Tanus took a can of maroon spray paint on January 19, 2008 11:29 am and
wrote the following:
> Leon wrote:
>> "LRod" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>>
>> Before you know it the suggestion of moderating this group may be
>> suggested, for the 10,879 time.
>>
>> Than goodness we get new people in here to straight un us all out.
>>
>
> is that boy actually new? I thought
> Twayne was 'Pop, repackaged.
>
It is just after Christmas, new computer (probably first one), and whamo, a
new group moderator/expert on group politics, I'm seeing it in several
groups.
Same thing happens early summer, schools let out and all hell breaks loose
in some groups, year, after year.....
--
Lits Slut #9
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.
Twayne wrote:
> Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:JZpkj.2225$k15.804@trnddc06...
>>> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>>>
>>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for
>>>>> spamvertising your own web site.
>>>>
>>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>>>
>>> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>>
>> I don't think you have been here long enough to know who the real
>> spammers are and which ones are not.
>> You missed on this one.
>
> I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a spammer by
> knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is spam.
Tom Watson may be a number of things, but he is no spammer. He has
contributed to this newsgroup for a number of years. I may not agree with
a number of his views or outlook, but he is a woodworker and has provided
valuable information to users on this newsgroup on numerous occasions.
Pinewood derby is one of his pet projects and it certainly is on topic for
rec.WOODWORKING (wood, pine, get it?0
... and you have contributed, what, exactly?
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
Twayne wrote:
> Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> wrote:
... snip
>> ... and you have contributed, what, exactly?
>
> None of which has anything to do with the spam under discussion.
Just the kind of answer I expected. No substance, single-minded
[mis]-focus.
Well, as others have said:
<plonk>
Once in a while, public plonking is well-deserved; it serves as a notice
to the plonkee that maybe he/she/it is not playing well with others and may
someday come to the realization that there are better ways to communicate.
Kind of the Usenet equivalent of shaking the dust from one's sandals and
moving on.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
Robatoy wrote:
> On Jan 20, 3:37Â pm, Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Kind of the Usenet equivalent of shaking the dust from one's sandals and
>> moving on.
>
>
> Consider that line stolen. I love the visual.
Not a problem, after all, I borrowed it from the Book of Acts.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
Twayne took a can of maroon spray paint on January 19, 2008 07:52 pm and
wrote the following:
> FrozenNorth <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Twayne took a can of maroon spray paint on January 19, 2008 11:57 am
>> and wrote the following:
>>
>>> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>>>
>>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for
>>>>> spamvertising your own web site.
>>>>
>>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>>>
>>> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>>
>> You need a whack upside the head with a Clue by Four, if enough
>> people tell you that you are wrong, did you ever think it might be
>> true?
>
<snip wank>
Plonk
--
Lits Slut #9
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.
In article <[email protected]>, LRod
<[email protected]> wrote:
> By the way, the dozen posts you've made today either alerting we poor,
> ignorant, veteran wreckers as to what spam is (I think we've had a
> pretty good handle on that for a long time) or laming back at people
> pointing out your deficiencies (which are legion), is frankly, worse
> than the spam. They certainly waste just as much bandwidth
Just killfile the twit and move on. it's not worth the effort.
--
Help improve usenet. Kill-file Google Groups.
http://improve-usenet.org/
Garage_Woodworks <.@.> wrote:
> "Lumpy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]..
>
> PLONK
plink plink, ploonnkk, plink p-p-plink-link, plonka, plonka, plonka,
PiiiiinnnnnnGGGG!
5/4 time would be better than 4/4 but it's so hard to write!
On Jan 20, 5:33=A0pm, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Google doesn't ahve a plonker, but being afraid to read somethign I
> disagree with has never been one of my faults. I love a good
> disagreement.
Just a minot quibble, Charlie. (Hey... you said you >>love<< them !)
Google has the oldest *plonk* software around. You. If it looks like
shit, it reads like shit, the actual post is shit, and you know where
it came from...
Ta da!
It's a good post to skip. No configs for me. Most of us here have
been around this as well as countless other newsgroups, forums, etc.
It's just plain easier to me (YMMV) to flat ignore the idiots
altogether. I ofter scan long threads to see who is participating
before I even read them.
Long tangle threads on the poster opinion of the minutae contained in
their interpretation of the constitution leave me along about reaponse
#50.
I go to the next subject.
Robert
On Jan 20, 3:37=A0pm, Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> wrote:
> Kind of the Usenet equivalent of shaking the dust from one's sandals and
> moving on.
Consider that line stolen. I love the visual.
On Jan 22, 3:15=A0pm, "Lumpy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > The Lump was only partially plonked
> > till this plonk by the Master
> > Plonker hisself.
>
> I'm honored! The public plonkers continue to
> support my claim that it's not the plonk, it's
> the posture that counts.
>
> Lumpy
>
> You were the Ken-L-Ration St Bernard?
> Yes. My dog's bigger.www.LumpyVoice.com
I visualize a proper plonk to include fanned-out fingers a la MAD
magazine's Don Martin.
Perhaps a bit of a hip thrust.
"Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:JZpkj.2225$k15.804@trnddc06...
> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>
>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>
>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>
>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>>> your own web site.
>>
>> Gotta love the noobs.
>
> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
I don't think you have been here long enough to know who the real spammers
are and which ones are not.
You missed on this one.
Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <Coykj.1396$Wr4.578@trnddc04>, "Twayne"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. So
>> far you've only been a wart on the ass of progress and have nothing
>> to do with any solution for anything.
>
> PLONK
Good. The spammers are learning; not much, but learning.
Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> Regards,
>
> Tom Watson
>
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Speaking softly, and carrying a big stick? (A pine 2x4 to make cars from
right?)
Puckdropper
--
Marching to the beat of a different drum is great... unless you're in
marching band.
To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm
"Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Coykj.1396$Wr4.578@trnddc04...
PLONK! See ya dude. You are the second person I have plonked in almost
5-years.
--
www.garagewoodworks.com
"Lumpy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..
PLONK
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:29:40 -0500, Tanus <[email protected]> wrote:
>Leon wrote:
>> "LRod" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>>
>> Before you know it the suggestion of moderating this group may be suggested,
>> for the 10,879 time.
>>
>> Than goodness we get new people in here to straight un us all out.
>>
>is that boy actually new? I thought
>Twayne was 'Pop, repackaged.
Anyone who doesn't know who Tom Watson is and that he's entitled to
invite a visit to his site can't be someone with a clue, repackaged or
otherwise.
--
LRod
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com
Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997
email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.
Leon wrote:
> "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
>>If you think "plonk" is a threat, you're as wrong as you are stupid for
>>using it. I could not care less whether you read my posts of not - you
>>are irrelevant. If you're not smart enough to look at a post and decide
>>it's not worth reading for you, then you probably also read spams
>>regularly. You will be one of the reasons servers decide to drop the
>>group because of the excess traffic spams and readers such as yourself
>>create by reading them.
>
>
> Plonk is not a threat by any means. Simply a warning that if you ever want
> to get an answer to a question that you may post, you need to be seen.
>
I'd hope the "plonk" would act as a reminder to stop feeding the trolls
so that those that have kill-filed the twerps do have to see their
quoted message in replies from valued users of the group.
--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
[email protected]
Lumpy:
> > Ah another public plonking.
> > That works so well to demonstrate the
> > tolerance level of the plonker.
Doug Miller:
> I presume you'll be making the same criticism
> of 'GarageWoodworks', who also publicly plonked
> Twerp at the same time for the same reason...
Pretty much of anyone who is afraid to read something
they don't agree with, and feels the need to demonstrate
the histrionics of the public plonk. It's the NG equiv
of taking your toys and going home.
> Your sig is malformed. It should be preceded by two hyphens,
> a blank, and a newline so that conforming newsreaders
> automatically recognize it as a sig and
> do not quote it on followup.
Plonk me and you won't be bothered any longer?
Lumpy
You were the Ken-L-Ration St Bernard?
Yes. My dog's bigger.
www.LumpyVoice.com
J. Clarke wrote:
[public plonking]
> It's not a matter of being "afraid",
> it's a matter of deciding not to
> associated with a particular individual.
And the plonk-ER just HAS to make a big,
histrionic, public display about who they
personally think is "not worthy". Obviously
seeking the approval of others. Obviously
not enough of a man to stand on his own
two feet and simply plonk the guy. He wants
everybody to know that he's not afraid to be afraid.
Hilarious.
Lumpy
You Played on Lawrence Welk?
Yes but no blue notes. Just blue hairs.
www.LumpyGuitar.net
Mark & Juanita wrote:
> Once in a while, public plonking is
> well-deserved; it serves as a
> notice to the plonkee that maybe
> he/she/it is not playing well with
> others...
It may serve as notice that ONE particular
reader is threatened by the plonkee. But the
plonk-er hardly speaks for the hundreds or
thousands of other readers. They're simply
trying to make their dick just a mm longer.
Lumpy
You Played on Lawrence Welk?
Yes but no blue notes. Just blue hairs.
www.LumpyGuitar.net
J. Clarke wrote:
> More than half of your nine posts
> to this newsgroup have been
> complaints about the posting
> habits of others. Nobody likes a whiner.
That corrected last sentence should read
"I don't like a whiner".
^^^
Or is there a list of people that you represent
when you use the collective "nobody"?
Now what was your answer to my woodworking question?
Lumpy
You Played on Lawrence Welk?
Yes but no blue notes. Just blue hairs.
www.LumpyGuitar.net
Tanus wrote:
> ... Lumpy is the same as what
> Twayne/Pop was doing. Generating noise.
So it's not generating noise if I posted
the same noise that you just did? Or was
there some kind of woodworking content
in your post?
Lumpy
Were you the voice of Casper?
No. Popeye, Snagglepuss and Wells Fargo Bank.
www.LumpyVoice.net
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tom Watson
>>
>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>
>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>
>Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>your own web site.
Gotta love the noobs.
--
LRod
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com
Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997
email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 15:33:35 -0800 (PST), Charlie Self
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Google doesn't ahve a plonker, but being afraid to read somethign I
>disagree with has never been one of my faults. I love a good
>disagreement.
I couldn't agree more.
Seriously thinking about an opposing viewpoint is good for the soul.
We "got's" to look at both sides...
Twayne took a can of maroon spray paint on January 19, 2008 11:57 am and
wrote the following:
> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>
>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>
>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>
>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>>> your own web site.
>>
>> Gotta love the noobs.
>
> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
You need a whack upside the head with a Clue by Four, if enough people tell
you that you are wrong, did you ever think it might be true?
--
Lits Slut #9
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.
On Jan 19, 3:28 pm, LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
> You should probably check around for the many contributions Tom Watson
> has made to this group. He is your intellectual superior, and that of
> almost everyone here. He is certainly your woodworking superior, even
> in retirement.
>
> You should get down on your knees and beg foregiveness (spelling) for your
> ignorance.
uh .... wouldn't that actually be Thomas R. Plamann?
LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:51:39 GMT, "Twayne"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> I don't think you have been here long enough to know who the real
>>> spammers are and which ones are not.
>>> You missed on this one.
>>
>> I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a
>> spammer by knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is
>> spam.
>
> I'll take a piece of that. 103 posts since the 23 December 2007
> incarnation of the name makes you one of the newest of the new.
Now, there's some really relevant info; something any idiot could (and
one did) count up. So I guess you've only been here this month then,
eh? That's interesting; so has your spam.
>
> Now if you are someone else who really has been around longer than
> Leon (which I doubt), pony up your longtime nom de wreck and let's
> just see.
There you go; attempting to sidetrack things. What's wrong, can't
defend yourself so you want to put it off onto someone else? Typical
troll-speak, that's for sure.
>
> By the way, the dozen posts you've made today either alerting we poor,
> ignorant, veteran wreckers as to what spam is (I think we've had a
> pretty good handle on that for a long time) or laming back at people
> pointing out your deficiencies (which are legion), is frankly, worse
> than the spam. They certainly waste just as much bandwidth.
You should count up the BW you and your other spammer friends have
wasted.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. So far
you've only been a wart on the ass of progress and have nothing to do
with any solution for anything.
"Nova" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:5ORkj.7479$4b6.3054@trndny08...
> Leon wrote:
>> "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>If you think "plonk" is a threat, you're as wrong as you are stupid for
>>>using it. I could not care less whether you read my posts of not - you
>>>are irrelevant. If you're not smart enough to look at a post and decide
>>>it's not worth reading for you, then you probably also read spams
>>>regularly. You will be one of the reasons servers decide to drop the
>>>group because of the excess traffic spams and readers such as yourself
>>>create by reading them.
>>
>>
>> Plonk is not a threat by any means. Simply a warning that if you ever
>> want to get an answer to a question that you may post, you need to be
>> seen.
>>
>
> I'd hope the "plonk" would act as a reminder to stop feeding the trolls so
> that those that have kill-filed the twerps do have to see their quoted
> message in replies from valued users of the group.
I know, I know.....
In article <[email protected]>, "Lumpy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> PLONK
>
>Ah another public plonking.
>That works so well to demonstrate the
>tolerance level of the plonker.
I presume you'll be making the same criticism of 'GarageWoodworks', who also
publicly plonked Twerp at the same time for the same reason...
>
>
>Lumpy
Your sig is malformed. It should be preceded by two hyphens, a blank, and a
newline so that conforming newsreaders automatically recognize it as a sig and
do not quote it on followup.
>
>You Played on Lawrence Welk?
>Yes but no blue notes. Just blue hairs.
>
>www.LumpyGuitar.net
>
>
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a spammer by
> knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is spam.
And a troll is a troll.
And you are a troll.
"Robatoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:e3c14190-be83-4e59-b026-664dd31f6449@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 19, 11:23 am, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > Regards,
>
> > Tom Watson
>
> > tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>
> >http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>
> Cool Tom, and I thing you caught a big one. ;~)
I suggest we pour a little water on Tom's drag to try to stop it from
overheating and melting the 20# test.
I would be the courteous thing to do. :~)
On a different "on topic" subject, I know you have the Rotex and I am really
wanting to get the Rotex 125 to help with dust control and to replace my 18
year old right angle PC. Unfortunately that would only correct half of the
problem . I also have a PC Sped Bloc that puts out a cloud all on its own.
Do you use any of the other Festool sanders such as the smaller finish
sanders?
Lastly, do you use Festool sand paper?
In article <[email protected]>, Tanus <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>is that boy actually new? I thought
>Twayne was 'Pop, repackaged.
Yes, it is. TrollFilters have been updated accordingly, and can be obtained by
the usual means (see sig below).
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Download Nfilter at http://www.milmac.com/np-120.exe
LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Tom Watson
>>>
>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>
>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>> your own web site.
>
> Gotta love the noobs.
Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
Robatoy wrote:
> On Jan 21, 8:38Â pm, Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:52:46 -0700, "Lumpy"
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >Charlie Self wrote:
>> >> ... Neither you nor your pal are saying anything, and
>> >> you're both hoofing it.
>>
>> >Not my pal. As I've said many times.
>> >I speak for myself. I don't have the need to
>> >enlist others' support by way of the plonk de public.
>>
>> >Lumpy
>>
>> You know, your mom was right about hanging around with that Haskell
>> boy. Â Now look at you.
>>
>> Ah well, say hi to Wally and the Beave for me.
>>
>
> Do Wally and Beave run a bait shop? <G>
Nah, I think Lumpy wound up doing that after hanging around with Eddie
Haskell; he wound up not amounting to much. Eddie of course did well
because he was a trust-fund kid (Lumpy wasn't). Wally and the Beave see
Lumpy on weekends that they go fishing; Ward and June made sure they were
successful, stayed in school and got good jobs.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
On Jan 21, 8:38=A0pm, Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:52:46 -0700, "Lumpy"
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Charlie Self wrote:
> >> ... Neither you nor your pal are saying anything, and
> >> you're both hoofing it.
>
> >Not my pal. As I've said many times.
> >I speak for myself. I don't have the need to
> >enlist others' support by way of the plonk de public.
>
> >Lumpy
>
> You know, your mom was right about hanging around with that Haskell
> boy. =A0Now look at you.
>
> Ah well, say hi to Wally and the Beave for me.
>
Do Wally and Beave run a bait shop? <G>
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:52:46 -0700, "Lumpy"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Charlie Self wrote:
>> ... Neither you nor your pal are saying anything, and
>> you're both hoofing it.
>
>Not my pal. As I've said many times.
>I speak for myself. I don't have the need to
>enlist others' support by way of the plonk de public.
>
>
>Lumpy
You know, your mom was right about hanging around with that Haskell
boy. Now look at you.
Ah well, say hi to Wally and the Beave for me.
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
"Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:JZpkj.2225$k15.804@trnddc06...
> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>
>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>
>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>
>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>>> your own web site.
>>
>> Gotta love the noobs.
>
> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>
Oh great wise one, what is he spamming? What is he selling?
Anybody who knows anything about Tom Watson knows that he USED to own a
shop. Which he shut down and is now working for someone else.
And he does spend time with us each year talking about his son's pinewood
derby cars.
If you don't know what a pinewood derby car is, it is a massive communist
conspiracy.
J. Clarke <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lumpy wrote:
>> Charlie Self wrote:
>>> ... Neither you nor your pal are saying anything, and
>>> you're both hoofing it.
>>
>> Not my pal. As I've said many times.
>> I speak for myself. I don't have the need to
>> enlist others' support by way of the plonk de public.
>>
>>
>> Lumpy
>>
>> In Your Ears for 40 Years
>> www.LumpyMusic.com
>
> More than half of your nine posts to this newsgroup have been
> complaints about the posting habits of others. Nobody likes a whiner.
>
> --
lol, from the mouths of babes! Pot, kettle, black, etc. I'd say poet &
don't know it but it's just plain bad rhyming. It's interesting you
have nothing better to do than count people's post quantities. Perhaps
you should consider getting a job instead.
Garage_Woodworks <.@.> wrote:
> "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:Coykj.1396$Wr4.578@trnddc04...
>
> PLONK! See ya dude. You are the second person I have plonked in
> almost 5-years.
Good. But it doesn't work and does prove that you read spams.
Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Regards,
>
> Tom Watson
>
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
your own web site.
Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:vWwkj.1048$pC5.959@trnddc05...
>>> You missed on this one.
>>
>> I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a
>> spammer by knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is
>> spam.
>
> What ever you think and works for you. We really do not need your
> help, you are not showing us any thing that we do not already know.
> For most of us, spammers are usually a short term and or one time
> nuisance. Then there is the troll that is far worse, like a
> disruptive kindergartner that society eventually shuns. You seem to
> be filling that position.
One thing it has shown is the number of people who read spams. It's
high in this group. That's a bad sign. There is absolutely nothing in
any spam that bears reading unless the reader is planning to use
information it may contain based on the source code of the spam. Only
suckers and desparate people read spam seriously and they are the ones
who provide the spammer wtih his paycheck. Just reading spam for the
sake of reading it is just plain stupid. But it seems to be done very
often in this group.
>
> May I suggest that you either contribute or do us all a favor and go
> away. I will give you the benefit of the doubt a little bit longer
> and then for me you will disappear if you are of no value to the
> group.
If you think "plonk" is a threat, you're as wrong as you are stupid for
using it. I could not care less whether you read my posts of not - you
are irrelevant. If you're not smart enough to look at a post and decide
it's not worth reading for you, then you probably also read spams
regularly. You will be one of the reasons servers decide to drop the
group because of the excess traffic spams and readers such as yourself
create by reading them.
>
> If you are indeed sincere, use a new post and apologize to the group
> and try to fit in.
No, I won't use a new post as my current first two posts were on target
and meaningful. Since then I have entertained myself by simply
responding in kind to those who bothered to read spam and were upset to
see someone has the guts to do something about it. You're the kind who
will sit around and wait for things like the Can-Spam Act to fix
everything for you; 'snot gonna happen. Had you not read the spams, you
would have had no hint of anything that was in the thread. But you did
click, didn't you? That was not only senseless to do, but stupid also.
It's been in interesting social sciences demo here watching the opinions
of those who read spam and the silence from those who know better and at
least don't admit it, or actually never bothered to click on anything
that looks like spam.
I probably should apologize for "using" the group as I did/am, but from
the lack of displayed intelligence I see, it's not worth the effort and
would be on no value. Not being a follower, I will post anywhere I
please and here at least the knowledge that some of the group of
spammers and mongers won't be assessing respnses with the stupid
misinformation they've presented over the last about 5 months here.
Newsgroups get a reputation for accepting spam without consequence, and
this group now has that reputation. It's precisely why I chose this
group to post some of my reports in.
Twayn e
"LRod" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Gotta love the noobs.
Before you know it the suggestion of moderating this group may be suggested,
for the 10,879 time.
Than goodness we get new people in here to straight un us all out.
"Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:NcQkj.21519$8A4.11570@trnddc02...
>
> One thing it has shown is the number of people who read spams. It's high
> in this group. That's a bad sign. There is absolutely nothing in any
> spam that bears reading unless the reader is planning to use information
> it may contain based on the source code of the spam. Only suckers and
> desparate people read spam seriously and they are the ones who provide the
> spammer wtih his paycheck. Just reading spam for the sake of reading it
> is just plain stupid. But it seems to be done very often in this group.
Just as you do personally, you don't really know if people in this group are
reading the spam or clicking on as you are doing.
>
>>
>> May I suggest that you either contribute or do us all a favor and go
>> away. I will give you the benefit of the doubt a little bit longer
>> and then for me you will disappear if you are of no value to the
>> group.
>
> If you think "plonk" is a threat, you're as wrong as you are stupid for
> using it. I could not care less whether you read my posts of not - you
> are irrelevant. If you're not smart enough to look at a post and decide
> it's not worth reading for you, then you probably also read spams
> regularly. You will be one of the reasons servers decide to drop the
> group because of the excess traffic spams and readers such as yourself
> create by reading them.
Plonk is not a threat by any means. Simply a warning that if you ever want
to get an answer to a question that you may post, you need to be seen.
The rest of what you have to say is a load.
>>
>> If you are indeed sincere, use a new post and apologize to the group
>> and try to fit in.
>
> No, I won't use a new post as my current first two posts were on target
> and meaningful. Since then I have entertained myself by simply responding
> in kind to those who bothered to read spam and were upset to see someone
> has the guts to do something about it. You're the kind who will sit
> around and wait for things like the Can-Spam Act to fix everything for
> you; 'snot gonna happen. Had you not read the spams, you would have had
> no hint of anything that was in the thread. But you did click, didn't
> you? That was not only senseless to do, but stupid also.
So I take it that Spam is a large source of your entertainment. With out
Spam you would have little to say or do.
>
> It's been in interesting social sciences demo here watching the opinions
> of those who read spam and the silence from those who know better and at
> least don't admit it, or actually never bothered to click on anything that
> looks like spam.
>
> I probably should apologize for "using" the group as I did/am, but from
> the lack of displayed intelligence I see, it's not worth the effort and
> would be on no value. Not being a follower, I will post anywhere I please
> and here at least the knowledge that some of the group of spammers and
> mongers won't be assessing respnses with the stupid misinformation they've
> presented over the last about 5 months here. Newsgroups get a reputation
> for accepting spam without consequence, and this group now has that
> reputation. It's precisely why I chose this group to post some of my
> reports in.
Please spare us all and post your "reports" else where.
"Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:vWwkj.1048$pC5.959@trnddc05...
>> You missed on this one.
>
> I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a spammer by
> knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is spam.
>
What ever you think and works for you. We really do not need your help, you
are not showing us any thing that we do not already know. For most of us,
spammers are usually a short term and or one time nuisance. Then there is
the troll that is far worse, like a disruptive kindergartner that society
eventually shuns. You seem to be filling that position.
May I suggest that you either contribute or do us all a favor and go away.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt a little bit longer and then for me
you will disappear if you are of no value to the group.
If you are indeed sincere, use a new post and apologize to the group and try
to fit in.
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Regards,
>
> Tom Watson
>
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Cool Tom, and I thing you caught a big one. ;~)
Tom,
I went to your site. I clicked on lots of stuff, neat stuff by
the way. I never found anything about Pinewood Derby.
My dumb?
______________________________
Keep the whole world singing . . . .
DanG (remove the sevens)
[email protected]
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Well, this is very interesting.
>
> A thread that started with a blank post (except for the sig) has
> gone
> on for almost forty replies.
>
> Of course, this is mostly due to the Trollbitch, Twayne, or,
> "The
> Trollbitch formerly known as Pop", without whose assistance this
> thread would have died an early and deserved death.
>
> TrollbitchTwayne has been busy, posting in 124 different groups,
> usually with the same level of knowledge, insight and intellect
> he
> has demonstrated here.
>
> It's too bad our Trollbitch filters don't have an olfactory
> component.
> Guys like TrollbitchTwaynePop would never get by them.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:24:36 -0500, Tom Watson
> <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Tom Watson
>>
>>tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>
>>http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
> Regards,
>
> Tom Watson
>
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
FrozenNorth <[email protected]> wrote:
> Twayne took a can of maroon spray paint on January 19, 2008 11:57 am
> and wrote the following:
>
>> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>>
>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>>
>>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>>
>>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for
>>>> spamvertising your own web site.
>>>
>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>>
>> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>
> You need a whack upside the head with a Clue by Four, if enough
> people tell you that you are wrong, did you ever think it might be
> true?
--
Regards,
--
Wrong does not cease to be wrong
because the majority share in it. -Tolstoy
On Jan 19, 9:32 pm, "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote:
> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:51:39 GMT, "Twayne"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>> I don't think you have been here long enough to know who the real
> >>> spammers are and which ones are not.
> >>> You missed on this one.
>
> >> I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a
> >> spammer by knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is
> >> spam.
>
> > I'll take a piece of that. 103 posts since the 23 December 2007
> > incarnation of the name makes you one of the newest of the new.
>
> Now, there's some really relevant info; something any idiot could (and
> one did) count up. So I guess you've only been here this month then,
> eh? That's interesting; so has your spam.
>
>
>
> > Now if you are someone else who really has been around longer than
> > Leon (which I doubt), pony up your longtime nom de wreck and let's
> > just see.
>
> There you go; attempting to sidetrack things. What's wrong, can't
> defend yourself so you want to put it off onto someone else? Typical
> troll-speak, that's for sure.
>
>
>
> > By the way, the dozen posts you've made today either alerting we poor,
> > ignorant, veteran wreckers as to what spam is (I think we've had a
> > pretty good handle on that for a long time) or laming back at people
> > pointing out your deficiencies (which are legion), is frankly, worse
> > than the spam. They certainly waste just as much bandwidth.
>
> You should count up the BW you and your other spammer friends have
> wasted.
> If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. So far
> you've only been a wart on the ass of progress and have nothing to do
> with any solution for anything.
You sure as hell aren't providing anything but sturm und drang. You
might announce who you REALLY are, if you're such an all-fired
expert...and then show some proof of your expertise, something Tom
Watson has done time and again for years. So far, from you, all we've
read is drivel.
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:41:32 -0500, "Lee Michaels"
<leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>"Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:JZpkj.2225$k15.804@trnddc06...
>> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>>
>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>>
>>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>>
>>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>>>> your own web site.
>>>
>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>>
>> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>>
>Oh great wise one, what is he spamming? What is he selling?
>
>Anybody who knows anything about Tom Watson knows that he USED to own a
>shop. Which he shut down and is now working for someone else.
>
>And he does spend time with us each year talking about his son's pinewood
>derby cars.
>
>If you don't know what a pinewood derby car is, it is a massive communist
>conspiracy.
Or a blatantly commercial enterprise which none of us regulars have
noticed yet.
--
LRod
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com
Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997
email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.
On Jan 20, 11:57 am, "Lumpy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lumpy:
>
> > > Ah another public plonking.
> > > That works so well to demonstrate the
> > > tolerance level of the plonker.
>
> Doug Miller:
>
> > I presume you'll be making the same criticism
> > of 'GarageWoodworks', who also publicly plonked
> > Twerp at the same time for the same reason...
>
> Pretty much of anyone who is afraid to read something
> they don't agree with, and feels the need to demonstrate
> the histrionics of the public plonk. It's the NG equiv
> of taking your toys and going home.
>
> > Your sig is malformed. It should be preceded by two hyphens,
> > a blank, and a newline so that conforming newsreaders
> > automatically recognize it as a sig and
> > do not quote it on followup.
>
> Plonk me and you won't be bothered any longer?
>
Google doesn't ahve a plonker, but being afraid to read somethign I
disagree with has never been one of my faults. I love a good
disagreement. But there is an old New York saying, "Money talks,
bullshit walks." Neither you nor your pal are saying anything, and
you're both hoofing it.
Twayne wrote:
> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tom Watson
>>
>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>
>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>
> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
> your own web site.
>
>
DWEB!
Leon wrote:
> "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:JZpkj.2225$k15.804@trnddc06...
>> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>>
>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>>
>>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>>>> your own web site.
>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>
> I don't think you have been here long enough to know who the real spammers
> are and which ones are not.
> You missed on this one.
>
>
Dweb!
On Jan 19, 11:23=A0am, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > Regards,
>
> > Tom Watson
>
> > tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>
> >http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>
> Cool Tom, and I thing you caught a big one. =A0;~)
I suggest we pour a little water on Tom's drag to try to stop it from
overheating and melting the 20# test.
LRod wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 19:45:13 GMT, Ralph <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Twayne wrote:
>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>
>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>
>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>>> your own web site.
>>>
>>>
>> DWEB!
>
> What's a "dweb?" Do you mean dweeb, by any chance?
>
> You should probably check around for the many contributions Tom Watson
> has made to this group. He is your intellectual superior, and that of
> almost everyone here. He is certainly your woodworking superior, even
> in retirement.
>
> You should get down on your knees and beg foregiveness for your
> ignorance.
>
>
You're right it should be dweeb. The response was not directed at Tom
but at the self righteous person after.
"LRod" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Tom Watson
>>>
>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>
>>Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>>your own web site.
>
> Gotta love the noobs.
>
> --
> LRod
>
> Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
>
> Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
>
> http://www.woodbutcher.net
> http://www.normstools.com
>
Never saw the 'noobs' reply until the furor. Must've plonked him a long
time ago, although I don't remember the reason, or even having plonked him.
Based on this post alone, I remain happy in my decision.
jc
On Jan 19, 6:21=A0pm, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "bookman" wrote in message
> > On Jan 19, 3:28 pm, LRod wrote:
>
> > > You should probably check around for the many contributions Tom Watson=
> > > has made to this group. He is your intellectual superior, and that of
> > > almost everyone here. He is certainly your woodworking superior, even
> > > in retirement.
>
> > > You should get down on your knees and beg foregiveness (spelling) for
> your
> > > ignorance.
>
> > uh .... wouldn't that actually be Thomas R. Plamann?
>
> Nope. But, there's not much difference in craftsmanship, so take your pick=
.
>
They're different. Tom Watson doesn't turn real-life-size replicas of
Toronto's CN Tower on his lathe.... although he probably could *G*
Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> wrote:
> Twayne wrote:
>
>> Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:JZpkj.2225$k15.804@trnddc06...
>>>> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for
>>>>>> spamvertising your own web site.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>>>>
>>>> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>>>
>>> I don't think you have been here long enough to know who the real
>>> spammers are and which ones are not.
>>> You missed on this one.
>>
>> I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a
>> spammer by knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is
>> spam.
>
> Tom Watson may be a number of things, but he is no spammer. He has
> contributed to this newsgroup for a number of years. I may not agree
> with a number of his views or outlook, but he is a woodworker and has
> provided valuable information to users on this newsgroup on numerous
> occasions. Pinewood derby is one of his pet projects and it certainly
> is on topic for rec.WOODWORKING (wood, pine, get it?0
>
> ... and you have contributed, what, exactly?
None of which has anything to do with the spam under discussion.
On Jan 19, 9:32=A0pm, "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote:
[snipped drivel]
<plonk>
On Jan 22, 1:35=A0am, "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lumpy wrote:
> > J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >> More than half of your nine posts
> >> to this newsgroup have been
> >> complaints about the posting
> >> habits of others. =A0Nobody likes a whiner.
>
> > That corrected last sentence should read
> > "I =A0don't like a whiner".
> > ^^^
>
> > Or is there a list of people that you represent
> > when you use the collective "nobody"?
>
> > Now what was your answer to my woodworking question?
>
> <plonk>
>
The Lump was only partially plonked till this plonk by the Master
Plonker hisself.
Leon wrote:
> "LRod" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Gotta love the noobs.
>
> Before you know it the suggestion of moderating this group may be suggested,
> for the 10,879 time.
>
> Than goodness we get new people in here to straight un us all out.
>
>
>
is that boy actually new? I thought
Twayne was 'Pop, repackaged.
--
Tanus
This is not really a sig.
http://www.home.mycybernet.net/~waugh/shop/
Lumpy wrote:
> Lumpy:
>>> Ah another public plonking.
>>> That works so well to demonstrate the
>>> tolerance level of the plonker.
>
> Doug Miller:
>> I presume you'll be making the same criticism
>> of 'GarageWoodworks', who also publicly plonked
>> Twerp at the same time for the same reason...
>
> Pretty much of anyone who is afraid to read something
> they don't agree with, and feels the need to demonstrate
> the histrionics of the public plonk. It's the NG equiv
> of taking your toys and going home.
It's not a matter of being "afraid", it's a matter of deciding not to
associated with a particular individual.
>> Your sig is malformed. It should be preceded by two hyphens,
>> a blank, and a newline so that conforming newsreaders
>> automatically recognize it as a sig and
>> do not quote it on followup.
>
> Plonk me and you won't be bothered any longer?
If you're going to be confrontational about a suggestion that you
bring your sig into compliance with accepted practice then it's not
lookin' too good.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Lumpy wrote:
> Charlie Self wrote:
>> ... Neither you nor your pal are saying anything, and
>> you're both hoofing it.
>
> Not my pal. As I've said many times.
> I speak for myself. I don't have the need to
> enlist others' support by way of the plonk de public.
>
>
> Lumpy
>
> In Your Ears for 40 Years
> www.LumpyMusic.com
More than half of your nine posts to this newsgroup have been
complaints about the posting habits of others. Nobody likes a whiner.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
J. Clarke wrote:
> Lumpy wrote:
>> Charlie Self wrote:
>>> ... Neither you nor your pal are saying anything, and
>>> you're both hoofing it.
>> Not my pal. As I've said many times.
>> I speak for myself. I don't have the need to
>> enlist others' support by way of the plonk de public.
>>
>>
>> Lumpy
>>
>> In Your Ears for 40 Years
>> www.LumpyMusic.com
>
> More than half of your nine posts to this newsgroup have been
> complaints about the posting habits of others. Nobody likes a whiner.
>
Amen to that, John. Essentially what
you're doing, Lumpy is the same as what
Twayne/Pop was doing. Generating noise.
--
Tanus
This is not really a sig.
http://www.home.mycybernet.net/~waugh/shop/
Lumpy wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> More than half of your nine posts
>> to this newsgroup have been
>> complaints about the posting
>> habits of others. Nobody likes a whiner.
>
> That corrected last sentence should read
> "I don't like a whiner".
> ^^^
>
> Or is there a list of people that you represent
> when you use the collective "nobody"?
>
> Now what was your answer to my woodworking question?
<plonk>
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:51:39 GMT, "Twayne"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I don't think you have been here long enough to know who the real
>> spammers are and which ones are not.
>> You missed on this one.
>
>I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a spammer by
>knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is spam.
I'll take a piece of that. 103 posts since the 23 December 2007
incarnation of the name makes you one of the newest of the new.
Now if you are someone else who really has been around longer than
Leon (which I doubt), pony up your longtime nom de wreck and let's
just see.
By the way, the dozen posts you've made today either alerting we poor,
ignorant, veteran wreckers as to what spam is (I think we've had a
pretty good handle on that for a long time) or laming back at people
pointing out your deficiencies (which are legion), is frankly, worse
than the spam. They certainly waste just as much bandwidth.
--
LRod
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com
Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997
email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:46:42 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Do Wally and Beave run a bait shop? <G>
You don't need no steenkin' bait.
You don't even need no steenin' hook!
Maybe the next header should be:
"Hillary - The Blond Leading The Blond?".
Like starving dogs onna meat truck, my brudda.
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Tanus" wrote
>
>> is that boy actually new? I thought
>> Twayne was 'Pop, repackaged.
>
> It is ... some of those idiots around Syracuse have a stink you just
> can't hide.
There's a great example of how NOT to figure out where a person resides!
lol
Well, this is very interesting.
A thread that started with a blank post (except for the sig) has gone
on for almost forty replies.
Of course, this is mostly due to the Trollbitch, Twayne, or, "The
Trollbitch formerly known as Pop", without whose assistance this
thread would have died an early and deserved death.
TrollbitchTwayne has been busy, posting in 124 different groups,
usually with the same level of knowledge, insight and intellect he
has demonstrated here.
It's too bad our Trollbitch filters don't have an olfactory component.
Guys like TrollbitchTwaynePop would never get by them.
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:24:36 -0500, Tom Watson <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>Regards,
>
>Tom Watson
>
>tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>
>http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 16:57:13 GMT, "Twayne"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>
Tawm is not a spammer!
Visit the site and look...
Google his name...
In article <Coykj.1396$Wr4.578@trnddc04>, "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote:
>If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. So far
>you've only been a wart on the ass of progress and have nothing to do
>with any solution for anything.
PLONK
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 19:45:13 GMT, Ralph <[email protected]> wrote:
>Twayne wrote:
>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Tom Watson
>>>
>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>
>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for spamvertising
>> your own web site.
>>
>>
>DWEB!
What's a "dweb?" Do you mean dweeb, by any chance?
You should probably check around for the many contributions Tom Watson
has made to this group. He is your intellectual superior, and that of
almost everyone here. He is certainly your woodworking superior, even
in retirement.
You should get down on your knees and beg foregiveness for your
ignorance.
--
LRod
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com
Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997
email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.
"bookman" wrote in message
> On Jan 19, 3:28 pm, LRod wrote:
>
> > You should probably check around for the many contributions Tom Watson
> > has made to this group. He is your intellectual superior, and that of
> > almost everyone here. He is certainly your woodworking superior, even
> > in retirement.
> >
> > You should get down on your knees and beg foregiveness (spelling) for
your
> > ignorance.
>
> uh .... wouldn't that actually be Thomas R. Plamann?
Nope. But, there's not much difference in craftsmanship, so take your pick.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)
Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Twayne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:JZpkj.2225$k15.804@trnddc06...
>> LRod <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:55:41 GMT, "Twayne"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>>
>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
>>>>>
>>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>>>>
>>>> Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for kudos for
>>>> spamvertising your own web site.
>>>
>>> Gotta love the noobs.
>>
>> Gotta hate the spammers. LARTs away.
>
> I don't think you have been here long enough to know who the real
> spammers are and which ones are not.
> You missed on this one.
I'll bet I've been here longer than you have. You don't ID a spammer by
knowing who he is, you ID him by what he does. spam is spam.