Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her posting? I
miss her!!!

--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On 2010-07-16, Ophelia > wrote:
>
> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her posting? I
> miss her!!!

Why am I not surprised.

nb

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, "Ophelia" >
wrote:

>
> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her posting? I
> miss her!!!
>

Not gone entirely. She still posts occasionally.

--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, "Ophelia" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her posting?
>> I
>> miss her!!!
>>
>
> Not gone entirely. She still posts occasionally.

Her email address she uses here is good, Ms O.

On 2010-07-17, sf > wrote:

>
> Not gone entirely. She still posts occasionally.

Whew! I'd hate to think we've been reduced to a single obnoxious twit
newsgroup.

nb

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, "Ophelia" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her posting?
>>> I
>>> miss her!!!
>>>
>>
>> Not gone entirely. She still posts occasionally.
>
> Her email address she uses here is good, Ms O.

Yes, thank you, Cheryl I do have it too. I just realised I hadn't seen
her posting
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>
>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her posting?
>> I
>> miss her!!!
>
> You mean Gregory Morrow.

nope.

--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

"Ophelia" <Ophelia Elsinore.me.uk> wrote:

> Where is that cybercat????

"Love on the rocks... Aint no surprise... la la la"

> Is she gone or have I not seen her posting? I miss her!!!

Cope with it, moron.
--





















>
> --
> --
> https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/
>
>

> Path: news.astraweb.com!border5.newsrouter.astraweb.com! news-
xfer.nntp.sonic.net!feeder.erje.net!news.musoftwar e.de!
wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-
mail
> From: "Ophelia" <Ophelia Elsinore.me.uk>
> Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
> Subject: Cybercat
> Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100
> Lines: 8
> Message-ID: <8abtliFlvgU1 mid.individual.net>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Trace: individual.net
KaZLrvtAaUxOFza1SOPurwfObJLVrO1OnZVieAPop2F4HTceZF
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:PqK4s+xLEPVzKkeh/SOOqVEcxWA=
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> Importance: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8050.1202
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8050.1202
>
>

"John Doe" > wrote in message
...
> "Ophelia" <Ophelia Elsinore.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> Where is that cybercat????
>
> "Love on the rocks... Aint no surprise... la la la"
>
>> Is she gone or have I not seen her posting? I miss her!!!
>
> Cope with it, moron.

You fail. If a thread is dead over 24 hours you're not allowed to respond
to it.

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...
> "John Doe" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Ophelia" <Ophelia Elsinore.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Where is that cybercat????
>>
>> "Love on the rocks... Aint no surprise... la la la"
>>
>>> Is she gone or have I not seen her posting? I miss her!!!
>>
>> Cope with it, moron.
>
> You fail. If a thread is dead over 24 hours you're not allowed to respond
> to it.

LOL I have been in contact with her, Cheryl, she is fine but is very busy
with family stuff
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:06:17 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her
>>> posting? I
>>> miss her!!!
>>
>> You mean Gregory Morrow.
>
> nope.
>
I must admit I have the same suspicions as Mr Wertz; however if you've met
both parties concerned in person - and can prove it har har - I am quite
willing to publicly apologize for harboring such dastardly thoughts. ;-)

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

'On Usenet, nobody knows you're a dog'

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:06:17 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her
>>>> posting? I
>>>> miss her!!!
>>>
>>> You mean Gregory Morrow.
>>
>> nope.
>>
> I must admit I have the same suspicions as Mr Wertz; however if you've met
> both parties concerned in person - and can prove it har har - I am quite
> willing to publicly apologize for harboring such dastardly thoughts. ;-)

Are some of my old posts reappearing? This is a really old thread.
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 10:22:37 +0100, Ophelia wrote:

>
>
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:06:17 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her
>>>>> posting? I
>>>>> miss her!!!
>>>>
>>>> You mean Gregory Morrow.
>>>
>>> nope.
>>>
>> I must admit I have the same suspicions as Mr Wertz; however if you've met
>> both parties concerned in person - and can prove it har har - I am quite
>> willing to publicly apologize for harboring such dastardly thoughts. ;-)
>
> Are some of my old posts reappearing? This is a really old thread.

You have the nicest way of sidestepping issues Mrs O. <grin> But
as for your old posts showing up, I'd just blame it on Usenet gremlins.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 10:22:37 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:06:17 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her
>>>>>> posting? I
>>>>>> miss her!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean Gregory Morrow.
>>>>
>>>> nope.
>>>>
>>> I must admit I have the same suspicions as Mr Wertz; however if you've
>>> met
>>> both parties concerned in person - and can prove it har har - I am quite
>>> willing to publicly apologize for harboring such dastardly thoughts. ;-)
>>
>> Are some of my old posts reappearing? This is a really old thread.
>
> You have the nicest way of sidestepping issues Mrs O. <grin> But
> as for your old posts showing up, I'd just blame it on Usenet gremlins.

OK Well I don't know about morrow but I have been in private contact with
cybercat for a very long time She is ok for me
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 06:43:37 +0100, Ophelia wrote:

> "Cheryl" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "John Doe" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Ophelia" <Ophelia Elsinore.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Where is that cybercat????
>>>
>>> "Love on the rocks... Aint no surprise... la la la"
>>>
>>>> Is she gone or have I not seen her posting? I miss her!!!
>>>
>>> Cope with it, moron.
>>
>> You fail. If a thread is dead over 24 hours you're not allowed to respond
>> to it.
>
> LOL I have been in contact with her, Cheryl, she is fine but is very busy
> with family stuff
> --

give her my best next time you talk to her.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:15:00 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:06:17 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her
>>>> posting? I
>>>> miss her!!!
>>>
>>> You mean Gregory Morrow.
>>
>> nope.
>>
> I must admit I have the same suspicions as Mr Wertz; however if you've met
> both parties concerned in person - and can prove it har har - I am quite
> willing to publicly apologize for harboring such dastardly thoughts. ;-)

no way. i've met neither but exchanged e-mail with both. cyber is no
sock.

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 06:43:37 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>
>> "Cheryl" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "John Doe" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Ophelia" <Ophelia Elsinore.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Where is that cybercat????
>>>>
>>>> "Love on the rocks... Aint no surprise... la la la"
>>>>
>>>>> Is she gone or have I not seen her posting? I miss her!!!
>>>>
>>>> Cope with it, moron.
>>>
>>> You fail. If a thread is dead over 24 hours you're not allowed to
>>> respond
>>> to it.
>>
>> LOL I have been in contact with her, Cheryl, she is fine but is very
>> busy
>> with family stuff
>> --
>
> give her my best next time you talk to her.

I will
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:15:00 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:06:17 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her
>>>>> posting? I
>>>>> miss her!!!
>>>>
>>>> You mean Gregory Morrow.
>>>
>>> nope.
>>>
>> I must admit I have the same suspicions as Mr Wertz; however if you've
>> met
>> both parties concerned in person - and can prove it har har - I am quite
>> willing to publicly apologize for harboring such dastardly thoughts. ;-)
>
> no way. i've met neither but exchanged e-mail with both. cyber is no
> sock.

I agree!
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:04:53 -0400, blake murphy wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:15:00 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:06:17 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her
>>>>> posting? I
>>>>> miss her!!!
>>>>
>>>> You mean Gregory Morrow.
>>>
>>> nope.
>>>
>> I must admit I have the same suspicions as Mr Wertz; however if you've
>> met both parties concerned in person - and can prove it har har - I am
>> quite willing to publicly apologize for harboring such dastardly
>> thoughts. ;-)
>
> no way. i've met neither but exchanged e-mail with both. cyber is no
> sock.

"On Usenet nobody knows you're a dog" Dunno who said that, but I agree
with the sentiment. And I'd say the same goes for email (or even social
networking sites like Facebook,Myspace, Twitter etc.)

Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be a
picture of anybody on the planet that has great hair...

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 14:17:23 -0700, Christine Dabney wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 22:44:51 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
>>mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be a
>>picture of anybody on the planet that has great hair...
>
> That's really him. I met him, in person. He does have great
> hair...and he let me have some of his raw meat dish at the Ethiopian
> restaurant we went to that night.

blake eats raw meat as well as having great hair? OMG, if he doesn't
have a spouse/SO I'd say goferit girl!

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 10:22:37 +0100, "Ophelia" >
wrote:

>Are some of my old posts reappearing? This is a really old thread.

Look who dredged it up, O and count the responses. Troll in training
got an A in Internet Trolling for Responses 101.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:04:53 -0400, blake murphy wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:15:00 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:06:17 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 21:25:47 +0100, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Where is that cybercat???? Is she gone or have I not seen her
>>>>>> posting? I
>>>>>> miss her!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean Gregory Morrow.
>>>>
>>>> nope.
>>>>
>>> I must admit I have the same suspicions as Mr Wertz; however if you've
>>> met both parties concerned in person - and can prove it har har - I am
>>> quite willing to publicly apologize for harboring such dastardly
>>> thoughts. ;-)
>>
>> no way. i've met neither but exchanged e-mail with both. cyber is no
>> sock.
>
> "On Usenet nobody knows you're a dog" Dunno who said that, but I agree
> with the sentiment. And I'd say the same goes for email (or even social
> networking sites like Facebook,Myspace, Twitter etc.)
>
> Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
> mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be a
> picture of anybody on the planet that has great hair...

So our Cathy... are you really a 6ft body builder with a beard? <g> I guess
we have to take each other on trust, until that trust is broken eh?
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 10:22:37 +0100, "Ophelia" >
> wrote:
>
>>Are some of my old posts reappearing? This is a really old thread.
>
> Look who dredged it up, O and count the responses. Troll in training
> got an A in Internet Trolling for Responses 101.

I can't say it matters much
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 08:17:45 +0100, Ophelia wrote:

>
> So our Cathy... are you really a 6ft body builder with a beard? <g> I
> guess we have to take each other on trust, until that trust is broken
> eh?

Close, but no cigar. I'm actually 6' 6" - and I don't have a beard. That's
what shavers were invented for. Should I email you some pics of my tattoos? ;-)

But seriously - I know most people we "meet" on-line are generally decent
human beings - but how can anybody be 100% certain about who they're
dealing with on-line until they actually do meet 'face to face' in Real
Life? And even then, how can one be sure that the person turning up at the
meeting *is* indeed the same person, and not someone that has been sent by
the real person in his/her place? You have to admit that even before there
was a computer in almost every [First World country) household and we had
to rely on snail mail, it wasn't unheard of for "pen pals" to send photo's
of their "good-looking friend" to said pen pals because they thought that
sending a real photo of themselves would put him/her off.

Also been several documented cases of teen-aged girls being lured into
believing they were chatting on-line to a boy of similar age and interests
(and even exchanging photos with), only to end up dead when the person
behind the keyboard turned out to be some forty-something murdering
nutcase.

And then you get cases like this:

<http://www.news.com.au/national/girl-harassed-by-girl-facebook-stalker-12/story-e6frfkvr-1225925103284>
or
http://tinyurl.com/2bfp9kc

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Sep 18, 3:10*am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
>
> Also been several documented cases of teen-aged girls being lured into
> believing they were chatting on-line to a boy of similar age and interests
> (and even exchanging photos with), only to end up dead when the person
> behind the keyboard turned out to be some forty-something murdering
> nutcase.
>
Probably far more often the forty-something man shows up to meet the
girl and finds another forty-something man.

> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

--Bryan

On Sep 18, 5:44*am, atec77 > wrote:
> On 18/09/2010 8:19 PM, Bryan wrote:> On Sep 18, 3:10 am, > *wrote:
>
> >> Also been several documented cases of teen-aged girls being lured into
> >> believing they were chatting on-line to a boy of similar age and interests
> >> (and even exchanging photos with), only to end up dead when the person
> >> behind the keyboard turned out to be some forty-something murdering
> >> nutcase.
>
> > Probably far more often the forty-something man shows up to meet the
> > girl and finds another forty-something man.
>
> * or as is with preverts an indeterminatly aged person of confused sex
> and inclination , perverts are by definition alsmot anyone including
> women and some very young people
> * Of course we do prefer to ignore that end of the bell curve
>
When I used the phrase, "Probably far more often," I meant more or
less those within one standard deviation of the mean, and even at that
it was an exaggeration in an attempt to be humorous. I do realize
that "perverts" do not all fit *my* demographic--though in 7 weeks
I'll be fifty-something, not forty-something.
>
> >> --
> >> Cheers
> >> Chatty Cathy
>
> > --Bryan
>
--Bryan

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
news
> Close, but no cigar. I'm actually 6' 6" - and I don't have a beard. That's
> what shavers were invented for. Should I email you some pics of my
> tattoos? ;-)

Oh just post them on the blog........... <g>


> But seriously - I know most people we "meet" on-line are generally decent
> human beings - but how can anybody be 100% certain about who they're
> dealing with on-line until they actually do meet 'face to face' in Real
> Life? And even then, how can one be sure that the person turning up at the
> meeting *is* indeed the same person, and not someone that has been sent by
> the real person in his/her place? You have to admit that even before there
> was a computer in almost every [First World country) household and we had
> to rely on snail mail, it wasn't unheard of for "pen pals" to send photo's
> of their "good-looking friend" to said pen pals because they thought that
> sending a real photo of themselves would put him/her off.

Indeed!

> http://tinyurl.com/2bfp9kc

Yes it is horrible I am just happy to chat in the ngs and take people as
their posting selves. Character does come over. Kind people, nasty people,
bitchy people, cruel people...etc. I have met relatively few people I have
talked with online and it is not something I generally seek so yes, I could
be communicating with a serial killer, but so long as s/he is nice on line,
that is ok with me

Unfortunately, (as in the case of the 12 year old above) anonymity seems to
bring out the worst in some people and they behave in a way they would never
dare to so do in rl. I have written about this elsewhere so forgive me if
you have already seen it.

There arose a 'rule' that what happens online stays online, and of course
the perpetrators of wicked and hurtful attacks, propagate that view because
it protects them. I don't agree with that rule. Those causing real damage
must be held accountable for it, no matter where it is perpetrated. A few
years ago, my husband had to send a 'Cease and Desist' notice after his
character was badly impugned. He didn't even post in the group concerned.
It was done in an effort to hurt me. It was all lies and he didn't give a
damn about ng rules. He was so angry he didn't care how much it would cost
and was quite prepared to go to law.

Had those lies been believed he would have been unemployable.

It did stop and I persuaded him to back off but he was very angry. I can't
think what kind of person finds pleasure in wrecking lives. What ugly
people they are.

I have had my moments too, when I have defended others and got caught up in
the crossfire. I refuse to allow myself to be drawn into that stuff any
more. It holds no pleasure and one finds that it attracts even more filth
and viciousness. Where I see cruelty, as in the case of Andy, I will say my
piece but there it ends.

As for Facebook! I will NOT join even though my children entreat me. I
think it is a dangerous place to be. It seems people post all kinds of
personal details about themselves. To my mind that is courting trouble!
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Sep 18, 6:26*am, "Ophelia" > wrote:
>
>
> As for Facebook! *I will NOT join even though my children entreat me. *I
> think it is a dangerous place to be. *It seems people post all kinds of
> personal details about themselves. * To my mind that is courting trouble!
>
What is dangerous about it? Just don't post any personal details
about yourself that you have any problem with a billion other people
knowing. Facebook is less public than Usenet, though Usenet can
certainly be more anonymous. Most stuff about people, if someone
really cares to find out, they can find a way to do so. I'm not vain
enough to think that very many people out there who really care about
the minutiae of my life.

It would be more dangerous to walk down the street with a sign that
said:
MY BANK ACCOUNT # IS 12345678, AND MY MOTHER'S MAIDEN NAME WAS SMITH.

--Bryan

"Bryan" > wrote in message
...
> On Sep 18, 6:26 am, "Ophelia" > wrote:
>>
>>
>> As for Facebook! I will NOT join even though my children entreat me. I
>> think it is a dangerous place to be. It seems people post all kinds of
>> personal details about themselves. To my mind that is courting trouble!
>>
> What is dangerous about it? Just don't post any personal details
> about yourself that you have any problem with a billion other people
> knowing. Facebook is less public than Usenet, though Usenet can
> certainly be more anonymous. Most stuff about people, if someone
> really cares to find out, they can find a way to do so. I'm not vain
> enough to think that very many people out there who really care about
> the minutiae of my life.

Oh, some people do exactly that! If they can find information to hurt
someone they take great pleasure in using it! They think it shows them to
be clever.. if only they knew...

--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Sep 18, 6:49*am, "Ophelia" > wrote:
> "Bryan" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On Sep 18, 6:26 am, "Ophelia" > wrote:
>
> >> As for Facebook! *I will NOT join even though my children entreat me.. *I
> >> think it is a dangerous place to be. *It seems people post all kinds of
> >> personal details about themselves. * To my mind that is courting trouble!
>
> > What is dangerous about it? *Just don't post any personal details
> > about yourself that you have any problem with a billion other people
> > knowing. *Facebook is less public than Usenet, though Usenet can
> > certainly be more anonymous. *Most stuff about people, if someone
> > really cares to find out, they can find a way to do so. *I'm not vain
> > enough to think that very many people out there who really care about
> > the minutiae of my life.
>
> Oh, some people do exactly that! *If they can find information to hurt
> someone they take great pleasure in using it! *They think it shows them to
> be clever.. if only they knew...
>
But I mildly **** people off all the time, I am very public with
almost every detail of my life, and no one has gone after me in a way
that particularly hurt. With Facebook, you can set your page to
private, and then only "friend" your children or other close
confidantes.

--Bryan

On Sep 18, 7:12*am, atec77 > wrote:
> On 18/09/2010 8:55 PM, Bryan wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 18, 5:44 am, > *wrote:
> >> On 18/09/2010 8:19 PM, Bryan wrote:> *On Sep 18, 3:10 am, > * *wrote:
>
> >>>> Also been several documented cases of teen-aged girls being lured into
> >>>> believing they were chatting on-line to a boy of similar age and interests
> >>>> (and even exchanging photos with), only to end up dead when the person
> >>>> behind the keyboard turned out to be some forty-something murdering
> >>>> nutcase.
>
> >>> Probably far more often the forty-something man shows up to meet the
> >>> girl and finds another forty-something man.
>
> >> * *or as is with preverts an indeterminatly aged person of confused sex
> >> and inclination , perverts are by definition alsmot anyone including
> >> women and some very young people
> >> * *Of course we do prefer to ignore that end of the bell curve
>
> > When I used the phrase, "Probably far more often," I meant more or
> > less those within one standard deviation of the mean, and even at that
> > it was an exaggeration in an attempt to be humorous. *I do realize
> > that "perverts" do not all fit *my* demographic--though in 7 weeks
> > I'll be fifty-something, not forty-something.
>
> * A simple question , do you remember the late 1960's ?
> * I sorta do
>
Yes. Funny, but the thing that makes me nostalgic for those times is
a certain type of music, a sort of jazz that is heavy on clarinet and
muted horns. It's bizarre really. Any specific title or artist
eludes me right now, except that some of the Bacharach/Warwick stuff
hints at what I'm talking about. Certainly not my favorite type of
music, and my gosh the music in the sixties.

http://www.chairborneranger.com/top100/top100-1965.htm
http://www.chairborneranger.com/top100/top100-1966.htm
http://www.chairborneranger.com/top100/top100-1967.htm
http://www.chairborneranger.com/top100/top100-1968.htm
http://www.chairborneranger.com/top100/top100-1969.htm
>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>> Chatty Cathy
>
> >>> --Bryan
>
> > --Bryan
>
--Bryan

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 14:17:23 -0700, Christine Dabney wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 22:44:51 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
>>mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be a
>>picture of anybody on the planet that has great hair...
>
> That's really him. I met him, in person. He does have great
> hair...and he let me have some of his raw meat dish at the Ethiopian
> restaurant we went to that night.
>
> Christine

why, thank you, honey.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
ChattyCathy > wrote:

> Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
> mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be a
> picture of anybody on the planet that has great hair...

How many testimonials will it take to convince you of Blake's mugshot?
We have dined together in our nation's capital, Blake and I have. It is
he.

--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."
A few pics from the Fair are he
http://gallery.me.com/barbschaller#100254

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
.. .
> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 14:17:23 -0700, Christine Dabney wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 22:44:51 +0200, ChattyCathy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
>>>mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be a
>>>picture of anybody on the planet that has great hair...
>>
>> That's really him. I met him, in person. He does have great
>> hair...and he let me have some of his raw meat dish at the Ethiopian
>> restaurant we went to that night.
>>
>> Christine
>
> why, thank you, honey.
>
> your pal,
> blake

And I second Chris's post. I was there at that meeting and dinner also. It
was a fun evening.

Boli

On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 16:25:24 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:

> In article >,
> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
>> Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
>> mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be
>> a picture of anybody on the planet that has great hair...
>
> How many testimonials will it take to convince you of Blake's mugshot?
> We have dined together in our nation's capital, Blake and I have. It is
> he.

Your testimonial (and a few others) only proves that there is a person
closely resembling this mugshot, who wanders around the USA claiming to be
Blake Murphy. But would any investigator worth his/her salt take that as
absolute proof, unless it was backed up by a drivers license, and a check
with their local DMV to verify the authenticity of said document?

And if I was said investigator, I'd still be leery - after all there are
no (recent) photos on birth certificates, which I believe is all that is
required to prove who one allegedly is to the DMV when applying for a
drivers license. Same goes for passport applications, last I heard.
Furthermore, unless "blake" has been under criminal investigation at some
point, his finger prints won't be on record anywhere either.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Sep 18, 10:50*pm, Christine Dabney > wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 23:34:12 -0400, "bolivar" >
> wrote:
>
> >And I second Chris's post. *I was there at that meeting and dinner also. It
> >was a fun evening.
>
> >Boli
>
> Except he didn't give you any of his raw meat.. *I was the lucky
> one..

I'm thinking maybe he gave the meat to both of you that night.
>
> Christine

--Bryan

ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
>mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be a
>picture of anybody on the planet.

Yeah, like I think of you as an erect nippled Kelvinator gal. LOL-LOL

But that's a good thing, Kelvinator is synonymous with quality and
performance!

http://www.kelvinator.com/

ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>Your testimonial (and a few others) only proves that there is a person
>closely resembling this mugshot, who wanders around the USA claiming to be
>Blake Murphy. But would any investigator worth his/her salt take that as
>absolute proof, unless it was backed up by a drivers license, and a check
>with their local DMV to verify the authenticity of said document?
>
>And if I was said investigator, I'd still be leery - after all there are
>no (recent) photos on birth certificates, which I believe is all that is
>required to prove who one allegedly is to the DMV when applying for a
>drivers license. Same goes for passport applications, last I heard.
>Furthermore, unless "blake" has been under criminal investigation at some
>point, his foot prints won't be on record anywhere either.

Heheheh

On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 10:15:10 -0400, Brooklyn1 quoted an edited version of
Chatty Cathy's post:

<snipped>
>
> Heheheh

Sheldon, ya know I luvs ya - but I'd appreciate it you didn't take it
upon yourself to edit my posts before quoting and responding to them. If I
wanted an editor, I'd hire one - and I hate to mention this, but you
wouldn't make my short-list of prospective editors.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 09:52:53 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 16:25:24 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>
>>> Come to think of it, how could I possibly know for certain that your
>>> mugshot is actually *your* mugshot unless I met you in person? Could be
>>> a picture of anybody on the planet that has great hair...
>>
>> How many testimonials will it take to convince you of Blake's mugshot?
>> We have dined together in our nation's capital, Blake and I have. It is
>> he.
>
> Your testimonial (and a few others) only proves that there is a person
> closely resembling this mugshot, who wanders around the USA claiming to be
> Blake Murphy. But would any investigator worth his/her salt take that as
> absolute proof, unless it was backed up by a drivers license, and a check
> with their local DMV to verify the authenticity of said document?
>
> And if I was said investigator, I'd still be leery - after all there are
> no (recent) photos on birth certificates, which I believe is all that is
> required to prove who one allegedly is to the DMV when applying for a
> drivers license. Same goes for passport applications, last I heard.
> Furthermore, unless "blake" has been under criminal investigation at some
> point, his finger prints won't be on record anywhere either.

amazingly enough, i have my original 'certificate of live birth,' original
social security card (typed on a typewriter), and had to be fingerprinted
when i was hired by arlington co., virginia. i'm not sure whether or not
that means they're in 'the system,' though.

accept no cheap imitations!

your pal,
blake