Stay out of my mailbox. If you have something to say in reply to a
Usenet post from me, say it on Usenet.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

Totally a mistake! Nothing else!

"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote in message
...
Stay out of my mailbox. If you have something to say in reply to a
Usenet post from me, say it on Usenet.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J.
Furr

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
If you have something to say in reply to a
Usenet post from me, say it on Usenet.

Isn't what follows the corollary to the above? - If you have something to
say in reply to an e-mail from someone, say it in an e-mail to that person.

I usually avoid meaningless threads like this. However,read KevinS's
initial post. I am not to respond to his mailbox. I felt the need to
respond, and this is the only means of doing so.
Cheers to all, and sorry for the O.T.
Kent

Anon wrote:

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
If you have something to say in reply to a
Usenet post from me, say it on Usenet.

Isn't what follows the corollary to the above? - If you have something to
say in reply to an e-mail from someone, say it in an e-mail to that person.

Kent,

Been there, done that. He's a trolling a-hole. Once he receives an email (to
likely save him some embarrassment in the group) he posts this crap.

He allegedly reported me to my ISP but they are aware of these idiots and don't
waste their time on them.

Regards,
Dan


Kent H. wrote:

I usually avoid meaningless threads like this. However,read KevinS's
initial post. I am not to respond to his mailbox. I felt the need to
respond, and this is the only means of doing so.
Cheers to all, and sorry for the O.T.
Kent

Anon wrote:

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:

If you have something to say in reply to a
Usenet post from me, say it on Usenet.

Isn't what follows the corollary to the above? - If you have something to
say in reply to an e-mail from someone, say it in an e-mail to that person.

He sets his own rules. Don't bother....

Anon wrote:

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:

If you have something to say in reply to a
Usenet post from me, say it on Usenet.


Isn't what follows the corollary to the above? - If you have something to
say in reply to an e-mail from someone, say it in an e-mail to that person.

"Kent H." wrote in message ...
I usually avoid meaningless threads like this. However,read KevinS's
initial post. I am not to respond to his mailbox. I felt the need to
respond, and this is the only means of doing so.
Cheers to all, and sorry for the O.T.
Kent

Kevin has a tendency to file lawsuits, so be careful.

-- Yip

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 08:59:01 -0500, "Anon"
wrote:

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
If you have something to say in reply to a
Usenet post from me, say it on Usenet.

Isn't what follows the corollary to the above? - If you have something to
say in reply to an e-mail from someone, say it in an e-mail to that person.

You didn't think very long about this, did you? I don't want e-mail
from Kent. Why would I expect my e-mail to him would be any more
welcome?

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:33:04 GMT, Dan Krueger
wrote:

Kent,

Been there, done that. He's a trolling a-hole. Once he receives an email (to
likely save him some embarrassment in the group) he posts this crap.

I get frequently get e-mail from people on AFB. The first e-mail I
received from you consisted of two letters: "FU."

Are you still wondering why I might welcome e-mail from some people,
but not from you? If so, you aren't particularly bright.

He allegedly reported me to my ISP but they are aware of these idiots and don't
waste their time on them.

When you continued to e-mail me, you violated your ISP's AUP. I asked
them to enforce that policy. And I now notice you no longer dump your
garbage in my mailbox. Hmmm.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

On 8 Oct 2004 18:48:56 -0700, (Yip Yap) wrote:

"Kent H." wrote in message ...
I usually avoid meaningless threads like this. However,read KevinS's
initial post. I am not to respond to his mailbox. I felt the need to
respond, and this is the only means of doing so.
Cheers to all, and sorry for the O.T.
Kent

Kevin has a tendency to file lawsuits, so be careful.

Against spammers, putz. But you knew that already, didn't you? Funny
that you didn't mention it.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

You didn't think very long about this, did you? I don't want e-mail
from Kent. Why would I expect my e-mail to him would be any more
welcome?

Why did you think we all wanted to see your message to him?

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:28:04 GMT, "Kevin" wrote:


You didn't think very long about this, did you? I don't want e-mail
from Kent. Why would I expect my e-mail to him would be any more
welcome?

Why did you think we all wanted to see your message to him?

Someone holding a gun to your head, forcing you to read every message
posted to AFB? Including ones clearly addressed to an individual?

BTW, I expect consistency out of you, son. The next time someone posts
a "PING: Joe Bleaux" message, I expect you to be all over them like
ugly on a cheap suit. Don't disappoint me.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

Kevin wrote:
You didn't think very long about this, did you? I don't want e-mail
from Kent. Why would I expect my e-mail to him would be any more
welcome?

Why did you think we all wanted to see your message to him?

KevinS doesn't care. This is his private playground that he uses to bitch and
chide others that don't play by his rules. He'll now post a question or
something that he cooked in a thinly veiled attempt to make the gullible believe
that he does care about this newsgroup. He'd make a snappy comeback to my
message, but I'm right now reminding him that he's stated that he's plonked me,
and if he responds to this, he'd out himself as the lier that he is.

BOB

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:06:24 -0400, " BOB" wrote:

Kevin wrote:
You didn't think very long about this, did you? I don't want e-mail
from Kent. Why would I expect my e-mail to him would be any more
welcome?

Why did you think we all wanted to see your message to him?

KevinS doesn't care. This is his private playground that he uses to bitch and
chide others that don't play by his rules.

My rules? The word "Netiquette" mean anything to you? E-mail
follow-ups--particularly when they are duplicates of posted
follow-ups--have long been frowned on. Who wants to waste time
responding via e-mail only to find the same message on Usenet? In this
case, who wants e-mail from Kent? Not me. I get enough idiotic spam,
most of which I suspect you could benefit from, if those pills
actually work.

He'll now post a question or
something that he cooked in a thinly veiled attempt to make the gullible believe
that he does care about this newsgroup.

Want to bet?

He'd make a snappy comeback to my
message, but I'm right now reminding him that he's stated that he's plonked me,
and if he responds to this, he'd out himself as the lier that he is.

Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? Let's reason through this, shall
we? If I plonked you, then it is also within my power to unplock you,
correct? In fact, I can even automate the process, so that you are
automatically unplonked after so many days, so I can see if your
thinking has improved. (It hasn't, BTW.)

You'd think after all this time throwing the word around, you would
have learned to spell "liar" correctly.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:06:24 -0400, " BOB" wrote:

Kevin wrote:
You didn't think very long about this, did you? I don't want e-mail
from Kent. Why would I expect my e-mail to him would be any more
welcome?

Why did you think we all wanted to see your message to him?

KevinS doesn't care. This is his private playground that he uses to bitch
and
chide others that don't play by his rules.

My rules? The word "Netiquette" mean anything to you? E-mail
follow-ups--particularly when they are duplicates of posted
follow-ups--have long been frowned on. Who wants to waste time
responding via e-mail only to find the same message on Usenet? In this
case, who wants e-mail from Kent? Not me. I get enough idiotic spam,
most of which I suspect you could benefit from, if those pills
actually work.

He'll now post a question or
something that he cooked in a thinly veiled attempt to make the gullible
believe that he does care about this newsgroup.

Want to bet?

He'd make a snappy comeback to my
message, but I'm right now reminding him that he's stated that he's plonked
me, and if he responds to this, he'd out himself as the lier that he is.

Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? Let's reason through this, shall
we? If I plonked you, then it is also within my power to unplock you,
correct? In fact, I can even automate the process, so that you are
automatically unplonked after so many days, so I can see if your
thinking has improved. (It hasn't, BTW.)

You'd think after all this time throwing the word around, you would
have learned to spell "liar" correctly.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

How about "OFF TOPIC"? Mean anything to you? I didn't think so.

Why don't you pick any month and see how many ON topic posts that you have made,
then look at the OFF topic posts. Which is larger?

BOB