From: dsc-ky on

> So, you think that getting out on world-wide TV
> is not a problem?

I kind of cringe when I see a golfer (any golfer) throw a fit after a
bad shot whether it has the accompaning foul language and/or flying
clubs or not. I typically don't want to be around those kind of
people. I don't personally think Tiger's language is a serious threat
to the tour in any way. I'm sure they would "prefer" he clean it up
though.
From: MNMikeW on

"Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-FB879D.12033318072010(a)news.shawcable.com...
> In article
> <c88b78c1-857b-4ab9-bdb6-1785405edd5b(a)k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
> kenpitts <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jul 18, 9:36 am, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:34:50 -0700, kenpitts wrote:
>> > > ........... that needs correcting.
>> >
>> > > Ken
>> >
>> > For the love of all that's holy, please stop.
>>
>> I stop when he stops. So, you think that getting out on world-wide TV
>> is not a problem?
>>
>> Do you want to call off that bet or not? As we move forward, I think
>> the advantage starts to shift to me. I think it is 50-50 right now.
>>
>> Ken
>
> Why is it that you hold absolutely everyone in this group in utter
> contempt, Ken?
>
> Why is it that the expressed wish of people you call your friends is
> utterly unimportant to you?
>
You, like everybody else saw the title of this thread. You could have
ignored it. But you chose not to. Waaaa, Ken posted something I didn't like
and I don't have the self-control to ignore it.


From: MNMikeW on

"Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-4464DB.17064518072010(a)news.shawcable.com...
> In article <4c4392c8$0$8003$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>,
> Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:49:36 -0700, kenpitts wrote:
>> > On Jul 18, 9:36� am, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:34:50 -0700, kenpitts wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> ........... that needs correcting.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ken
>> >>
>> >> For the love of all that's holy, please stop.
>> >
>> > I stop when he stops. So, you think that getting out on world-wide TV
>> > is
>> > not a problem?
>>
>> You're being inconsiderate to people in a public forum and you're
>> totally unapologetic about it. Do you not realize that you're doing
>> essentially the same thing as Tiger?
>
> Far worse than Tiger:
>
> He knows he's offending people whom he has claimed as friends and he is
> not doing it in the heat of the moment.
>
> --
> Alan Baker
> Vancouver, British Columbia
> <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>

Offensive, LOL! Pussys!


From: Alan Baker on
In article <8ajdmdFi8rU1(a)mid.individual.net>,
"MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote:

> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message
> news:alangbaker-FB879D.12033318072010(a)news.shawcable.com...
> > In article
> > <c88b78c1-857b-4ab9-bdb6-1785405edd5b(a)k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
> > kenpitts <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Jul 18, 9:36 am, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:34:50 -0700, kenpitts wrote:
> >> > > ........... that needs correcting.
> >> >
> >> > > Ken
> >> >
> >> > For the love of all that's holy, please stop.
> >>
> >> I stop when he stops. So, you think that getting out on world-wide TV
> >> is not a problem?
> >>
> >> Do you want to call off that bet or not? As we move forward, I think
> >> the advantage starts to shift to me. I think it is 50-50 right now.
> >>
> >> Ken
> >
> > Why is it that you hold absolutely everyone in this group in utter
> > contempt, Ken?
> >
> > Why is it that the expressed wish of people you call your friends is
> > utterly unimportant to you?
> >
> You, like everybody else saw the title of this thread. You could have
> ignored it. But you chose not to. Waaaa, Ken posted something I didn't like
> and I don't have the self-control to ignore it.

Not at all.

I like pointing out the hypocrisy of people!

But if we go down that road, you saw my reply to Ken and didn't have the
self-control to ignore it, huh?

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
<http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: dene on

"Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-360E4E.10243919072010(a)news.shawcable.com...
> In article <8ajdmdFi8rU1(a)mid.individual.net>,
> "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message
> > news:alangbaker-FB879D.12033318072010(a)news.shawcable.com...
> > > In article
> > > <c88b78c1-857b-4ab9-bdb6-1785405edd5b(a)k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
> > > kenpitts <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Jul 18, 9:36 am, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> > >> > On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:34:50 -0700, kenpitts wrote:
> > >> > > ........... that needs correcting.
> > >> >
> > >> > > Ken
> > >> >
> > >> > For the love of all that's holy, please stop.
> > >>
> > >> I stop when he stops. So, you think that getting out on world-wide TV
> > >> is not a problem?
> > >>
> > >> Do you want to call off that bet or not? As we move forward, I think
> > >> the advantage starts to shift to me. I think it is 50-50 right now.
> > >>
> > >> Ken
> > >
> > > Why is it that you hold absolutely everyone in this group in utter
> > > contempt, Ken?
> > >
> > > Why is it that the expressed wish of people you call your friends is
> > > utterly unimportant to you?
> > >
> > You, like everybody else saw the title of this thread. You could have
> > ignored it. But you chose not to. Waaaa, Ken posted something I didn't
like
> > and I don't have the self-control to ignore it.
>
> Not at all.
>
> I like pointing out the hypocrisy of people!
>
> But if we go down that road, you saw my reply to Ken and didn't have the
> self-control to ignore it, huh?

Mike was simply pointing out your hypocrisy.

-Greg