What's wrong with RSG?
in [Golf]
|
From: Dene on 26 Feb 2007 13:34 On Feb 26, 9:03 am, "The_Professor" <d...(a)att.net> wrote: > I didn't bring the issue of what people think of Bret up. I just > commented on it. Again, if this level of "caring" is important to you, > I genuinely feel sorry for you Me too....I truly pity him. He's retired and yet his life is spent on a computer, running his crony network, acting out a sick Tony Soprano fantasy. Please God. Put me in the ground if my life becomes this meaningless. -Greg
From: The_Professor on 26 Feb 2007 13:42 On Feb 26, 11:13 am, Bobby Knight <bkni...(a)conramp.net> wrote: > On 26 Feb 2007 09:03:43 -0800, "The_Professor" <d...(a)att.net> wrote: > > >On Feb 26, 7:41 am, Bobby Knight <bkni...(a)conramp.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:15:54 GMT, Robert Hamilton <D...(a)att.net> > >> Pathetic is that, if you didn't care, you would take the time to > >> mention it. There was no call for you to gossip about Bret's posts to > >> another news group. > >> -- > > >I didn't bring the issue of what people think of Bret up. I just > >commented on it. Again, if this level of "caring" is important to you, > >I genuinely feel sorry for you. > > Rob, every time I start to think that you're sane you post something > idiotic like this. You absolutely brought it up...that is what > commenting on it means. Surely you aren't that senile. Damn, I'm > probably 10 years older than you and it's clear to me. > > Just in case you forgot. Here's your "comment", now try to spin that > a comment isn't bringing something up. > > Pllum wrote: > > Yeah, Annika talks the trash but I have a really hard time believing > > he has it in him to spew the personal insults and vulgarity that Eric > > did. There's a clear difference between Annika and Eric. Plus, we > > all know Annika's a little teddy bear underneath. > > You responded. > > >>Really. Might want to check out what the photo newsgroup thinks of Bret. Exactly. Pflum gave an opinion of Bret v Eric. Fine by me, but other people think differently of Bret. I personally don't see much difference in the posting style of Bret v Eric. Eric was more personal,and was directly attacked more. It would be interesting to see how Bret would respond to those kinds of attacks...as he has a bit in the photo group, BTW. In any event, Pflum brought up the issue of judging the relative "worth" of Bret's posts, not me. I just added comment.
From: Bobby Knight on 26 Feb 2007 13:51 On 26 Feb 2007 10:42:06 -0800, "The_Professor" <dbid(a)att.net> wrote: >> Pllum wrote: >> > Yeah, Annika talks the trash but I have a really hard time believing >> > he has it in him to spew the personal insults and vulgarity that Eric >> > did. There's a clear difference between Annika and Eric. Plus, we >> > all know Annika's a little teddy bear underneath. >> >> You responded. >> >> >>Really. Might want to check out what the photo newsgroup thinks of Bret. > >Exactly. Pflum gave an opinion of Bret v Eric. Fine by me, but other >people think differently of Bret. I personally don't see much >difference in the posting style of Bret v Eric. Eric was more >personal,and was directly attacked more. It would be interesting to >see how Bret would respond to those kinds of attacks...as he has a bit >in the photo group, BTW. In any event, Pflum brought up the issue of >judging the relative "worth" of Bret's posts, not me. I just added >comment. Unbelievable!!!! Read it again Rob. You denied that you brought up the subject of the photography group. PERIOD. That was the crux of your denial. For heaven's sake, can't you just admit that you erred...just once? The general system that you're using is to deny, deny, deny, and lose the string of posts. That's where you go wrong. Usenet has a memory, and even x-archive doesn't clear it. ___, \o | / \ . �Someone likes every shot� bk
From: The_Professor on 26 Feb 2007 14:06 On Feb 26, 12:51 pm, Bobby Knight <bkni...(a)conramp.net> wrote: > On 26 Feb 2007 10:42:06 -0800, "The_Professor" <d...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > > > > >> Pllum wrote: > >> > Yeah, Annika talks the trash but I have a really hard time believing > >> > he has it in him to spew the personal insults and vulgarity that Eric > >> > did. There's a clear difference between Annika and Eric. Plus, we > >> > all know Annika's a little teddy bear underneath. > > >> You responded. > > >> >>Really. Might want to check out what the photo newsgroup thinks of Bret. > > >Exactly. Pflum gave an opinion of Bret v Eric. Fine by me, but other > >people think differently of Bret. I personally don't see much > >difference in the posting style of Bret v Eric. Eric was more > >personal,and was directly attacked more. It would be interesting to > >see how Bret would respond to those kinds of attacks...as he has a bit > >in the photo group, BTW. In any event, Pflum brought up the issue of > >judging the relative "worth" of Bret's posts, not me. I just added > >comment. > > Unbelievable!!!! Read it again Rob. You denied that you brought up > the subject of the photography group. PERIOD. That was the crux of > your denial. For heaven's sake, can't you just admit that you > erred...just once? The general system that you're using is to deny, > deny, deny, and lose the string of posts. That's where you go wrong. > Usenet has a memory, and even x-archive doesn't clear it. You are obviously going senile. Here's what I denied: "I didn't bring the issue of what people think of Bret up. I just commented on it." Make of it what you will.
From: annika1980 on 26 Feb 2007 14:07
On Feb 26, 9:35 am, John van der Pflum <nowhammymyspa...(a)bite.org> wrote: > >Save your breath. I'm still not coming. > > What makes you think you even made the invitation list? Name's on the jug, baby. Don't Past Champions get an automatic invite? |