Patients gain
insight into their own thoughts and behavior, (Yes you . . . ) and offer
suggestions and support to others. In addition, patients who have a
difficult time with interpersonal relationships (yes you again . . . ) can
benefit from the social interactions that are a basic part of the group
therapy experience.
Precautions
Patients who are suicidal, homicidal, psychotic, (probably you . . . ) or
in the midst of a major acute crisis are typically not referred for group
therapy until their behavior and emotional state have stabilized. (So that
rules most of us out then . . . ) Some patients with sociopathic traits
are not suitable for most groups.
Risks
Some very fragile patients may not be able to tolerate aggressive or
hostile comments from group members. (So tell me something I don't know)
Patients who have trouble communicating in group situations (You again . .
. ?) may be at risk for dropping out of group therapy. If no one comments
on their silence or makes an attempt to interact with them, they may begin
to feel even more isolated and alone instead of identifying with the
group. Therefore, the therapist usually attempts to encourage silent
members to participate early on in treatment.
%69%20%6c%6f%76%65%20%77%6f%6f%64%77%6f%72%6b%69%6e%67%20%62%75%74%20%69%6d%20%63%72%61%70
http://www.connoraston.com
"Phisherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
<snip> I know that true
> sawdust makers are very polite and easy-going by nature, never
> understood this, they just are.
Shy, too.
Tom
On 18 Feb 2006 08:03:54 -0800, "hylourgos" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>There an elephant in the room you don't mention, Tom, and that lacuna
>is glaring.
>
>H
I would describe to you the Number Of The Beast - but it keeps
changing...
Of course, the true Number Of The Beast was the phone number of Gloria
Frankenheimer from my high school...(rimshot).
btw - why "hylourgos", rather than "tekton"? (just idle curiosity on
my part)
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Tom Watson wrote:
<SNIP>
> These interest are not consanguinary with those of us who would work
> wood.
>
> The Political Scientologists are those of whom I speak.
As opposed, for example, to your personal history of remaining
entirely on-topic and never giving voice to your own political
fantasies?
>
> Miller and Baldesrstone are true WoodDorkers who are occasionally
> drawn towards the dark side. Watson is occasionally drawn there too,
> and hates himself when he has allowed this.
>
> Daneliuck, Barta, etc. have shown no WoodDorking interest and have
> posted mostly shit.
Ah, another Watson Bon Mot (tm) filled with your usual degree of
sophistication and style. For the record, I have in the past posted
on-topic and have done so recently. (Not that Reality will ever
intrude upon your squealing.)
>
> This is also the case for Enoch root.
>
> What is most disturbing to me is that all of these people seem to be
> bright and engaging people.
>
> They just don't seem to be able to confine themselves to the topic at
> hand.
I follow your lead by responding to OT threads *YOU* initiate.
Ah, but I forget ... your real objection here is that there are those
of us who refuse to bow to your self-proclaimed intellectual, literary,
and political superiority. Sorry Sparky, you're not the only game
in town anymore and you don't get to howl when others play the game
YOU start.
> This is about the time that some asshole stands up and parrots, "It's
> Usenet, Tom. Get over it." ("It's Chinatown, Jake. Get over it".)
>
> You've seen the movie. You get the point.
>
> What do I want out of all this?
>
> I want everything.
>
> I want the intelligence that is embodied in the aforementioned
> gentlemen to be at least partially directed towards WoodDorking.
>
> Certainly the Messrs Daneliuck, Barta, Root, et al, must have some
> informed opinions on art, design, techniques, etc. - and I would be
> damned glad to hear them.
I will be happy to be silent on all matters other than WWing when
you lead by example. You cannot on the one hand grace us with
your political urinations here and then expect no one respond in
kind. You want only On-Topic, then stay that way yourself.
I have made this offer repeatedly to anyone who objects to my
joining the already-in-progress OT threads (which is 99% of when
I post OT). I follow the customs and conventions of this group.
As the group's self-anointed sage, seer, and spokesman, you have
the concommitant responsibility to lead by example.
>
> Doug Miller knows a shitload about WoodDorking. So does Davey
> Balderstone. This has been proven in past postings.
>
> I want them back and on target and I want the newer guys to use their
> obvious intellectual gifts in the furtherance of our Wrecklish
> knowledge.
>
> Frankly, I've given up on BAD.
>
> Do I want the conversation to be totally directed towards WoodDorking?
> Hell no!
>
> I admire the model of the Wreck that describes it as a kind of
> clubhouse that people gather at to shoot the shit.
You do until someone vehemently disagrees with you, then you get
you pantyhose all bunched up and start cursing.
>
> Most of the shit is about WoodDorking but, as we are not only
> WodoDorkers -we will not only speak of WoodDorking.
>
> I enjoy brief interludes of conversation about the events of the day -
> the recent problem with the Wreck has been that argumentation has
> taken precedence over the good of the group.
>
> This sort of thing would not occur, with the same people, in a face to
> face situation - I am almost sure of that.
>
> Why can we not apply the same restraint that we would use in a real
> world clubhouse to this virtual one?
*You* calling for "restraint"! - You have demonstrably one of the fouler
mouths here and commonly take on a vulgar tone in your interactions
with others. Work on the moat in your own eye on this one first Sparky.
>
> I stopped posting to the Wreck about a month ago.
No you didn't. You went quasi anonymous as if no one could spot
your condescending and foul manner...
> Since then I have gotten quite a number of emails describing my action
> as everything from self indulgent to cowardly.
>
> I would not like to be either.
>
> The kindest emails said that it was understandable.
>
> I am trying to understand better than I have.
>
> I have always enjoyed the Wreck in the past.
>
> I hope that there is some possibility that I can do so in the future.
>
> I will certainly miss the input of Keith Bohn and Paully Rad (rip),
> and the reduced input of O'Deen, the almost lurkdom of Charlie Self is
> much to be regretted, Tommy Plamann used to be around much more, as
> was Phully.
>
> Let's create an environment that would welcome most of them back to
> full participation.
>
> Let's be self-moderating to the degree that we do not upset our fellow
> WoodDorkers.
>
> Why Is There Wreck?
>
> Because, at the most basic level, we share a passion for the activity
> of WoodDorking.
I repeat <small words/simple concepts> - I promise to abide by the
common practices of this group. I will be still on all OT chatter
so long as it is not otherwise introduced by others. If you are
sincere in all the above, you'll likewise make a public committment to
do the same AND to refrain from the foul and vulgar manner that has
characterized your posts of late.
The ball is in your court...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
Tom, It's gone.Fini!
I do have a solution for you though and that is to create your own blog and
only allow those that deserve to be there on. Yes it does cost some bucks
and a little time and effort, but you'll be free! You might hit it big and
then start selling advert's and actually make some bucks and get tool
sponsors etc.etc.
What I find now is that you have way too many smartasassholes and to many
miserable fucks out here. I've been here for a long time and about 3 years
ago I noticed a slide in not just this group but many of them. You got your
knownothingIjustwanttoseemynameinpostbecauseit'scoollikebattleassupscale
morons and WhensomeoneasksforhelpIlovejerkingthemoffandfuckingwiththeirmind
kiddies.
The Best place to learn for anyone is downstairs hands on, trial and error.
If I asked a question or for help on this or many other NG's 9 out of 10
answers were just moronic shit. If I need help, I now go to the source. I do
agree Barta is a real piece of work, I just think he's one of those
wheelchair bound kids who makes things outa popsicle sticks! I kinda feel
sorry for him with his protect bush at all cost mantra. Unfortunately
Katrina came along and proved him (bush) for what he is.
As for my post, I don't take shit, I don't walk away and I stand my ground.
I don't get into the Bush shit because anyone can see he's about the same
speed as Barta. I don't pick on the weakones, like they do here. But when
weakass morons are annoyed by the dead soldiers.. I say fuck them! The
problem is when I start something, I don't quit so this is simply going to
be a pleasant juxtaposition on this NG until the war ends. I didn't make
this political, I didn't start the fire. Actually the response Mark & Jose
had to your post is what set me off, Then when that dickhead Mike said he
had two brothers killed in Nam,(Full O'Shit) the lying sack of shit then had
the faggot ass balls to threaten my ass. Better men haved tried and failed.
I said THESE FOLKS NEED ME! Big-time!!!!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA
You have nice day Tom and hope all your dreams do come true!
Jammer!
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This will not be a reification of the old Cosby enquiry into the
> philosophy of air, then again...
>
> We Wreck initially because we have a common interest in WoodDorking.
>
> This should pass without comment, as it should be a given.
>
> Let me not let this pass without comment.
>
> There are those who would seem to have no interest in WoodDorking who
> have come to infest this newsgroup with their nefarious opinions and
> interests.
>
> These interest are not consanguinary with those of us who would work
> wood.
>
> The Political Scientologists are those of whom I speak.
>
> Miller and Baldesrstone are true WoodDorkers who are occasionally
> drawn towards the dark side. Watson is occasionally drawn there too,
> and hates himself when he has allowed this.
>
> Daneliuck, Barta, etc. have shown no WoodDorking interest and have
> posted mostly shit.
>
> This is also the case for Enoch root.
>
> What is most disturbing to me is that all of these people seem to be
> bright and engaging people.
>
> They just don't seem to be able to confine themselves to the topic at
> hand.
>
> This is about the time that some asshole stands up and parrots, "It's
> Usenet, Tom. Get over it." ("It's Chinatown, Jake. Get over it".)
>
> You've seen the movie. You get the point.
>
> What do I want out of all this?
>
> I want everything.
>
> I want the intelligence that is embodied in the aforementioned
> gentlemen to be at least partially directed towards WoodDorking.
>
> Certainly the Messrs Daneliuck, Barta, Root, et al, must have some
> informed opinions on art, design, techniques, etc. - and I would be
> damned glad to hear them.
>
> Doug Miller knows a shitload about WoodDorking. So does Davey
> Balderstone. This has been proven in past postings.
>
> I want them back and on target and I want the newer guys to use their
> obvious intellectual gifts in the furtherance of our Wrecklish
> knowledge.
>
> Frankly, I've given up on BAD.
>
> Do I want the conversation to be totally directed towards WoodDorking?
> Hell no!
>
> I admire the model of the Wreck that describes it as a kind of
> clubhouse that people gather at to shoot the shit.
>
> Most of the shit is about WoodDorking but, as we are not only
> WodoDorkers -we will not only speak of WoodDorking.
>
> I enjoy brief interludes of conversation about the events of the day -
> the recent problem with the Wreck has been that argumentation has
> taken precedence over the good of the group.
>
> This sort of thing would not occur, with the same people, in a face to
> face situation - I am almost sure of that.
>
> Why can we not apply the same restraint that we would use in a real
> world clubhouse to this virtual one?
>
> I stopped posting to the Wreck about a month ago.
>
> Since then I have gotten quite a number of emails describing my action
> as everything from self indulgent to cowardly.
>
> I would not like to be either.
>
> The kindest emails said that it was understandable.
>
> I am trying to understand better than I have.
>
> I have always enjoyed the Wreck in the past.
>
> I hope that there is some possibility that I can do so in the future.
>
> I will certainly miss the input of Keith Bohn and Paully Rad (rip),
> and the reduced input of O'Deen, the almost lurkdom of Charlie Self is
> much to be regretted, Tommy Plamann used to be around much more, as
> was Phully.
>
> Let's create an environment that would welcome most of them back to
> full participation.
>
> Let's be self-moderating to the degree that we do not upset our fellow
> WoodDorkers.
>
> Why Is There Wreck?
>
> Because, at the most basic level, we share a passion for the activity
> of WoodDorking.
>
> Let's use this Newsgroup to celebrate that.
>
> It is a worthy undertaking.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tom Watson
>
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/