what a good person Andre is [Archive]

Jude

08-23-2003, 03:54 PM

"Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:bi8gob$473$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes: Fixed the title. <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason> Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in of itself that. Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of it was positive. Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past would be a problem for me... Oh well, some people have nothing better to do... On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:35:31 +0200 (CEST), starwars <nobody@tatooine.homelinux.net> wrote: [snip]Thoughts to ponder, on the spouses leaving.....Andre Lieven

Andre,

That was a pretty awful experience, to say the least. I really mean this in
the best of ways, but have you thought about what it was about her that you
were attracted to? The worst relationship I went through was with a pretty
awful woman, but I had to look inside myself and ask myself what "blind
side" did I have that allowed such a person into my world. No woman like
that could EVER get near me again. I learned my lesson. However, I still
give each individual woman respect until they show me they don't deserve it,
and not the other way around.... don't respect them and if they prove they
are worthy of my respect then start respecting them. That is almost always
going to lead to disaster.

Jude

Andre -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green.

atheisticmystic

08-23-2003, 06:27 PM

"Jude" <Jude@nunyabiznez.usa> wrote in message news:<86S1b.8269$99.4335@fe03.atl2.webusenet.com>... "Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:bi8gob$473$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes: Fixed the title. <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason> Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in of itself that. Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of it was positive. Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past would be a problem for me... Oh well, some people have nothing better to do... On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:35:31 +0200 (CEST), starwars <nobody@tatooine.homelinux.net> wrote: [snip]>Thoughts to ponder, on the spouses leaving.....>>Andre Lieven Andre, That was a pretty awful experience, to say the least. I really mean this in the best of ways, but have you thought about what it was about her that you were attracted to? The worst relationship I went through was with a pretty awful woman, but I had to look inside myself and ask myself what "blind side" did I have that allowed such a person into my world. No woman like that could EVER get near me again. I learned my lesson. However, I still give each individual woman respect until they show me they don't deserve it, and not the other way around.... don't respect them and if they prove they are worthy of my respect then start respecting them. That is almost always going to lead to disaster. Jude Andre -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Blind side? When a man allows several additional B/D indivduals to
join he and his newly betrothed on their honeymoon, and explains it
with a "maybe I should have said something", it's safe to say there's
not much vision going on.

The story, however, doesn't justify Andre's anti-female tirades. And
although he has every right to express his opinion, how useful is it
to coddle a near middle-age man who holds an entire gender responsible
for his own poor choices?
atheisticmystic

Andre Lieven

08-23-2003, 07:33 PM

"Jude" (Jude@nunyabiznez.usa) writes: "Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:bi8gob$473$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes: Fixed the title. <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason> Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in of itself that. Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of it was positive. Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past would be a problem for me... Oh well, some people have nothing better to do... On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:35:31 +0200 (CEST), starwars <nobody@tatooine.homelinux.net> wrote: [snip]>Thoughts to ponder, on the spouses leaving.....>>Andre Lieven Andre, That was a pretty awful experience, to say the least.

Indeed. Based on what I started learning in the immediate aftermath
of it, back in '97, I found out that my experience, while nasty and
unusual, in some of the specific details, was actually not that bad,
relative to many other men's experiences.

For one such experience, read Wendy Dennis' " The Divorce From Hell ".
I really mean this in the best of ways, but have you thought about what it was about her that you were attracted to?

Of course. My first priority, back then, was to rebuild myself,
from the wreckage, and then, to examine the relationship in
*whole*, including my part of it, and my choices, and choices
not made, and why I made or didn't make each type.
The worst relationship I went through was with a pretty awful woman, but I had to look inside myself and ask myself what "blind side" did I have that allowed such a person into my world.

I hear that. The problem is, that a lot of women present one version
of themselves, even over years of time, and then, expose another
version of themselves, usually a nastier side of them, after they've
established themselves tight in your life.
No woman like that could EVER get near me again.

I wish that I could say the same, both about my ex, and the fiancee
who followed her a few years later. While I made sure to choose a very
different ( And, I mean specific differences in areas related to the
pathologies of the ex ), that one, once she had a ring on, began to
show almost all of the sme general pathologies, with the differences
being more of style.
I learned my lesson. However, I still give each individual woman respect until they show me they don't deserve it, and not the other way around.... don't respect them and if they prove they are worthy of my respect then start respecting them. That is almost always going to lead to disaster.

Sure. I like the way that the character of Michael Garibaldi, on
Babylon 5, once put it. To the effect of, " I give everyone one
chance to disappoint me, G'Kar. Thanks for not taking it. "

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Rauni

08-23-2003, 07:52 PM

On 23 Aug 2003 18:27:31 -0700, atheisticmystic@hotmail.com
(atheisticmystic) wrote:
"Jude" <Jude@nunyabiznez.usa> wrote in message news:<86S1b.8269$99.4335@fe03.atl2.webusenet.com>... "Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:bi8gob$473$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes: > Fixed the title. > > <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason> Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in of itself that. Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of it was positive. Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past would be a problem for me... Oh well, some people have nothing better to do... > On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:35:31 +0200 (CEST), starwars > <nobody@tatooine.homelinux.net> wrote: > > [snip] > >>Thoughts to ponder, on the spouses leaving..... >> >>Andre Lieven Andre, That was a pretty awful experience, to say the least. I really mean this in the best of ways, but have you thought about what it was about her that you were attracted to? The worst relationship I went through was with a pretty awful woman, but I had to look inside myself and ask myself what "blind side" did I have that allowed such a person into my world. No woman like that could EVER get near me again. I learned my lesson. However, I still give each individual woman respect until they show me they don't deserve it, and not the other way around.... don't respect them and if they prove they are worthy of my respect then start respecting them. That is almost always going to lead to disaster. Jude Andre -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green.Blind side? When a man allows several additional B/D indivduals tojoin he and his newly betrothed on their honeymoon, and explains itwith a "maybe I should have said something", it's safe to say there'snot much vision going on.The story, however, doesn't justify Andre's anti-female tirades. Andalthough he has every right to express his opinion, how useful is itto coddle a near middle-age man who holds an entire gender responsiblefor his own poor choices?atheisticmystic

He's 45.........
Damn he's the same age as my husband! Was I shocked. I really though
he was this *kid* who made a bad mistake. **** he was 31 when he met
his future wife and dated her for four years before they got married.

To paraphrase what Andre wrote in Message-ID:
<bhgbdu$c80$1@freenet9.carleton.ca>

Free Clue" If men want good women then....they out not to sleep with,
and marry, non good women.

Duh!

John Jones

08-23-2003, 08:06 PM

Rauni wrote: On 23 Aug 2003 18:27:31 -0700, atheisticmystic@hotmail.com (atheisticmystic) wrote: "Jude" <Jude@nunyabiznez.usa> wrote in message news:<86S1b.8269$99.4335@fe03.atl2.webusenet.com>... "Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:bi8gob$473$1@freenet9.carleton.ca...> Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes:>> Fixed the title.>>>> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no
good>> reason>>> Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was
embarrassing,> because> that would be to say that what people do when they're
young(er) is> in> of itself that.>> Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that
not all> of> it was positive.>> Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my
stated> past> would be a problem for me...>> Oh well, some people have nothing better to do...>>> On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:35:31 +0200 (CEST), starwars>> <nobody@tatooine.homelinux.net> wrote:>>>> [snip]>>>>> Thoughts to ponder, on the spouses leaving.....>>>>>> Andre Lieven Andre, That was a pretty awful experience, to say the least. I
really mean this in the best of ways, but have you thought about what it was
about her that you were attracted to? The worst relationship I went through was
with a pretty awful woman, but I had to look inside myself and ask myself
what "blind side" did I have that allowed such a person into my world.
No woman like that could EVER get near me again. I learned my lesson.
However, I still give each individual woman respect until they show me they
don't deserve it, and not the other way around.... don't respect them and if
they prove they are worthy of my respect then start respecting them. That is almost always going to lead to disaster. Jude> Andre>>> --> " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess.
"> The Man Prayer, Red
Green. Blind side? When a man allows several additional B/D
indivduals to join he and his newly betrothed on their honeymoon, and
explains it with a "maybe I should have said something", it's safe to say
there's not much vision going on. The story, however, doesn't justify Andre's anti-female
tirades. And although he has every right to express his opinion, how useful
is it to coddle a near middle-age man who holds an entire gender responsible for his own poor choices? atheisticmystic He's 45......... Damn he's the same age as my husband! Was I shocked. I really
though he was this *kid* who made a bad mistake. **** he was 31 when
he met his future wife and dated her for four years before they got
married.

Sober up, huh?
To paraphrase what Andre wrote in Message-ID: <bhgbdu$c80$1@freenet9.carleton.ca> Free Clue" If men want good women then....they out not to sleep
with, and marry, non good women. Duh!

Actually, the reverse is more likely to be true. Go get a big cup
of black coffee.

Ann

08-24-2003, 02:24 AM

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski
<mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>, Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote: On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes:> Fixed the title.>> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason>Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, becausethat would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is inof itself that.Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all ofit was positive.Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated pastwould be a problem for me...Oh well, some people have nothing better to do... So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you? I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating all men... AnnActually, Andre was talking not about the woman herselfso much as a system that allowed her to get awaywith treating him poorly.

My question was a genuine one. From what I've read of Andre, which
are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person. A
woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others.
I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very
odd.
Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because theydisagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ?

I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American.

Ann

Andre Lieven

08-24-2003, 06:43 AM

Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski <mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>, Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote: On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote: >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes: >> Fixed the title. >> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason> > >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in >of itself that. > >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of >it was positive. > >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past >would be a problem for me... > >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do... So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you? I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating all men... AnnActually, Andre was talking not about the woman herselfso much as a system that allowed her to get awaywith treating him poorly. My question was a genuine one.

Its nice to be judge, jury, prosecution, and defense, eh ?

But, when you post to Usenet, you are no longer having a *mono*logue.

HTH.
From what I've read of Andre, which are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person.

" Misogynist: A man who is *winning* an argument with a Feminist. "
Chris Raum.
A woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others.

Lie. Feel free to show where I've done that, say, with Sunny, Deb, or
Jill...
I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very odd.

You should get out more...
Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because theydisagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ? I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American.

So ? Does your brain stop at your border ?

" Ignorance of the topic is no excuse. "

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Ann

08-24-2003, 07:18 AM

On 24 Aug 2003 13:43:03 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
wrote:
Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski <mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>, Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:> On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)> wrote:>> >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes:> >> Fixed the title.> >>> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason>> >> >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because> >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in> >of itself that.> >> >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of> >it was positive.> >> >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past> >would be a problem for me...> >> >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do...>> So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you?> I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating> all men...>> AnnActually, Andre was talking not about the woman herselfso much as a system that allowed her to get awaywith treating him poorly. My question was a genuine one.Its nice to be judge, jury, prosecution, and defense, eh ?But, when you post to Usenet, you are no longer having a *mono*logue.HTH. From what I've read of Andre, which are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person." Misogynist: A man who is *winning* an argument with a Feminist. "Chris Raum. A woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others.Lie. Feel free to show where I've done that, say, with Sunny, Deb, orJill...

They aren't t.r posters.
I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very odd.You should get out more...

Why? How would that help?
Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because theydisagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ? I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American.So ? Does your brain stop at your border ?

It wasn't reported much here and I didn't seek it out. I do tend to
be more interested in things that happen in my own country...
<sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American
</sarcasm>
" Ignorance of the topic is no excuse. "

We know that's the case with you but some of us prefer to know
something about the subject before offering an opinion.

Ann

Rauni

08-24-2003, 07:32 AM

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 15:18:21 +0100, Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:
On 24 Aug 2003 13:43:03 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)wrote:Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski <mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:>In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>,> Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:>>> On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)>> wrote:>>>> >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes:>> >> Fixed the title.>> >>>> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason>>> >>> >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because>> >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in>> >of itself that.>> >>> >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of>> >it was positive.>> >>> >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past>> >would be a problem for me...>> >>> >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do...>>>> So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you?>> I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating>> all men...>>>> Ann>>Actually, Andre was talking not about the woman herself>so much as a system that allowed her to get away>with treating him poorly. My question was a genuine one.Its nice to be judge, jury, prosecution, and defense, eh ?But, when you post to Usenet, you are no longer having a *mono*logue.HTH. From what I've read of Andre, which are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person." Misogynist: A man who is *winning* an argument with a Feminist. "Chris Raum. A woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others.Lie. Feel free to show where I've done that, say, with Sunny, Deb, orJill...They aren't t.r posters. I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very odd.You should get out more...Why? How would that help?

Nope I've never run across men in real life like the one's that post
here on soc.men. And I tend to hang out with military men. Not those
new age talky feely kind of guys. Of course I do avoid whiners and
complainers of both genders.>Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because they>disagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ? I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American.So ? Does your brain stop at your border ?It wasn't reported much here and I didn't seek it out. I do tend tobe more interested in things that happen in my own country...<sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American</sarcasm>" Ignorance of the topic is no excuse. "We know that's the case with you but some of us prefer to knowsomething about the subject before offering an opinion.Ann

Andre Lieven

08-24-2003, 07:33 AM

Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 24 Aug 2003 13:43:03 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski <mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:>In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>,> Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:>>> On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)>> wrote:>>>> >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes:>> >> Fixed the title.>> >>>> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason>>> >>> >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because>> >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in>> >of itself that.>> >>> >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of>> >it was positive.>> >>> >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past>> >would be a problem for me...>> >>> >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do...>>>> So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you?>> I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating>> all men...>>>> Ann>>Actually, Andre was talking not about the woman herself>so much as a system that allowed her to get away>with treating him poorly. My question was a genuine one.Its nice to be judge, jury, prosecution, and defense, eh ?But, when you post to Usenet, you are no longer having a *mono*logue.HTH. From what I've read of Andre, which are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person." Misogynist: A man who is *winning* an argument with a Feminist. "Chris Raum. A woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others.Lie. Feel free to show where I've done that, say, with Sunny, Deb, orJill... They aren't t.r posters.

" So this is why you hate ALL women. "

YOUR claim, toots, not mine. Funny how, when I call your *lying cow****
out*, all of a sudden, its " all women *on t.r*. "

Thats what, TWO ? You feel OK making sweeping *ALL* claims based on
*that* ?

ROTFLMAO ! At you !
I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very odd.You should get out more... Why? How would that help?

Education. Experience. Social interaction.
>Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because they>disagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ? I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American.So ? Does your brain stop at your border ? It wasn't reported much here and I didn't seek it out.

" The Case Of The Century ", and you... missed it. LOL.
I do tend to be more interested in things that happen in my own country...

So do I, but I do pay attention to things outside of it, too...
<sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American </sarcasm>

ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots...
" Ignorance of the topic is no excuse. " We know that's the case with you but some of us prefer to know something about the subject before offering an opinion.

<yawn> More *empty and unsupported* claims.

See " ad homs "...

" If you CAN'T answer a person's arguments, don't worry ! You
can always call him names ! " Oscar Wilde.

You do this a *lot*... Must be your *inability* to deal with
disagreements...

Andre
--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Ann

08-24-2003, 09:07 AM

On 24 Aug 2003 14:33:28 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
wrote:
Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 24 Aug 2003 13:43:03 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes:> On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski> <mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:>>>In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>,>> Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:>>>>> On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)>>> wrote:>>>>>> >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes:>>> >> Fixed the title.>>> >>>>> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason>>>> >>>> >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because>>> >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in>>> >of itself that.>>> >>>> >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of>>> >it was positive.>>> >>>> >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past>>> >would be a problem for me...>>> >>>> >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do...>>>>>> So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you?>>> I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating>>> all men...>>>>>> Ann>>>>Actually, Andre was talking not about the woman herself>>so much as a system that allowed her to get away>>with treating him poorly.>> My question was a genuine one.Its nice to be judge, jury, prosecution, and defense, eh ?But, when you post to Usenet, you are no longer having a *mono*logue.HTH.> From what I've read of Andre, which> are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person." Misogynist: A man who is *winning* an argument with a Feminist. "Chris Raum.> A woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others.Lie. Feel free to show where I've done that, say, with Sunny, Deb, orJill... They aren't t.r posters." So this is why you hate ALL women. "YOUR claim, toots, not mine. Funny how, when I call your *lying cow****out*, all of a sudden, its " all women *on t.r*. "

I was talking about crossposts. If I don't read soc.men how would I
see their posts? You don't read for understanding and it shows.
Thats what, TWO ? You feel OK making sweeping *ALL* claims based on*that* ?ROTFLMAO ! At you !> I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very> odd.You should get out more... Why? How would that help?Education. Experience. Social interaction.

I've learnt more about people on here than I could ever learn in real
life. People just don't present themselves in the same way in real
life. Maybe they are less honest. In any case why my saying that I
have never come across people like this anywhere else on the net
should provoke a response about meeting people in real life is
incomprehensible. Not reading for understanding again are you?
>>Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because they>>disagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ?>> I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American.So ? Does your brain stop at your border ? It wasn't reported much here and I didn't seek it out." The Case Of The Century ", and you... missed it. LOL.

The case wasn't the case of the century anywhere this side of the
pond. Not everyone is watching what happens in America all the time
because America isn't the centre of the world. We had many more
interesting cases happen here including both Sutcliffe and the Wests
and more recently, Martin which is still a case to watch.
I do tend to be more interested in things that happen in my own country...So do I, but I do pay attention to things outside of it, too...

So you know the details of the crimes I mention, without looking them
up on the net?
<sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American </sarcasm>ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots...

Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you
American, in the same way as I am British as well as English.

Ann
" Ignorance of the topic is no excuse. " We know that's the case with you but some of us prefer to know something about the subject before offering an opinion.<yawn> More *empty and unsupported* claims.See " ad homs "..." If you CAN'T answer a person's arguments, don't worry ! Youcan always call him names ! " Oscar Wilde.You do this a *lot*... Must be your *inability* to deal withdisagreements...Andre

Mark Sobolewski

08-24-2003, 10:13 AM

In article <vi0hkvs18qcg18uou6peqc9pptk589h979@4ax.com>,
Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski <mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>, Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote: On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote: >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes: >> Fixed the title. >> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason> > >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in >of itself that. > >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of >it was positive. > >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past >would be a problem for me... > >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do... So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you? I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating all men... AnnActually, Andre was talking not about the woman herselfso much as a system that allowed her to get awaywith treating him poorly. My question was a genuine one. From what I've read of Andre, which are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person. A woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others. I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very odd.

There are women posters who are conservative in nature
such as Jill and to a certain degree, Deborah.
They are not labeled anti-men for the most part.
Unless you are a reader of soc.men, I don't think you
are qualified to make such statements (I'm not saying
this to dismiss you outright, but to explain why
you may be mistaken.)

That said, there are men in soc.men who are angry with women
and often have a good reason for being so. So what?
Note that I am the first to remind them that men
themselves should accept responsibility for a lot of
the bad behavour they bring out in women and vice-versa.
It's a discussion group and to a certain degree, a support
group.
Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because theydisagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ? I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American. Ann

Oh come now! Really? Even in Russia people heard about
the case. It was simply incredible.

regards,
Mark Sobolewski

Mark Sobolewski

08-24-2003, 10:20 AM

In article <thnhkv8namkjq7csjoscfb0t1m157f7h3q@4ax.com>,
Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:
On 24 Aug 2003 14:33:28 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 24 Aug 2003 13:43:03 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:>Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes:>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski>> <mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:>>>>>In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>,>>> Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:>>>>>>> On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)>>>> wrote:>>>>>>>> >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes:>>>> >> Fixed the title.>>>> >>>>>> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good>>>> >> reason>>>>> >>>>> >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing,>>>> >because>>>> >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in>>>> >of itself that.>>>> >>>>> >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of>>>> >it was positive.>>>> >>>>> >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past>>>> >would be a problem for me...>>>> >>>>> >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do...>>>>>>>> So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you?>>>> I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating>>>> all men...>>>>>>>> Ann>>>>>>Actually, Andre was talking not about the woman herself>>>so much as a system that allowed her to get away>>>with treating him poorly.>>>> My question was a genuine one.>>Its nice to be judge, jury, prosecution, and defense, eh ?>>But, when you post to Usenet, you are no longer having a *mono*logue.>>HTH.>>> From what I've read of Andre, which>> are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person.>>" Misogynist: A man who is *winning* an argument with a Feminist. ">Chris Raum.>>> A woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others.>>Lie. Feel free to show where I've done that, say, with Sunny, Deb, or>Jill... They aren't t.r posters." So this is why you hate ALL women. "YOUR claim, toots, not mine. Funny how, when I call your *lying cow****out*, all of a sudden, its " all women *on t.r*. " I was talking about crossposts. If I don't read soc.men how would I see their posts? You don't read for understanding and it shows.Thats what, TWO ? You feel OK making sweeping *ALL* claims based on*that* ?ROTFLMAO ! At you !>> I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very>> odd.>>You should get out more... Why? How would that help?Education. Experience. Social interaction. I've learnt more about people on here than I could ever learn in real life. People just don't present themselves in the same way in real life. Maybe they are less honest. In any case why my saying that I have never come across people like this anywhere else on the net should provoke a response about meeting people in real life is incomprehensible. Not reading for understanding again are you?

USENET is interesting because the way people present themselves
can go two ways:

1) They engage in taxicab confessions (as I tend to do).
I'm not ashamed of anything I've done in my life, but I don't
worry about my presentation as much as I would at a friend's
wedding or at a job interview. The anonymity presents an
opportunity for people to explore issues a bit more deeply
than normal. This is the purpose of group therapy too.

2) Many people on USENET go the other direction and try to
pump up their sagging egos. This is often how they are
in real life: terrified about not fitting in. I regard
these people as never having truly graduated secondary
school. If you want to observe a disproportionate
number of such specimens, go on over to soc.singles.
>>>Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because they>>>disagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ?>>>> I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American.>>So ? Does your brain stop at your border ? It wasn't reported much here and I didn't seek it out." The Case Of The Century ", and you... missed it. LOL. The case wasn't the case of the century anywhere this side of the pond. Not everyone is watching what happens in America all the time because America isn't the centre of the world. We had many more interesting cases happen here including both Sutcliffe and the Wests and more recently, Martin which is still a case to watch.

So you do know about the case. :-) Come on, just because
you were disinterested doesn't mean you don't know anything
about it.
I do tend to be more interested in things that happen in my own country...So do I, but I do pay attention to things outside of it, too... So you know the details of the crimes I mention, without looking them up on the net? <sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American </sarcasm>ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots... Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you American, in the same way as I am British as well as English. Ann>" Ignorance of the topic is no excuse. " We know that's the case with you but some of us prefer to know something about the subject before offering an opinion.<yawn> More *empty and unsupported* claims.See " ad homs "..." If you CAN'T answer a person's arguments, don't worry ! Youcan always call him names ! " Oscar Wilde.You do this a *lot*... Must be your *inability* to deal withdisagreements...Andre

Mark Sobolewski

08-24-2003, 10:42 AM

In article <bi9ha0$o1i$1@freenet9.carleton.ca>,
dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:
Mark Sobolewski (mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com) writes: In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>, Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote: On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote: >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes: >> Fixed the title. >> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason> > >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in >of itself that. > >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of >it was positive. > >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past >would be a problem for me... > >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do... So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you? I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating all men... Ann Actually, Andre was talking not about the woman herself so much as a system that allowed her to get away with treating him poorly. Indeed. But, to misandrists such as Ann, " The personal is political. " So, they cannot grasp the difference between hating an *idelogy*, and hating a birth group, only *some* of whom are members of that ideology, and where members of other birth groups are also members of the ideology.

Interestingly enough, such women also tend to want to
put politics aside when it becomes uncomfortable.
When dating such women, I asked them if they could
help pay for a date and maybe live up to their ideology
if they wanted it to work and they claimed that they
wanted their home life seperate from work.
"They're two different things" they claimed.

One woman then explained to me that the politics should
kick in at her convenience: During dating, the woman's
desire for wealth and good looks should be satiated and
then after marriage, when she's working 40 hours a week,
he should help cook and clean and be a liberated guy
rather than have her live up to traditionalist expectations.
See how that works?

I was so shocked when I first heard these rationalizations
that I couldn't just state the obvious: It appears to me
as if they were selfish materialistic hypocrites
who were likely to become disappointed. Most don't
become "bitter" (at least on the surface) because
society tries to cater to them.

Whining, to a certain degree, is productive which
is precisely why many people cry that it should be stopped
and it annoys them. It disturbs their moral comfort
and eventually, they have to give the whiner what
they want. (This worked wonders on men after all.)
But even if the whiners aren't justfied, at least
people who tell the whiners to shut up and give a good
reason may help the whiner to solve their problem.

If someone gives me good advice, even as they tell me
to quit whining, I'll take it. Gladly. Wouldn't you?
Before the men here quit whining, all the "civil rights"
groups will need to have someone maybe tell them
to shut up too.
Further, they try to claim that *pointing out the evil that some women do commit ", is " woman hating ". That, in of itself, is their own misogyny speaking. Because they want to treat women not as people, some good, some not, but as ideals of angelism, where no woman can be admitted to vary from their totalitarian ideal. The New Soviet Man is dead, and good riddance. Next, the New Soviet Uber-Woman needs to go...

For women who buy into this ideology certainly.
I think what many women want is just the status
quo to remain and for ALL whining to stop.
A "cease fire" as one feminist put it.
Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because they disagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ? Indeed. They weren't pissed at blacks, they were rightly pissed at one person who was also black... Andre

What's amazing is how non-racist both Goldman's and
the Brown's happened to be. The case had a lot of funny
twists and turns including Nicole's sister milking
the publicity behind the case to become an advocate
of battered women. (I guess that beats living in
rehab)

regards,
Mark Sobolewski

Andre Lieven

08-24-2003, 12:03 PM

Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 24 Aug 2003 14:33:28 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 24 Aug 2003 13:43:03 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:>Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes:>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 04:52:53 GMT, Mark Sobolewski>> <mark_sobolewski@yahoo.com> wrote:>>>>>In article <sjnfkvsinbdoa90tbr50k7120khu8ljh0g@4ax.com>,>>> Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:>>>>>>> On 23 Aug 2003 19:53:47 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)>>>> wrote:>>>>>>>> >Sunny (mashyne@worldnet.att.net) writes:>>>> >> Fixed the title.>>>> >>>>>> >> <hi5 to Andre, who has been through a lot of crap for no good reason>>>>> >>>>> >Thank you. I won't say that any of whatI wrote was embarrassing, because>>>> >that would be to say that what people do when they're young(er) is in>>>> >of itself that.>>>> >>>>> >Its a part of life, learning, doing, and finding out that not all of>>>> >it was positive.>>>> >>>>> >Funny tho, that the troll " thought " that bringing up my stated past>>>> >would be a problem for me...>>>> >>>>> >Oh well, some people have nothing better to do...>>>>>>>> So is this why you hate *all* women. Because of what one did to you?>>>> I could tell a story about a man but it hasn't resulted in me hating>>>> all men...>>>>>>>> Ann>>>>>>Actually, Andre was talking not about the woman herself>>>so much as a system that allowed her to get away>>>with treating him poorly.>>>> My question was a genuine one.>>Its nice to be judge, jury, prosecution, and defense, eh ?>>But, when you post to Usenet, you are no longer having a *mono*logue.>>HTH.>>> From what I've read of Andre, which>> are crossposts to t.r, he comes across as a very bitter person.>>" Misogynist: A man who is *winning* an argument with a Feminist. ">Chris Raum.>>> A woman only has to post to be labelled anti-men by him and some others.>>Lie. Feel free to show where I've done that, say, with Sunny, Deb, or>Jill... They aren't t.r posters." So this is why you hate ALL women. "YOUR claim, toots, not mine. Funny how, when I call your *lying cow****out*, all of a sudden, its " all women *on t.r*. " I was talking about crossposts. If I don't read soc.men how would I see their posts? You don't read for understanding and it shows.

Non sequitur. No writer is able to blame their readers for the
*writer's failure to say what they intended*...
Thats what, TWO ? You feel OK making sweeping *ALL* claims based on*that* ?ROTFLMAO ! At you !>> I've never come across that anywhere else on the net and it's very>> odd.>>You should get out more... Why? How would that help?Education. Experience. Social interaction. I've learnt more about people on here than I could ever learn in real life.

LOL. That only suggests that you learned very little in Real Life...
People just don't present themselves in the same way in real life.

Indeed. In real life, people can show, and see, more depth.
Maybe they are less honest. In any case why my saying that I have never come across people like this anywhere else on the net should provoke a response about meeting people in real life is incomprehensible.

.... To *you*...
Not reading for understanding again are you?

No, thats you, by virtue of your *inability* to graps Real Life...
>>>Was Nichole Simpson's parents racist because they>>>disagreed with the not-guilty verdict for OJ?>>>> I don't know anything about the case. I'm not American.>>So ? Does your brain stop at your border ? It wasn't reported much here and I didn't seek it out." The Case Of The Century ", and you... missed it. LOL. The case wasn't the case of the century anywhere this side of the pond.

Interesting, given that I've seen not a little European commentary
on it...
Not everyone is watching what happens in America all the time because America isn't the centre of the world. We had many more interesting cases happen here including both Sutcliffe and the Wests and more recently, Martin which is still a case to watch.

These days, I rarely follow criminal cases. The whole Kobe cross
posted stuff, isn't of interest to me, either.
I do tend to be more interested in things that happen in my own country...So do I, but I do pay attention to things outside of it, too... So you know the details of the crimes I mention, without looking them up on the net?

Ibid.
<sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American </sarcasm>ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots... Canada is a part of North America I believe.

Quite distinctly so...
That makes you American, in the same way as I am British as well as English.

Many foolish and ignorant of Canada people say things like that...
Ann>" Ignorance of the topic is no excuse. " We know that's the case with you but some of us prefer to know something about the subject before offering an opinion.<yawn> More *empty and unsupported* claims.See " ad homs "..." If you CAN'T answer a person's arguments, don't worry ! Youcan always call him names ! " Oscar Wilde.You do this a *lot*... Must be your *inability* to deal withdisagreements...

Indeed.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

John James

08-24-2003, 01:03 PM

"Ann" <ann@nochance.net> wrote in message
news:thnhkv8namkjq7csjoscfb0t1m157f7h3q@4ax.com... Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you American, in the same way as I am British as well as English. Ann

Not really, no. It makes him 'American' in the same way that an Irishman is
an inhabitant of the 'British Isles', rather than 'British'. You are
'British' as well as 'English' because of the Act Of Union - that is
politically, not geographically. Inhabitants of the Falkland Isles are
'British' (at the moment), but they're not part of the British Isles.
Likewise, Hawaiian Islanders are US citizens, but they're not 'American' in
the sense of being part of the American continent.

John James (JJ)

John James

08-24-2003, 01:13 PM

"Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:bib2ut$o3j$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... Rauni (LadyWolf@newsguy.com) writes:
[...] Damn, don't you know how to click on the message ID I provided in the quote and it will take your directly to the post in question. Or maybe you need to learn how to use goggle. Which is why I provided the message ID. So one could find the post simply and easily. Except for people using text based newsreaders, which *cannot* web...

If you use a text-based newsreader like Tin and don't know how to look up
message IDs, then you are a buffoon. HTH.
Oh wait you don't want your presumptions confused by the facts. I provided what was needed to retrieve your post easily. I will assume that you learned about looking up things when you got your degree? No, I'll leave that to you, with your ASSumptions about other people's newsreaders...

*Puhleeze*, Andre - do not persist in the 'it makes an *** out of you and
me' cliche. I know you're struggling while waiting for the humour implant,
and it's the only joke you know, but trust me - we've all *heard* it
millions of times, and it's *not* funny.

John James (JJ)

Andre Lieven

08-24-2003, 02:14 PM

"John James" (not@all.co.uk) writes: "Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:bib2ut$o3j$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... Rauni (LadyWolf@newsguy.com) writes: [...] Damn, don't you know how to click on the message ID I provided in the quote and it will take your directly to the post in question. Or maybe you need to learn how to use goggle. Which is why I provided the message ID. So one could find the post simply and easily. Except for people using text based newsreaders, which *cannot* web... If you use a text-based newsreader like Tin and don't know how to look up message IDs,

The program won't do that, as it's *not* web based... Duh.
then you are a buffoon. HTH.

LOL. So, that I don't choose to use *toys* you deem " fit ", that
gives you cause to slag ad homs about ?

Vot praklitiy kretina kusock.
Oh wait you don't want your presumptions confused by the facts. I provided what was needed to retrieve your post easily. I will assume that you learned about looking up things when you got your degree? No, I'll leave that to you, with your ASSumptions about other people's newsreaders... *Puhleeze*, Andre - do not persist in the 'it makes an *** out of you and me' cliche. I know you're struggling while waiting for the humour implant, and it's the only joke you know, but trust me - we've all *heard* it millions of times, and it's *not* funny.

Tough. Deal with it, oh net cop wannabe self centered pompous twat.

That was clear enough, I'd say.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Ann

08-24-2003, 02:30 PM

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 21:03:22 +0100, "John James" <not@all.co.uk>
wrote:
"Ann" <ann@nochance.net> wrote in messagenews:thnhkv8namkjq7csjoscfb0t1m157f7h3q@4ax .com... Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you American, in the same way as I am British as well as English. AnnNot really, no. It makes him 'American' in the same way that an Irishman isan inhabitant of the 'British Isles', rather than 'British'. You are'British' as well as 'English' because of the Act Of Union - that ispolitically, not geographically. Inhabitants of the Falkland Isles are'British' (at the moment), but they're not part of the British Isles.Likewise, Hawaiian Islanders are US citizens, but they're not 'American' inthe sense of being part of the American continent.

It wound him up though...

Ann

08-24-2003, 09:22 PM

Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:Andre Lieven wrote:Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: Andre Lieven wrote:
<sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American </sarcasm>ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots... Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you American, in the same way as I am British as well as English.

Very, VERY poor analogy. England is at the centre of the British
Commonwealth. If I am not mistaken, Canada is still a member of the
British Commonwealth, with the Queen as their statutory head of state.
The USA isn't a part of the commonwealth, and ever since 1776,
British royalty has held NO place in the US government, ceremonially
or otherwise.

Equating Canadians with Americans (the common term for US residents)
because they're on the same continent is about as accurate as claiming
that French and English cultures are homogenous because they happen to
share the same tectonic plate.

Learn something about geography and history, then try again.

TR II

Rauni

08-25-2003, 07:17 AM

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 21:13:03 +0100, "John James" <not@all.co.uk>
wrote:
"Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in messagenews:bib2ut$o3j$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... Rauni (LadyWolf@newsguy.com) writes:[...] Damn, don't you know how to click on the message ID I provided in the quote and it will take your directly to the post in question. Or maybe you need to learn how to use goggle. Which is why I provided the message ID. So one could find the post simply and easily. Except for people using text based newsreaders, which *cannot* web...If you use a text-based newsreader like Tin and don't know how to look upmessage IDs, then you are a buffoon. HTH. Oh wait you don't want your presumptions confused by the facts. I provided what was needed to retrieve your post easily. I will assume that you learned about looking up things when you got your degree? No, I'll leave that to you, with your ASSumptions about other people's newsreaders...*Puhleeze*, Andre - do not persist in the 'it makes an *** out of you andme' cliche. I know you're struggling while waiting for the humour implant,and it's the only joke you know, but trust me - we've all *heard* itmillions of times, and it's *not* funny.John James (JJ)
And I used a text based news reader as well. In fact most news readers
will let one click the message ID and if it is still on your hard
drive or still in the feed on should be able to bring it up.

Since I have used several news readers I know that this is a pretty
standard feature. Even if you are reading the newsgroup from a web
page there is usually a feature to do a search by message ID. That is
the reason I included it.
Sounds like Andre doesn't know how to do a google message id search
either
Or doesn't wanted to be bothered

08-25-2003, 08:17 AM

"John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote: "TR" <the_rev_mre@hotmail.com> wrote: Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:Andre Lieven wrote: >Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: >> Andre Lieven wrote: > >ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots... Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you American, in the same way as I am British as well as English. Very, VERY poor analogy. England is at the centre of the British Commonwealth. If I am not mistaken, Canada is still a member of the British Commonwealth, with the Queen as their statutory head of state. The USA isn't a part of the commonwealth, and ever since 1776, British royalty has held NO place in the US government, ceremonially or otherwise. And being 'American' as in part of 'The Americas' has *nothing* to do with history, politics, government, culture or anything else other than geography. It is very common for Latin Americans to correct US citizens who call themselves 'Americans' by pointing out, quite correctly, that so are they.

1. You don't get out much. It is, in fact, very UNcommon for Latin
Americans (particularly) or even Canadians to "correct" a US citizen
who uses the term "American" for his nationality. Even you poms use
the term "American" to refer specifically to citizens of the USA, as
does the rest of the world. The reason lies in the awkward name of
that country.

"USian", "Unitedstatesian" or "Unitedstatesofamericanian" just doesn't
work. As well, there is no other country in North or South America
that calls itself "the ___ States of America", as in the Mexican
States of America (a country that actually has individual states).
The citizens of these countries refer to themselves (in English) as
Mexican, Salvadoran, Guatemalan and even Canadian.

2. Want a convenient example? You'll notice that Mr. Lieven
introduced himself thus: "I'm *Canadian*, toots...". He didn't write
"I'm an *American* from Canada, toots...".

Back to the name: If the USA ever holds a constitutional convention,
perhaps the delegates will consider changing the name of the country
to something more euphonious, maybe "The United States of Glitz". The
citizens could then call themselves "Glitzians" and reduce some of the
the aggravation the term "American" causes to the culturally
constipated, such as yourself. Be sure to send them a reminder when
the convention is announced, eh?
Equating Canadians with Americans (the common term for US residents) because they're on the same continent is about as accurate as claiming that French and English cultures are homogenous because they happen to share the same tectonic plate. No,. it *isn't*.

My, how forceful!
It is precisely the same as claiming French and English inhabitants are 'European', since both live on the continent of Europe. Once again, it has *nothing* to do with culture - both the French and English happily (well some more than others) accept the nomenclature 'European'.

Once again, you really don't get out much, do you? When you find a
significant number of people who seriously refer to themselves as
North Americans, as opposed to using the name of their own country,
then you might have the beginnings of an argument. Meanwhile, these
people will carry on refering to themselves as Panamanian, Costa Rican
and so on (or the proper term in their own language), whether or not
it suits your delicate sensibilities.
Learn something about geography and history, then try again. I suggest you do the same.

Learned. And much more extensively than you, obviously.
It might teach you to check your facts before you butt in to a thread in future.

Well, I'll butt into threads whenever I please, and I'll continue
doing it with the facts already sorted out.

I suggest you work on that pommie pretentiousness a bit more. I
commend you for today's demonstration, but you really need to put a
bit more character into it.
John James (JJ)

TR II

Andre Lieven

08-25-2003, 08:28 AM

TR (the_rev_mre@hotmail.com) writes: "John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote: "TR" <the_rev_mre@hotmail.com> wrote: Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote: >Andre Lieven wrote: > >Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: > >> Andre Lieven wrote: > > > >ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots... > > Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you > American, in the same way as I am British as well as English. Very, VERY poor analogy. England is at the centre of the British Commonwealth. If I am not mistaken, Canada is still a member of the British Commonwealth, with the Queen as their statutory head of state. The USA isn't a part of the commonwealth, and ever since 1776, British royalty has held NO place in the US government, ceremonially or otherwise. And being 'American' as in part of 'The Americas' has *nothing* to do with history, politics, government, culture or anything else other than geography. It is very common for Latin Americans to correct US citizens who call themselves 'Americans' by pointing out, quite correctly, that so are they. 1. You don't get out much. It is, in fact, very UNcommon for Latin Americans (particularly) or even Canadians to "correct" a US citizen who uses the term "American" for his nationality.

Indeed. It wasn't until I saw a partly whimsical term on an sf group
on Usenet, that I even considered the possibility of another
descriptive terms for people of the USA to exist.

That term, BTW, was " USian ". <g>
Even you poms use the term "American" to refer specifically to citizens of the USA, as does the rest of the world. The reason lies in the awkward name of that country.

Indeed.
"USian", "Unitedstatesian" or "Unitedstatesofamericanian" just doesn't work. As well, there is no other country in North or South America that calls itself "the ___ States of America", as in the Mexican States of America (a country that actually has individual states). The citizens of these countries refer to themselves (in English) as Mexican, Salvadoran, Guatemalan and even Canadian.

Exactly.
2. Want a convenient example? You'll notice that Mr. Lieven introduced himself thus: "I'm *Canadian*, toots...". He didn't write "I'm an *American* from Canada, toots...".

Quite. While Peter Gzowski, a radio interviewer and writer of
well earned renown here in Canada, did make the point about
Canadians being the *other definition* of Americans, as in North
Americans, he also acknowledged that this was an arcane point.
Back to the name: If the USA ever holds a constitutional convention, perhaps the delegates will consider changing the name of the country to something more euphonious, maybe "The United States of Glitz". The citizens could then call themselves "Glitzians" and reduce some of the the aggravation the term "American" causes to the culturally constipated, such as yourself. Be sure to send them a reminder when the convention is announced, eh?

LOL.
Equating Canadians with Americans (the common term for US residents) because they're on the same continent is about as accurate as claiming that French and English cultures are homogenous because they happen to share the same tectonic plate. No,. it *isn't*. My, how forceful!

" This isn't an argument, its just contradiction ! "
It is precisely the same as claiming French and English inhabitants are 'European', since both live on the continent of Europe. Once again, it has *nothing* to do with culture - both the French and English happily (well some more than others) accept the nomenclature 'European'. Once again, you really don't get out much, do you? When you find a significant number of people who seriously refer to themselves as North Americans, as opposed to using the name of their own country, then you might have the beginnings of an argument. Meanwhile, these people will carry on refering to themselves as Panamanian, Costa Rican and so on (or the proper term in their own language), whether or not it suits your delicate sensibilities.

Exactly. I do appreciate the irony of a European *telling North
Americans*, and residents of the whole continent of " America ",
how they ought to view their continental identities, *because
thats how Europeans do it*...
Learn something about geography and history, then try again. I suggest you do the same. Learned. And much more extensively than you, obviously.

Indeed.
It might teach you to check your facts before you butt in to a thread in future.

More netcoppism... <yawn>
Well, I'll butt into threads whenever I please, and I'll continue doing it with the facts already sorted out.

Kewl. Free speech is a good thing.
I suggest you work on that pommie pretentiousness a bit more. I commend you for today's demonstration, but you really need to put a bit more character into it.

Quite, eh ? <g>

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Andre Lieven

08-25-2003, 08:45 AM

Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 24 Aug 2003 21:22:09 -0700, the_rev_mre@hotmail.com (TR) wrote:Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:Andre Lieven wrote: >Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: >> Andre Lieven wrote: >> <sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American >> </sarcasm> > >ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots... Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you American, in the same way as I am British as well as English.Very, VERY poor analogy. England is at the centre of the BritishCommonwealth. If I am not mistaken, Canada is still a member of theBritish Commonwealth, with the Queen as their statutory head of state. The USA isn't a part of the commonwealth, and ever since 1776,British royalty has held NO place in the US government, ceremoniallyor otherwise.Equating Canadians with Americans (the common term for US residents)because they're on the same continent is about as accurate as claimingthat French and English cultures are homogenous because they happen toshare the same tectonic plate.Learn something about geography and history, then try again. Read the rest of the thread before commenting... It was a wind up.

AKA " troll "....
I didn't know he was Canadian to start with, I assumed he was American as are most who think that the States are the centre of the world and everyone else should know what's going on there.

So, your ASSumption shows *that you are a believer in that view of
the US being at the centre of the world*...

LOL. Hoist on your own Euro-centric petard...
I expect you're another one!

..... Can't. Wait. To. See. Respose. To. This...

<laughs>

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Ann

08-25-2003, 08:55 AM

On 25 Aug 2003 15:45:48 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
wrote:
Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 24 Aug 2003 21:22:09 -0700, the_rev_mre@hotmail.com (TR) wrote:Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:>Andre Lieven wrote:> >Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes:> >> Andre Lieven wrote:> >> <sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American> >> </sarcasm>> >> >ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots...>> Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you> American, in the same way as I am British as well as English.Very, VERY poor analogy. England is at the centre of the BritishCommonwealth. If I am not mistaken, Canada is still a member of theBritish Commonwealth, with the Queen as their statutory head of state. The USA isn't a part of the commonwealth, and ever since 1776,British royalty has held NO place in the US government, ceremoniallyor otherwise.Equating Canadians with Americans (the common term for US residents)because they're on the same continent is about as accurate as claimingthat French and English cultures are homogenous because they happen toshare the same tectonic plate.Learn something about geography and history, then try again. Read the rest of the thread before commenting... It was a wind up.AKA " troll ".... I didn't know he was Canadian to start with, I assumed he was American as are most who think that the States are the centre of the world and everyone else should know what's going on there.So, your ASSumption shows *that you are a believer in that view ofthe US being at the centre of the world*...

It's spelt arse not ***, Andre. But in any case my assumption was
that you believe that the US is the centre of the world even though
you are Canadian. Jesus, Andre, you can't even understand an insult
when it's written in plain English. What are we going to do with you?

Ann
LOL. Hoist on your own Euro-centric petard... I expect you're another one!.... Can't. Wait. To. See. Respose. To. This...<laughs>Andre

Andre Lieven

08-25-2003, 09:00 AM

Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 25 Aug 2003 15:45:48 GMT, dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes: On 24 Aug 2003 21:22:09 -0700, the_rev_mre@hotmail.com (TR) wrote:>Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:>>Andre Lieven wrote:>> >Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes:>> >> Andre Lieven wrote:>>> >> <sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American>> >> </sarcasm>>> >>> >ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots...>>>> Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you>> American, in the same way as I am British as well as English.>>Very, VERY poor analogy. England is at the centre of the British>Commonwealth. If I am not mistaken, Canada is still a member of the>British Commonwealth, with the Queen as their statutory head of state.> The USA isn't a part of the commonwealth, and ever since 1776,>British royalty has held NO place in the US government, ceremonially>or otherwise.>>Equating Canadians with Americans (the common term for US residents)>because they're on the same continent is about as accurate as claiming>that French and English cultures are homogenous because they happen to>share the same tectonic plate.>>Learn something about geography and history, then try again. Read the rest of the thread before commenting... It was a wind up.AKA " troll ".... I didn't know he was Canadian to start with, I assumed he was American as are most who think that the States are the centre of the world and everyone else should know what's going on there.So, your ASSumption shows *that you are a believer in that view ofthe US being at the centre of the world*... It's spelt arse not ***, Andre.

Not to Canadians, so I'll spell the way that my compatriots in
my home and native land do, and you can shove your Euro-centrism
in the same place as the " USA roooles " crown can shove their
similar *jingoism*.
But in any case my assumption was that you believe that the US is the centre of the world even though you are Canadian.

Non sequitur. That the US is the largest power, especially in such
things as media presence, *and* its right next door to us Canadians,
well, we ought to pay it *some* attention...

Rather than just turn up our totted noses at it...
Jesus, Andre, you can't even understand an insult when it's written in plain English.

Non sequitur. Your *inability* to write is your problem.
What are we going to do with you?

The only person who gets that decision is... me. You get NO say.
But, your delusions of grandeur and *adequecy* noted...

Deal with it.
AnnLOL. Hoist on your own Euro-centric petard... I expect you're another one!.... Can't. Wait. To. See. Respose. To. This...

<laughs>

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

John Jones

08-25-2003, 09:27 AM

TR wrote: "John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote: "TR" <the_rev_mre@hotmail.com> wrote: Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:> Andre Lieven wrote:>> Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes:>>> Andre Lieven wrote:>>>> ROTFLMAO ! I'm *Canadian*, toots...>> Canada is a part of North America I believe. That makes you> American, in the same way as I am British as well as
English. Very, VERY poor analogy. England is at the centre of the
British Commonwealth. If I am not mistaken, Canada is still a member
of the British Commonwealth, with the Queen as their statutory head
of state. The USA isn't a part of the commonwealth, and ever
since 1776, British royalty has held NO place in the US government,
ceremonially or otherwise. And being 'American' as in part of 'The Americas' has
*nothing* to do with history, politics, government, culture or anything
else other than geography. It is very common for Latin Americans to correct US citizens who call themselves 'Americans' by
pointing out, quite correctly, that so are they. 1. You don't get out much. It is, in fact, very UNcommon for
Latin Americans (particularly) or even Canadians to "correct" a US
citizen who uses the term "American" for his nationality. Even you
poms use the term "American" to refer specifically to citizens of the
USA, as does the rest of the world. The reason lies in the awkward
name of that country.

Also, IMO, due the the fact that the USA is the only country in
the world with the word "America" in it's official name.
"USian", "Unitedstatesian" or "Unitedstatesofamericanian" just
doesn't work. As well, there is no other country in North or South
America that calls itself "the ___ States of America", as in the
Mexican States of America (a country that actually has individual
states). The citizens of these countries refer to themselves (in
English) as Mexican, Salvadoran, Guatemalan and even Canadian.

IIRC, Mexico's official name is the United States Of Mexico.

[...]

John James

08-25-2003, 02:36 PM

"Andre Lieven" <dg411@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:bidv2n$nf8$1@freenet9.carleton.ca...
[...]

Andre Lieven wrote:
" OK. The states on the British Isles are *all under one government*.
IE- The United Kingdom."

And the truth (in plain contradiction of the above, and confirmation of my
statements), as I posted:
http://www.know-britain.com/general/great_britain.html

John James (JJ)

Sir Jessy of Anti

08-25-2003, 08:36 PM

"TR" <trell133a@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35908791fa60d1cb497d31d12bb158ae@news.teranew s.com...
.. No worries. I'm well known for being charitable to the intellectually challenged.

LOL! That you are TR. :-)

_TR_

08-25-2003, 09:36 PM

"John Jones" <enuffspam@nothanks.invalid> wrote: Pardon the top post, but this *spanking* of John James should be both reiterated and uninterrupted. Tip of the hat to The Reverend Ellis ...

Mighty kind words, Mr. Jones. Thanks. But I must admit, it wasn't much
of a chore. This little guy just gets SOOOOOOOOO vexed! ;)

<snicker>

Indeed.

TR II

TR wrote: "John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote: "TR" <the_rev_mre@hotmail.com> wrote:> "John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote:>> "TR" <the_rev_mre@hotmail.com> wrote:>>> Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote:>>>> Andre Lieven wrote:>>>>> Ann (ann@nochance.net) writes:>>>>>> Andre Lieven wrote:

08-26-2003, 06:36 AM

"Sir Jessy of Anti" <evilincorporated@yahoo.com> wrote: "TR" <trell133a@hotmail.com> wrote: . No worries. I'm well known for being charitable to the intellectually challenged. LOL! That you are TR. :-)

You noticed, mate!
Well, at least I have ONE claim to fame. ;)

TR II

08-26-2003, 08:30 AM

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 00:01:39 +0000, TR wrote:
"John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote:
That in itself is enough to discredit your claim. Your personal experiences are so limitted that you actually believe that "Latin Americans correct US folks about the use of the term American". Doesn't happen, lad. Canadians sometimes do it as light humour, but Latin Americans are too proud of their own countries to wish to be confused with gringos.

Only Gringos?

Hell, they get offended if you call someone from Mexico a Peruvian, or
call a Brazilian a Costa Rican. They like their specific country lable and
dont like to be generalized.

John James (JJ) <spanked> by: TR II

~wd

_TR_

08-26-2003, 09:15 AM

"wd" <root@localhost.localdomain> wrote:TR wrote:"John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote: That in itself is enough to discredit your claim. Your personal experiences are so limitted that you actually believe that "Latin Americans correct US folks about the use of the term American". Doesn't happen, lad. Canadians sometimes do it as light humour, but Latin Americans are too proud of their own countries to wish to be confused with gringos. Only Gringos? Hell, they get offended if you call someone from Mexico a Peruvian, or call a Brazilian a Costa Rican. They like their specific country lable and dont like to be generalized.

Indeed. In fact, the term "Mexican American" means ... what? Wye, a
citizen of the USA who has Mexican heritage, NOT a Mexican who lives in
North America (redundant).

This little guy isn't so bright, is he? John James (JJ) <spanked> by: TR II ~wd

TR II

Sir Jessy of Anti

08-26-2003, 09:59 AM

"TR" <the_rev_mre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ad6fb6cd.0308260536.71ed8f0a@posting.google.c om... "Sir Jessy of Anti" <evilincorporated@yahoo.com> wrote: "TR" <trell133a@hotmail.com> wrote: . No worries. I'm well known for being charitable to the intellectually challenged. LOL! That you are TR. :-) You noticed, mate! Well, at least I have ONE claim to fame. ;)

Oh, you've more than one mate. Anyways, it's nice to see The Rev preachin'
to the ignorant masses once again.

Welcome back.
TR II

_TR_

08-27-2003, 04:50 AM

"John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote: "TR" <trell133a@hotmail.com> wrote:
Fee, fie, fo fum - I smell the blood of a sockman with no arguments... ;-).

The white flag of victory. Your ancestors were French, were they?
It was a funny old rant though, mate - you do get yourself worked up, dontcha? You could have saved some time and just wrote 'guess the news, I lose...' See ya.

Of course you will, when you've recovered from this tantrum and can face
another stinging lesson in English usage and reasoning ability.

Until then, you can work up an answer to the probing question you
repeatedly flee:

Why should any thinking person should bother to learn the geopolitical
minutuae of the Twitish Empire?

When you discover the serious answer, peasant, you will have evolved
from intellectual feudalism, however imperceptibly.
John James (JJ)

TR II

Sharon B

08-31-2003, 04:02 AM

On 25 Aug 2003 07:16:46 -0700, the_rev_mre@hotmail.com (TR) wrote in
<ad6fb6cd.0308250616.613e369b@posting.google.com>:
Love it or hate it, the USA is the most dynamic nation on the planettoday. Britain certainly is not. Vastly more people know what'sgoing on in the USA than they know (or care) about what's going in inBritain. Deal with it.

Actually (and this most definitely does not apply to Ann), I wish
they'd take half as much interest in their own backyard as they do in
ours. I find it annoying the way some non-Americans feel they have a
right to insert their busybody noses into what are strictly internal
American affairs. They need a healthy kick in the pants and a strong
dose of Mind Your Own Business and Keep Your Nose Out of Ours.

again....I am referring to non-American posters in ngs outside of
soc.men and talk.rape.....except for Andre and his interest in
American jurisprudence and plot to eliminate child support by
overturning Roe v Wade (how that would impact Canadian child support
laws, even if he /could/ change the ruling still boggles my mind).

Sharon B

08-31-2003, 04:05 AM

On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:17:08 +0100, "John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote
in <3f49e223$0$23215$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>:
And being 'American' as in part of 'The Americas' has *nothing* to do withhistory, politics, government, culture or anything else other thangeography. It is very common for Latin Americans to correct US citizens whocall themselves 'Americans' by pointing out, quite correctly, that so arethey.

I have no idea who started the American=US Citizen, but nonetheless,
it /is/ commonly understood throughout the world that American refers
specifically to US citizens.....unless one prefaces it with "South" or
"Central" or sometimes, "North".

Rauni

08-31-2003, 06:52 AM

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 11:40:21 +0100, Ann <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 06:34:28 -0400, Sharon B <sharon@lart.com> wrote:On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 15:18:21 +0100, Ann <ann@nochance.net> wrote in<lthhkv46nmr3e41t2q3st7m1sagqsfstfn@4ax.com>:It wasn't reported much here and I didn't seek it out. I do tend tobe more interested in things that happen in my own country...<sarcasm>of course that's a charge we would never level at an American</sarcasm>Andre isn't American....and you would be STUNNED at the number of folkwho take an unhealthy (IMHO) interest in our internal affairs.ROFL... let's not start again. We know what nationality he is, evenif he doesn't ;-)Ann

Andre needs a SciFi show to tell him what planet he lives on.

"It is hard to free fools from chains they revere."-Voltaire

09-01-2003, 12:25 AM

"John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote: "Sharon B" <sharon@lart.com> wrote:
I have no idea who started the American=US Citizen, but nonetheless, it /is/ commonly understood throughout the world that American refers specifically to US citizens.....unless one prefaces it with "South" or "Central" or sometimes, "North". I think this thread has been done to death frankly, and I have no desire to resurrect it again -

Your alleged thoughts and forlorn desires duly noted and dismissed.
the arguments are available to the curious, whoever *they* may be. For the record, I am well aware of what is 'commonly understood'. Words do not have *one* meaning however - the point I was trying to make.

You weren't trying to make a point. You only indulged your
pompousness and ended up with it smeared all over you.
I also gave clear references to support my statements -

No. To state it more accurately, you provided disingenuous excuses
and appeals to obsolete usage that only highlighted the pointlessness
of your claims.
unlike Andre The Wolfman, who said black was white, and then slunk away when I posted the colour chart; and the idiot TR (the self-styled Rev),

"Self-styled" indeed! Finally, you got something *almost* right.
With more than enough justification I am physically, spiritually and
intellectually free to choose my own style, lad, and need no support
from hive-minded wannabe intellectuals like you.
who seems to believe that streams of contentless ad homs are a substitute for an argument.

Wienerettes such as yourself are what makes Usenet the wonderful
virtual absurdity it is. You try and try to be clever with your
quips, but as soon as someone does it better than you, you raise the
white flag of victory and huff away whining about your opponent's
usage of them nasty ol' "ad homs". But don't worry, lad. This
exchange shouldn't stop you from trying, even if there will ALWAYS be
someone here much more humourous and thoughtful than you.
Whatever, life is too short to educate the wilfully ignorant.

You can stop that RIGHT NOW! I made NO suggestions that you kill
yourself just because your education was ineffective. Really, you
should try to survive, if for no other reason than to provide a living
shrine to failure.

TR II

Archmedes

09-01-2003, 02:07 AM

On 1 Sep 2003 00:25:01 -0700, the_rev_mre@hotmail.com (TR) wrote:
Wienerettes such as yourself are what makes Usenet the wonderfulvirtual absurdity it is. You try and try to be clever with yourquips, but as soon as someone does it better than you, you raise thewhite flag of victory and huff away whining about your opponent'susage of them nasty ol' "ad homs". But don't worry, lad. Thisexchange shouldn't stop you from trying, even if there will ALWAYS besomeone here much more humourous and thoughtful than you.

Humorous.. you? Delusional I'd say.

Ann

John James

09-01-2003, 02:41 AM

"Ann" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:f036lvgvv935b5roje0mihe88nuj9tbc8u@4ax.com... On 1 Sep 2003 00:25:01 -0700, the_rev_mre@hotmail.com (TR) wrote:Wienerettes such as yourself are what makes Usenet the wonderfulvirtual absurdity it is. You try and try to be clever with yourquips, but as soon as someone does it better than you, you raise thewhite flag of victory and huff away whining about your opponent'susage of them nasty ol' "ad homs". But don't worry, lad. Thisexchange shouldn't stop you from trying, even if there will ALWAYS besomeone here much more humourous and thoughtful than you. Humorous.. you? Delusional I'd say. Ann

I must be missing the hidden bon mots of this latterday Oscar Wilde - could
somone point them out? I've never seen anyone expend quite so much effort
though following me around to tell me how unfunny I am, through the medium
of second-rate flames. I guess being exposed as wrong really gets to some
folk. It's quite amusing in a 'ho-hum' sort of a way.

John James (JJ)
Have I kill-filed him yet...;-)? Maybe, maybe not. Keep watching for another
thrill-packed instalment...<yawn>

_TR_

09-01-2003, 09:02 AM

"John James" <not@all.co.uk> wrote: "Ann" <me@privacy.net> wrote: TR wrote:Wienerettes such as yourself are what makes Usenet the wonderfulvirtual absurdity it is. You try and try to be clever with yourquips, but as soon as someone does it better than you, you raise thewhite flag of victory and huff away whining about your opponent'susage of them nasty ol' "ad homs". But don't worry, lad. Thisexchange shouldn't stop you from trying, even if there will ALWAYSbe someone here much more humourous and thoughtful than you. Humorous.. you? Delusional I'd say. Ann I must be missing the hidden bon mots of this latterday Oscar Wilde -

I have no interest for or connection with Oscar Wilde. He's all yours.
could somone point them out? I've never seen anyone expend quite so much effort though following me around to tell me how unfunny I am,

Not "tell", lad. Remind! You know this already, which is why you try
so hard to obscure your lack of wit with unremitting prattle.
through the medium of second-rate flames.

Hmm. If "second-rate flames" are all it takes to send you into these
fits of pique, then you REALLY should get out a bit more.
I guess being exposed as wrong really gets to some folk.
It's quite amusing in a 'ho-hum' sort of a way. John James (JJ) Have I kill-filed him yet...;-)? Maybe, maybe not.

Maybe? I spite of your previuos "plonk", you never did. Instead, you
just threw a little pommie tantrum and promptly found that you couldn't
control yourself enough to follow through with your empty "threat".
Keep watching for another thrill-packed instalment...<yawn>

You meant to write "... more of the same from a whinging pom".
<chuckle>

Run along, lad, before you humiliate yourself even more.

TR II