From Arny:

Tell you what Scotty. You show me Middius taking
responsibility for the way things are around here, and I'll
do the same. BTW, I've taken partical responsiblity for how
things are before, but AFAIK Middius never has. So, I'm not
waiting for Middius to take the first step, I'm waiting for
him to take any positive step at all.

So clearly opportunity is knocking at your door. Will you take it?

ScottW

The Terrierborg barks at Krooger's kommand.

Tell you what Scotty. You show me Middius taking
responsibility for the way things are around here, and I'll
do the same. BTW, I've taken partical responsiblity for how
things are before, but AFAIK Middius never has. So, I'm not
waiting for Middius to take the first step, I'm waiting for
him to take any positive step at all.

So clearly opportunity is knocking at your door. Will you take it?

Krooger is lying again. Possibly he's just konfused. But I doubt it. ;-)

I admitted to my bad behavior twice within the last month. In my defense, I
only act mean toward people who apologize for the Krooborg or do something
else similarly idiotic.

However, I also temper my causticity with humor. (Sorry, Arnii, but that's
the way it is. I know you're so divorced from your last shreds of humanity
that humor is an ancient relic to you, dead and covered with dust.)

As far as I'm concerned, we could have some fun on RAO if the 'borgs left.
But making fun of Them is the best we've got, so I'm not wishing for
anything so severe as a complete eradication.

Now you, Scottie: Admit to your part in the nastiness. Don't shift blame
like Krooger does; just take responsibility for your own behavior. Let
others who you feel are also guilty take responsibility for theirs.

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...


The Terrierborg barks at Krooger's kommand.

Tell you what Scotty. You show me Middius taking
responsibility for the way things are around here, and I'll
do the same. BTW, I've taken partical responsiblity for how
things are before, but AFAIK Middius never has. So, I'm not
waiting for Middius to take the first step, I'm waiting for
him to take any positive step at all.

So clearly opportunity is knocking at your door. Will you take it?

Krooger is lying again. Possibly he's just konfused. But I doubt it. ;-)

I admitted to my bad behavior twice within the last month. In my defense,
I
only act mean toward people who apologize for the Krooborg or do something
else similarly idiotic.

Is this really letting them take responsibility for their own behavior?


However, I also temper my causticity with humor. (Sorry, Arnii, but that's
the way it is. I know you're so divorced from your last shreds of humanity
that humor is an ancient relic to you, dead and covered with dust.)

As far as I'm concerned, we could have some fun on RAO if the 'borgs left.

They have as much right to be here and express opinion as you do.

But making fun of Them is the best we've got,

Can't say I agree with that at all.

so I'm not wishing for
anything so severe as a complete eradication.

Now you, Scottie: Admit to your part in the nastiness. Don't shift blame
like Krooger does; just take responsibility for your own behavior.

I reflect on my own behavior all the time.

Let
others who you feel are also guilty take responsibility for theirs.


Perfect, we're in agreement. So no more blaming others or making
excuses for behavior.
The responsibility for your actions is yours and yours alone.


Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step... perhaps a small one
but positive none the less.


ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:53ZCe.47231$up5.40526@lakeread02

Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step...
perhaps a
small one but positive none the less.

Unh, he probably has been coaching Phildo full time.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:53ZCe.47231$up5.40526@lakeread02

Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step...
perhaps a
small one but positive none the less.

Unh, he probably has been coaching Phildo full time.


and your positive response is?

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:7aZCe.47233$up5.304@lakeread02
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:53ZCe.47231$up5.40526@lakeread02

Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step...
perhaps a
small one but positive none the less.

Unh, he probably has been coaching Phildo full time.

and your positive response is?

I'll take the matter under advisement.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:7aZCe.47233$up5.304@lakeread02
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:53ZCe.47231$up5.40526@lakeread02

Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step...
perhaps a
small one but positive none the less.

Unh, he probably has been coaching Phildo full time.

and your positive response is?

I'll take the matter under advisement.

Ok, the ball is in your court.

Now George if you don't mind... try to refrain from leaping the net and
stealing the ball if you know what I mean.

ScottW

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:7aZCe.47233$up5.304@lakeread02
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:53ZCe.47231$up5.40526@lakeread02

Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step...
perhaps a
small one but positive none the less.

Unh, he probably has been coaching Phildo full time.

and your positive response is?

I'll take the matter under advisement.

....until the meds run out.

Scott has clearly earned the Nobel prize with this attempted peace treaty
and hugfest. Two sticks under the driver's seat.

Margaret

"Margaret von B." wrote
in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:7aZCe.47233$up5.304@lakeread02
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:53ZCe.47231$up5.40526@lakeread02

Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step...
perhaps a
small one but positive none the less.

Unh, he probably has been coaching Phildo full time.

and your positive response is?

I'll take the matter under advisement.

...until the meds run out.

Yep as predicted, the Middius sockupppet force comes in with
guns blazing.

Yappity-yappity-yap.

Now George if you don't mind... try to refrain from leaping the net and
stealing the ball if you know what I mean.

Still waiting for you to own up to your ****tiness toward dave weil......

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Margaret von B." wrote
in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:7aZCe.47233$up5.304@lakeread02
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:53ZCe.47231$up5.40526@lakeread02

Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step...
perhaps a
small one but positive none the less.

Unh, he probably has been coaching Phildo full time.

and your positive response is?

I'll take the matter under advisement.

...until the meds run out.

Yep as predicted, the Middius sockupppet force comes in with
guns blazing.

Guns blazing? Just silly attempts to push your buttons and show you
aren't sincere. You have to expect such stuff for some time to come.

The sooner you make a positive gesture... the better.

ScottW

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Margaret von B." wrote
in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:7aZCe.47233$up5.304@lakeread02
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:53ZCe.47231$up5.40526@lakeread02

Arny... Arny... George has taken a positive step...
perhaps a
small one but positive none the less.

Unh, he probably has been coaching Phildo full time.

and your positive response is?

I'll take the matter under advisement.

...until the meds run out.

Yep as predicted, the Middius sockupppet force comes in with
guns blazing.



Quit whining!

Margaret

George M. Middius wrote:
Yappity-yappity-yap.

Now George if you don't mind... try to refrain from leaping the net and
stealing the ball if you know what I mean.

Still waiting for you to own up to your ****tiness toward dave weil......

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for him to do the same toward me.

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for you to do the same toward me.

Whats your point?

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


George M. Middius wrote:
Yappity-yappity-yap.

Now George if you don't mind... try to refrain from leaping the net and
stealing the ball if you know what I mean.

Still waiting for you to own up to your ****tiness toward dave weil......

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for him to do the same toward me.

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for you to do the same toward me.

Whats your point?

ScottW


His point is that your self-awareness is zero. Or was it Arny's point?

Always happy to help.

Cheers,

Margaret

HypocrisyBorg has a new acolyte.


Still waiting for you to own up to your ****tiness toward dave weil......

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for him to do the same toward me.

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for you to do the same toward me.

Whats your point?

Is this a mental problem on your part, or do you see yourself as some kind
of ****ing saint?

Scottie "No positive steps from me" Terrierborg oozes toward his PhD in
hypocracy™.

Still waiting for you to own up to your ****tiness toward dave weil......

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for him to do the same toward me.
and I could (but I'm not) waiting for you to do the same toward me.
Whats your point?

Tick-tock, Terrier****. Tick-tock.

George M. Middius wrote:
HypocrisyBorg has a new acolyte.


Still waiting for you to own up to your ****tiness toward dave weil......

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for him to do the same toward me.

and I could (but I'm not) waiting for you to do the same toward me.

Whats your point?

Is this a mental problem on your part, or do you see yourself as some kind
of ****ing saint?

An excercise in moral relativism with George as my baseline.....

definitely a ****ing saint. No...no.... help me here.. what's above
saint?

ScottW

Those darn fleas. What's a Terrierborg to do?

Is this a mental problem on your part, or do you see yourself as some kind
of ****ing saint?

An excercise in moral relativism with George as my baseline.....

Oh, now I see. You get stand above it all and direct me and Krooger and dave and
Lionella to take "positive steps", but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

That's either passive-aggressive behavior or just plain ****ty. Maybe you can
clarify for us.

No wonder Krooger dismissed your fake peace overtures.

George Middius wrote:
Those darn fleas. What's a Terrierborg to do?

Is this a mental problem on your part, or do you see yourself as some kind
of ****ing saint?

An excercise in moral relativism with George as my baseline.....

Oh, now I see. You get stand above it all and direct me and Krooger and dave and
Lionella to take "positive steps",

That's right.. because in reality and in usenet..I'm honest.

but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

I exempt myself from fraudulent claims of "****tiness" if that's what
you mean.

See.. you and Arny have both admitted ****tiness... I called Dave on
his and anyone who can see the truth knows what I called him on... and
I don't recall calling on Lionel to "take positive steps" but its
possible as I certainly do disagree with some of his deplorable antics.

That's either passive-aggressive behavior or just plain ****ty. Maybe you can
clarify for us.

Maybe you can clarify for yourself if you answer this: Who finds
honesty ****ty?

No wonder Krooger dismissed your fake peace overtures.

They weren't mine... they were yours. I'm just a messenger.

ScottW

On 19 Jul 2005 11:54:26 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

I exempt myself from fraudulent claims of "****tiness" if that's what
you mean.

See.. you and Arny have both admitted ****tiness... I called Dave on
his and anyone who can see the truth knows what I called him on

Of course, you never indicated what you thought the "****tiness" was,
even though I told you that I didn't know what you were talking about.

I guess it's all in your head.

dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 11:54:26 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

I exempt myself from fraudulent claims of "****tiness" if that's what
you mean.

See.. you and Arny have both admitted ****tiness... I called Dave on
his and anyone who can see the truth knows what I called him on

Of course, you never indicated what you thought the "****tiness" was,
even though I told you that I didn't know what you were talking about.


One ****tiness is your willingness to erroneously characterize people.


I guess it's all in your head.

Another is to jump to conclusions not supported by the available
facts.

ScottW

On 19 Jul 2005 12:39:44 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 11:54:26 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

I exempt myself from fraudulent claims of "****tiness" if that's what
you mean.

See.. you and Arny have both admitted ****tiness... I called Dave on
his and anyone who can see the truth knows what I called him on

Of course, you never indicated what you thought the "****tiness" was,
even though I told you that I didn't know what you were talking about.


One ****tiness is your willingness to erroneously characterize people.

You mean like me characterized me as a leech on society because I
didn't make a requisite amount of money?

I guess it's all in your head.

Another is to jump to conclusions not supported by the available
facts.

Well, in this case, it certainly wasn't true.

Glad to see you are happy to cast aspersions, you miserable little
****.

chuckle

dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 12:39:44 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 11:54:26 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

I exempt myself from fraudulent claims of "****tiness" if that's what
you mean.

See.. you and Arny have both admitted ****tiness... I called Dave on
his and anyone who can see the truth knows what I called him on

Of course, you never indicated what you thought the "****tiness" was,
even though I told you that I didn't know what you were talking about.


One ****tiness is your willingness to erroneously characterize people.

You mean like me characterized me as a leech on society because I
didn't make a requisite amount of money?

Poor Dave... always just a bit left of the truth.

Nobody cares how much money you make... it was how little you pay and
your ignorance of your "fair" share that was brought to your attention.


I guess it's all in your head.

Another is to jump to conclusions not supported by the available
facts.

Well, in this case, it certainly wasn't true.

It's right here in front of your face Dave, open your eyes.


Glad to see you are happy

Happy? well yes, there is certain satisfaction in exposing the truth.

to cast aspersions, you miserable little
****.

The irony is amusing .

ScottW

Scottiedork said:

Glad to see you are happy to cast aspersions, you miserable little ****.

The irony is amusing .

My main problem with you is your stupidity, not your ****tiness. I
understand that when critcized for something you don't understand and can't
ameliorate, you often get defensive and lash out in stumble-tongued anger
and frustration. The displays of temper then lead to even stupider whining
on your part, which is ****ty. But the core problem is your irremediable
lack of intelligence.

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us. Then you
compounded your doltishness by refusing to admit you are (at least
sometimes) an asshole.

George M. Middius wrote:
Scottiedork said:

Glad to see you are happy to cast aspersions, you miserable little ****.

The irony is amusing .

My main problem with you is your stupidity,

And I find it pretty ****ty that you feel the need to consistently
insult people with your opinion of their intelligence.
I prefer to actually reveal the flaws in your thinking rather that
hollowly claiming stupidity on your behalf.

For example.. the following paragraph is nothing more than your
opinion.
If your not going to provide any substance, you could at least make an
effort to be concise.

not your ****tiness. I
understand that when critcized for something you don't understand and can't
ameliorate, you often get defensive and lash out in stumble-tongued anger
and frustration. The displays of temper then lead to even stupider whining
on your part, which is ****ty. But the core problem is your irremediable
lack of intelligence.

We all know your opinion of me George. Why do you feel so compelled
to repeat yourself?


That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

Then you
compounded your doltishness by refusing to admit you are (at least
sometimes) an asshole.

Ok George... if it is so important to you.. yes, I have at times been
an asshole, but I was an honest asshole. How about you?

ScottW

On 19 Jul 2005 14:18:49 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 12:39:44 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 11:54:26 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

I exempt myself from fraudulent claims of "****tiness" if that's what
you mean.

See.. you and Arny have both admitted ****tiness... I called Dave on
his and anyone who can see the truth knows what I called him on

Of course, you never indicated what you thought the "****tiness" was,
even though I told you that I didn't know what you were talking about.


One ****tiness is your willingness to erroneously characterize people.

You mean like me characterized me as a leech on society because I
didn't make a requisite amount of money?

Poor Dave... always just a bit left of the truth.

Nobody cares how much money you make... it was how little you pay and
your ignorance of your "fair" share that was brought to your attention.

Liar. How much my "fair share" was (as determined by you) WAS the
point.

****ty behavior from you, Scott.

I guess it's all in your head.

Another is to jump to conclusions not supported by the available
facts.

Well, in this case, it certainly wasn't true.

It's right here in front of your face Dave, open your eyes.

You need to reread YOUR OWN posts recently.

Glad to see you are happy

Happy? well yes, there is certain satisfaction in exposing the truth.

You forgot to capitalize the word Truth.

to cast aspersions, you miserable little
****.

The irony is amusing .

Thank you. It was intended that way. Hence the chuckle.

On 19 Jul 2005 15:11:20 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

How about a soupcon of self-awareness, Scott?

dave weil said:

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

How about a soupcon of self-awareness, Scott?

I suspect Scottie would only be interested in a keg.

dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 15:11:20 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

How about a soupcon of self-awareness, Scott?

If I have not been honest... expose it.

But don't ask me to simply accept your word on your characterizations
of me. I won't and with good reason.

ScottW

dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 14:18:49 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 12:39:44 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 11:54:26 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

I exempt myself from fraudulent claims of "****tiness" if that's what
you mean.

See.. you and Arny have both admitted ****tiness... I called Dave on
his and anyone who can see the truth knows what I called him on

Of course, you never indicated what you thought the "****tiness" was,
even though I told you that I didn't know what you were talking about.


One ****tiness is your willingness to erroneously characterize people.

You mean like me characterized me as a leech on society because I
didn't make a requisite amount of money?

Poor Dave... always just a bit left of the truth.

Nobody cares how much money you make... it was how little you pay and
your ignorance of your "fair" share that was brought to your attention.

Liar. How much my "fair share" was (as determined by you) WAS the
point.

Ok Dave.. contrast your statement here with what I said and then with
what you originally said. (they're all repeated above for everyone to
see)

Seems pretty obvious that my statement and your final version have
much in common, while your original statment is significantly
different.


****ty behavior from you, Scott.

Once again.. your conclusion is not supported by the words on your
very monitor at this moment.


I guess it's all in your head.

Another is to jump to conclusions not supported by the available
facts.

Well, in this case, it certainly wasn't true.

It's right here in front of your face Dave, open your eyes.

You need to reread YOUR OWN posts recently.

As demonstrated by your example above? I think not.

You know... some people are interested in the truth.. and some are
interested in something else for purposes I will never understand. I
think you are one of those people whose purpose I will never
understand.

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com...


George Middius wrote:
Those darn fleas. What's a Terrierborg to do?

Is this a mental problem on your part, or do you see yourself as some
kind
of ****ing saint?

An excercise in moral relativism with George as my baseline.....

Oh, now I see. You get stand above it all and direct me and Krooger and
dave and
Lionella to take "positive steps",

That's right.. because in reality and in usenet..I'm honest.

but you exempt yourself from any
accountability because other people didn't apologize to you first.

I exempt myself from fraudulent claims of "****tiness" if that's what
you mean.

See.. you and Arny have both admitted ****tiness... I called Dave on
his and anyone who can see the truth knows what I called him on... and
I don't recall calling on Lionel to "take positive steps" but its
possible as I certainly do disagree with some of his deplorable antics.

That's either passive-aggressive behavior or just plain ****ty. Maybe you
can
clarify for us.

Maybe you can clarify for yourself if you answer this: Who finds
honesty ****ty?

No wonder Krooger dismissed your fake peace overtures.

They weren't mine... they were yours. I'm just a messenger.


And not a very good one. Why don't you just stick to being boring, Scott.
That seems to be one thing you do well.

Cheers,

Margaret

On 19 Jul 2005 16:01:01 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 15:11:20 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

How about a soupcon of self-awareness, Scott?

If I have not been honest... expose it.

But don't ask me to simply accept your word on your characterizations
of me. I won't and with good reason.

And neither will I when you say the same about me.

You're just sinking deeper in the mire with every post.

On 19 Jul 2005 16:05:43 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

I think you are one of those people whose purpose I will never
understand.

That's because you're not very bright.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On 19 Jul 2005 16:01:01 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 15:11:20 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a
peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

How about a soupcon of self-awareness, Scott?

If I have not been honest... expose it.

But don't ask me to simply accept your word on your characterizations
of me. I won't and with good reason.

And neither will I when you say the same about me.

I don't ask you to take me at my word. I ask you to consider the facts
I provide in support of my statements. Often I let people draw
their own conclusions.

Everything I've read today leads me to believe you and I are quite
opposite in this regard.


You're just sinking deeper in the mire with every post.


Anything more? Something with substance perhaps?

ScottW

dave weil said to the Terrierborg:

I think you are one of those people whose purpose I will never
understand.

That's because you're not very bright.

Now you've done it. Yesterday Scottie said he gets hurt feelings when people
make an issue of his denseness.

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 21:07:04 -0700, "ScottW"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On 19 Jul 2005 16:01:01 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 15:11:20 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a
peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

How about a soupcon of self-awareness, Scott?

If I have not been honest... expose it.

So, if you honestly believe that someone who makes $30,000 a year (now
$40,000 a year) isn't pulling their weight in society, fine. Then
you're "honestly" a dick. Nothing I can do about that. If you truly DO
look down at those who work in restaurants, then fine. If you HONESTLY
believe that taking someone on for their outrageous statements is
"obsession", fine. If you think that "deceptively editing posts" as
Arnold would call it, is "honest", fine.

Here's a good example of your deceptiveness:

We were talking about your high school son and I mentioned a similar
kid at work:

" We have a
guy who just graduated and who has worked for us for the last three
years and he's easily made $10k+ a year wroking AND going to school at
the same time.

$10K+ Wow....thats about $10/hour working half time. So in 3 years
the guy made 30K+ and paid tuition. Good thing he worked at a
restaurant or he might have starved to death. You sure he wasn't
really working for food"?

So how many high schoolers do you know who pay their own tuition?
Considering that he went to public high school, it wouldn't matter if
he "paid his own tuition", since there wasn't any. And, being in high
school, he didn't work "half time". He actually averaged about $15 an
hour. So, you are just as "****ty" in how you "handle the facts".

Face it, you just as "****ty" as the rest of us. You're as "****ty as
you want to be". You're up the ****ty tree. You're down with the
****ty. You believe that "****ty is as ****ty does". You've stolen the
****ty base. You do unto ****ty as ****ty does unto you.

But don't ask me to simply accept your word on your characterizations
of me. I won't and with good reason.

And neither will I when you say the same about me.

I don't ask you to take me at my word. I ask you to consider the facts
I provide in support of my statements. Often I let people draw
their own conclusions.

You haven't provided ANY specifics about my "****tiness", just your
characterization.

Everything I've read today leads me to believe you and I are quite
opposite in this regard.

I cartainly believe that we are "quite opposite", so this is a relief
that you feel the same.

You're just sinking deeper in the mire with every post.


Anything more? Something with substance perhaps?

You first.

dave weil wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 21:07:04 -0700, "ScottW"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On 19 Jul 2005 16:01:01 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 15:11:20 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a
peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

How about a soupcon of self-awareness, Scott?

If I have not been honest... expose it.

So, if you honestly believe that someone who makes $30,000 a year (now
$40,000 a year) isn't pulling their weight in society, fine. Then
you're "honestly" a dick.

I think at the time... based on your Fed taxes we estimated 28K. But
again you missed the point. The point was you were bragging to a
certain degree that you could make more money, but you liked working
when you wanted and less than full time and you made enough money for
yourself so... what the hell.. why not just take it easy and enjoy
life.

I simply pointed out that you were being a bit selfish in this
cavalier attitude and not actually pulling your weight. It was the
fact that you were doing less by choice and ignoring the very real
consequences of choice.
You simply didn't like the truth... that if everyone did what you're
doing...the country would be in very bad way.


Nothing I can do about that. If you truly DO
look down at those who work in restaurants, then fine. If you HONESTLY
believe that taking someone on for their outrageous statements is
"obsession", fine.

Never said that.. what I did say is if my 5 or 6 replies to you in a
period of time is obsessed.. than you should consider your own
obsession with Lionel or Howard. You often remove context in your
efforts to deceive, Dave.

If you think that "deceptively editing posts" as
Arnold would call it, is "honest", fine.

Here's a good example of your deceptiveness:

We were talking about your high school son and I mentioned a similar
kid at work:

" We have a
guy who just graduated and who has worked for us for the last three
years and he's easily made $10k+ a year wroking AND going to school at
the same time.

$10K+ Wow....thats about $10/hour working half time. So in 3 years
the guy made 30K+ and paid tuition. Good thing he worked at a
restaurant or he might have starved to death. You sure he wasn't
really working for food"?

Once again Dave.. you make a statement and then fail completely to
provide evidence. Where is the "deceptive edit" ? I don't see any
editing at all in your preceding example.

So how many high schoolers do you know who pay their own tuition?

Not many... but you didn't say at the time you were referring to a
"similar" kid to my son. You just said "We have a guy who just
graduated and who has worked for us for the last three years".

I assumed you meant college as we had covered the fact that there is
about only 1 job for a young kid in most restaurants that serve
drinks... busboy. I also asked in the same post
"why did he feel the need to go to school and pursure another career?"

Clearly indicating I meant college. I don't recall you replied or
clarified at the time.

So again Dave, where is the deception on my part?

Perhaps now you can see why I choose not to take your word for such
accusations.

Of course in that same post sequence we have my comment
"he just started his "dream job" working in a truck shop that does
all kinds of upgrades and specializes in H1s."

to which you replied : "He'll probably make a great truck mechanic."

Aren't you guilty of trying to deceptively imply in a condescending
manner that my son has embarked on a career as truck mechanic based on
a high school summer job?

Considering that he went to public high school, it wouldn't matter if
he "paid his own tuition", since there wasn't any. And, being in high
school, he didn't work "half time". He actually averaged about $15 an
hour. So, you are just as "****ty" in how you "handle the facts".

Poor Dave.. I can see now that clairvoyance is expected by you.
Sorry... I haven't quite mastered that yet.


Face it, you just as "****ty" as the rest of us.

Oh cool, you've finally mastered that Tennessee drawl.

You're as "****ty as
you want to be". You're up the ****ty tree. You're down with the
****ty. You believe that "****ty is as ****ty does". You've stolen the
****ty base. You do unto ****ty as ****ty does unto you.

Careful there Dave... Phildo will be demanding psychological
intervention on your behalf.


But don't ask me to simply accept your word on your characterizations
of me. I won't and with good reason.

And neither will I when you say the same about me.

I don't ask you to take me at my word. I ask you to consider the facts
I provide in support of my statements. Often I let people draw
their own conclusions.

You haven't provided ANY specifics about my "****tiness", just your
characterization.

I just provided another complete example above albeit a minor one.
Of course I can always dredge up your references to me as Kroopologist
(or equivalent). Do I really need to do that? I suppose I do.
Message ID:


Everything I've read today leads me to believe you and I are quite
opposite in this regard.

I cartainly believe that we are "quite opposite", so this is a relief
that you feel the same.

You're just sinking deeper in the mire with every post.


Anything more? Something with substance perhaps?

You first.

thanks... but you already went.

ScottW

On 20 Jul 2005 12:37:13 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 21:07:04 -0700, "ScottW"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On 19 Jul 2005 16:01:01 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 15:11:20 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:

That aside, you made a complete ass of yourself by trying to broker a
peace
treat between others when you are as combative as any of us.

Combative? Perhaps...but in an honest way.

How about a soupcon of self-awareness, Scott?

If I have not been honest... expose it.

So, if you honestly believe that someone who makes $30,000 a year (now
$40,000 a year) isn't pulling their weight in society, fine. Then
you're "honestly" a dick.

I think at the time... based on your Fed taxes we estimated 28K.

No, I SAID 28K. Are you suddenly quibbling about $2k? Is this
difference of about $100 in taxes enough to make a difference?

But again you missed the point. The point was you were bragging to a
certain degree that you could make more money, but you liked working
when you wanted and less than full time and you made enough money for
yourself so... what the hell.. why not just take it easy and enjoy
life.

I think that's what most people do. They work not only for a certain
amount of money, but also a lifestyle that they like.

I know very few people who look at what their share of taxes should be
and tailor their job based on a "necessary" tax bill. In fact, many
people who have high incomes shelter a lot of their income. Some of
them pay very little tax.

I simply pointed out that you were being a bit selfish in this
cavalier attitude and not actually pulling your weight.

As long as I'm paying every cent of tax that I'm supposed to, I AM
pulling my weight. This is America where the choice of income and
profession isn't mandated based on a "minimum" amount of taxes paid in
order to "pull their weight". And I also pointed out that in certain
areas, I pay FAR MORE than my "fair share", i.e. a lion's share of my
property taxes going to education when I have no children that take
advantage of that system (and I GLADLY do it).

It was the fact that you were doing less by choice and ignoring the very real
consequences of choice.

I'm not ignoring the "consequence of choice". What is the consequence
if I fall under YOUR determination of how much income I should make to
"pull my weight"?

You simply didn't like the truth... that if everyone did what you're
doing...the country would be in very bad way.

And if everyone worked the maximum, I suggest that the country would
ALSO be in a bad way. We wouldn't have vacations, or decent family
life, for those who have families, we probably wouldn't have very many
hobbies and we'd probably have a higher mortality rate. shrug

Nothing I can do about that. If you truly DO
look down at those who work in restaurants, then fine. If you HONESTLY
believe that taking someone on for their outrageous statements is
"obsession", fine.

Never said that.. what I did say is if my 5 or 6 replies to you in a
period of time is obsessed.. than you should consider your own
obsession with Lionel or Howard.

Yes, it's EXACTLY what you said. I take on Howard because he talks
trash.

And it's not a matter of 5 or 6 replies to me - it's the matter of you
responding to almost everything I write these days, no matter whether
you're in the conversation or not.

You often remove context in your
efforts to deceive, Dave.

If you think that "deceptively editing posts" as
Arnold would call it, is "honest", fine.

Here's a good example of your deceptiveness:

We were talking about your high school son and I mentioned a similar
kid at work:

" We have a
guy who just graduated and who has worked for us for the last three
years and he's easily made $10k+ a year wroking AND going to school at
the same time.

$10K+ Wow....thats about $10/hour working half time. So in 3 years
the guy made 30K+ and paid tuition. Good thing he worked at a
restaurant or he might have starved to death. You sure he wasn't
really working for food"?

Once again Dave.. you make a statement and then fail completely to
provide evidence. Where is the "deceptive edit" ?

I'm sorry to have been sloppy in my phrasing. In my defense, I didn't
say that this example was an example of a "deceptive edit". I said
that it was an example of your deceptiveness. But I'll grant that it
would have been easy to confuse the two. I can provide an example of
'deceptive editing" that you have displayed, if you wish.

My example was one of "deceptiveness" when you changed the context of
something that I had written.

I don't see any
editing at all in your preceding example.

The only editing was mine (in pulling it out of the OP, although I
didn't edit the fragment).

So how many high schoolers do you know who pay their own tuition?

Not many... but you didn't say at the time you were referring to a
"similar" kid to my son.

Deceptive. That's what we were talking about - your son's situation,
not a college student's. If you can't see that I was showing a like
indivudual's situation, then it's on you, not me.

You just said "We have a guy who just
graduated and who has worked for us for the last three years".

I assumed you meant college

Why you would assume that is bizarre. College has nothing to do with
high school.

as we had covered the fact that there is
about only 1 job for a young kid in most restaurants that serve
drinks... busboy.

But that's not true. They can be a food runner and they can be a
dishwasher, they can be a host, and they can be a to-go server.

I also asked in the same post
"why did he feel the need to go to school and pursure another career?"

Clearly indicating I meant college. I don't recall you replied or
clarified at the time.

I didn't reply because I didn't see it at the the time. I'm replying
NOW.

So again Dave, where is the deception on my part?

OK, so you were too dense to follow the conversation. I concede this
point.

Perhaps now you can see why I choose not to take your word for such
accusations.

You should work on your communication skills and reading
comprehension.

Of course in that same post sequence we have my comment
"he just started his "dream job" working in a truck shop that does
all kinds of upgrades and specializes in H1s."

to which you replied : "He'll probably make a great truck mechanic."

Aren't you guilty of trying to deceptively imply in a condescending
manner that my son has embarked on a career as truck mechanic based on
a high school summer job?

First of all, it wasn't a condescending remark, because being a
mechanic is a VERY honorable profession that keeps American on the
road. Would you be somehow ashamed if he took this path? In fact, I
know a mechanic who owns his own shop who is a millionaire a couple of
times over.

And it was YOU who talked about career paths, implying that a
restaurant job is a dead-end job for a high schooler unless someone
wanted to be a chef. Just to let you know, the current GM/OP that I
work for probably makes about $150,000 a year, and the guy who was GM
before him is now a market partner that probably makes double that if
not more. That first guy started as a dishwasher in high school. Now,
there are far more opportunities for high schooler than in those days.

In fact, I know another guy who took the same route. From the time
he was 17, and a dishwasher, until the time that he got out of the
business, he was in the business. He ended up selling his restaurant
to about $600,000, after about 8 years of making $100K a year.

Considering that he went to public high school, it wouldn't matter if
he "paid his own tuition", since there wasn't any. And, being in high
school, he didn't work "half time". He actually averaged about $15 an
hour. So, you are just as "****ty" in how you "handle the facts".

Poor Dave.. I can see now that clairvoyance is expected by you.
Sorry... I haven't quite mastered that yet.

No, but one expects to follow a conversation.

Face it, you just as "****ty" as the rest of us.

Oh cool, you've finally mastered that Tennessee drawl.

Nope. I STILL sound like I'm from North Carolina, from what I've been
told.

You're as "****ty as
you want to be". You're up the ****ty tree. You're down with the
****ty. You believe that "****ty is as ****ty does". You've stolen the
****ty base. You do unto ****ty as ****ty does unto you.

Careful there Dave... Phildo will be demanding psychological
intervention on your behalf.

Who cares?

But don't ask me to simply accept your word on your characterizations
of me. I won't and with good reason.

And neither will I when you say the same about me.

I don't ask you to take me at my word. I ask you to consider the facts
I provide in support of my statements. Often I let people draw
their own conclusions.

You haven't provided ANY specifics about my "****tiness", just your
characterization.

I just provided another complete example above albeit a minor one.
Of course I can always dredge up your references to me as Kroopologist
(or equivalent). Do I really need to do that? I suppose I do.
Message ID:

Unable to find the pertinent post.

Everything I've read today leads me to believe you and I are quite
opposite in this regard.

I cartainly believe that we are "quite opposite", so this is a relief
that you feel the same.

You're just sinking deeper in the mire with every post.


Anything more? Something with substance perhaps?

You first.

thanks... but you already went.

Yeah, I guess I DID provide some substance. Your turn.

dave weil wrote:
I just provided another complete example above albeit a minor one.
Of course I can always dredge up your references to me as Kroopologist
(or equivalent). Do I really need to do that? I suppose I do.
Message ID:

Unable to find the pertinent post.


Interesting.. In some views google truncates the ID string.



Make sure there are no .... in the string. If you cant, try original
under options.

I'll get back on the rest.

ScottW

On 20 Jul 2005 16:28:47 -0700, "ScottW" wrote:



dave weil wrote:
I just provided another complete example above albeit a minor one.
Of course I can always dredge up your references to me as Kroopologist
(or equivalent). Do I really need to do that? I suppose I do.
Message ID:

Unable to find the pertinent post.


Interesting.. In some views google truncates the ID string.



Make sure there are no .... in the string. If you cant, try original
under options.

I didn't use Google.

Having read it, there is no way that I was accusing you of being a
"Kroopologist". An apologist, yes. I guess it was the "...gist" part
that confused you. Once again, the comprehension issue comes to the
fore.

I'll get back on the rest.

Oh, don't bother.