Oh...... MY....... GOD!

You are so ****ing pathetic it's un-****ing-believable.

I'll leave the rest of this in tact for others to read while I
crosspost the shit out of this for the rest of the world to see how
****ing lame you are.

And those us following his kook-posts know he's not a troll. He
really IS a genuine USDA Grade AA moron. This is why we killed him
in the first place. As you can see, he took it kinda hard. Talk
about a mental melt-down...

-sw

Jerry Sauk > wrote:

> This last couple days I get several email's from people who very nicely
> asked to be removed from my kill-file. I think it's been long enough that
> most of you have learned your lesson.
>
> HERE'S THE DWEAL: There are currently 13 people in my kill-file. I will
> copy the name's to a separate file, and eliminate the kill-file for ONE
> WEEK.
>
> Some time during the week. those of you who want to be removed permanently
> from the file will be expected to write a 200 word apology to me for calling
> me dead.
>
> Explaining what you have learned and that you won't do it again.
> WARNING: DO NOT say that I WAS dead but came back to life, BUT rather that
> I was NEVER dead and it was all a lie. If you say that I was dead, you will
> not be removed from my kill-file. Anyone who does not right a apology and
> post it on the group in this thread will be put back in the kill-file at the
> end of the week. Apology's 199 words or less will be ignored.
>
> TFM and Paco may or may not be unkillfiled since they were in it before...
> we'll see how they behave and then I will make a decision. They WILL need
> to write an apology tostay out of it though.
>
> Writing the apology does NOT gaurentee you will be removed... it is
> strictly by my own choice who gets removed.
>
> WARNING!!!!! If you take back your apology at any point in the future or
> say that I died EVEN JUST ONCE, you will be immediately re-kill-filed.
>
> I think I am being EXTREMELY fair about this, I am NOT asking you to say
> that you like the taste of fast-food or even that you like ME, or that any
> of my past arguement's you now agree with, all I doing is asking you to
> apologize for the damge you done to me personally. Example, I am NOT
> telling you to say that Taco Blell is Public Property, to be unkillfiled,
> but if the discussion wasn't closed we could discuss it at a later time.
>
> Jerry

SO I TAKE IT THAT'S A "NO" FOR YOU STEVE???!?!!

And I thought you told me NOT TO TOP-POST OR CROSS-POST!!! fOLLOW YOUR OWN
RULE'S!!!

Have another Taco,

JERRY


"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> Oh...... MY....... GOD!
>
> You are so ****ing pathetic it's un-****ing-believable.
>
> I'll leave the rest of this in tact for others to read while I
> crosspost the shit out of this for the rest of the world to see how
> ****ing lame you are.
>
> And those us following his kook-posts know he's not a troll. He
> really IS a genuine USDA Grade AA moron. This is why we killed him
> in the first place. As you can see, he took it kinda hard. Talk
> about a mental melt-down...
>
> -sw
>
> Jerry Sauk > wrote:
>
> > This last couple days I get several email's from people who very nicely
> > asked to be removed from my kill-file. I think it's been long enough
that
> > most of you have learned your lesson.
> >
> > HERE'S THE DWEAL: There are currently 13 people in my kill-file. I
will
> > copy the name's to a separate file, and eliminate the kill-file for ONE
> > WEEK.
> >
> > Some time during the week. those of you who want to be removed
permanently
> > from the file will be expected to write a 200 word apology to me for
calling
> > me dead.
> >
> > Explaining what you have learned and that you won't do it again.
> > WARNING: DO NOT say that I WAS dead but came back to life, BUT rather
that
> > I was NEVER dead and it was all a lie. If you say that I was dead, you
will
> > not be removed from my kill-file. Anyone who does not right a apology
and
> > post it on the group in this thread will be put back in the kill-file at
the
> > end of the week. Apology's 199 words or less will be ignored.
> >
> > TFM and Paco may or may not be unkillfiled since they were in it
before...
> > we'll see how they behave and then I will make a decision. They WILL
need
> > to write an apology tostay out of it though.
> >
> > Writing the apology does NOT gaurentee you will be removed... it is
> > strictly by my own choice who gets removed.
> >
> > WARNING!!!!! If you take back your apology at any point in the future
or
> > say that I died EVEN JUST ONCE, you will be immediately re-kill-filed.
> >
> > I think I am being EXTREMELY fair about this, I am NOT asking you to say
> > that you like the taste of fast-food or even that you like ME, or that
any
> > of my past arguement's you now agree with, all I doing is asking you to
> > apologize for the damge you done to me personally. Example, I am NOT
> > telling you to say that Taco Blell is Public Property, to be
unkillfiled,
> > but if the discussion wasn't closed we could discuss it at a later time.
> >
> > Jerry

I'm sure TFM will be writing the 200 word apology. To be sure he is
sincere, I think it should be posted here also.


>
>> This last couple days I get several email's from people who very nicely
>> asked to be removed from my kill-file. I think it's been long enough
>> that
>> most of you have learned your lesson.
>>
>> HERE'S THE DWEAL: There are currently 13 people in my kill-file. I will
>> copy the name's to a separate file, and eliminate the kill-file for ONE
>> WEEK.
>>
>> Some time during the week. those of you who want to be removed
>> permanently
>> from the file will be expected to write a 200 word apology to me for
>> calling
>> me dead.

>>
>> TFM and Paco may or may not be unkillfiled since they were in it
>> before...
>> we'll see how they behave and then I will make a decision. They WILL
>> need
>> to write an apology tostay out of it though.
> Jerry

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
> I'm sure TFM will be writing the 200 word apology. To be sure he is
> sincere, I think it should be posted here also.
>
>
>>
>>> This last couple days I get several email's from people who very nicely
>>> asked to be removed from my kill-file. I think it's been long enough
>>> that
>>> most of you have learned your lesson.
>>>
>>> HERE'S THE DWEAL: There are currently 13 people in my kill-file. I
>>> will
>>> copy the name's to a separate file, and eliminate the kill-file for ONE
>>> WEEK.
>>>
>>> Some time during the week. those of you who want to be removed
>>> permanently
>>> from the file will be expected to write a 200 word apology to me for
>>> calling
>>> me dead.
>
>>>
>>> TFM and Paco may or may not be unkillfiled since they were in it
>>> before...
>>> we'll see how they behave and then I will make a decision. They WILL
>>> need
>>> to write an apology tostay out of it though.
>> Jerry
>
>

I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.

cybercat > wrote:

> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.

Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.

At least this one is entertaining.

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> cybercat > wrote:
>
>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>
> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>
> At least this one is entertaining.
>

Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
crossposting this shit.

Jerry Sauk > wrote:

> SO I TAKE IT THAT'S A "NO" FOR YOU STEVE???!?!!

Ahh, but I have a free, weekly pass. Who knows - maybe I'll write
you a 200-word apology next Sunday at 12:00pm. I still have 82
hours to think about it, right? That is, if you keep your word.

Can I write 400 words? I've never seen you read a 200-word post
without complaining that you didn't have time to read it all.

> And I thought you told me NOT TO TOP-POST OR CROSS-POST!!! fOLLOW YOUR OWN
> RULE'S!!!

Again - you imagined that. I never told you that, liar. I expect a
200-word apology for that comment.

[Oops - I mispelled kibology on my first crosspost - no big loss I
guess]

-sw

cybercat > wrote:

> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat > wrote:
>>
>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>
>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>
>> At least this one is entertaining.
>
> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
> crossposting this shit.

Yeah - so? I know who you were referring to (mostly ME).
And I was talking about you, not Jerry or Ed.

-sw

Sqwertz AKA Jerry Sauk wrote:
> Oh...... MY....... GOD!
>
> You are so ****ing pathetic it's un-****ing-believable.
>
> I'll leave the rest of this in tact for others to read while I
> crosspost the shit out of this for the rest of the world to see how
> ****ing lame you are.
>
> And those us following his kook-posts know he's not a troll. �He
> really IS a genuine USDA Grade AA moron. �This is why we killed him
> in the first place. �As you can see, he took it kinda hard. �Talk
> about a mental melt-down...
>
>
>
>
> Jerry Sauk AKA Sqwertz wrote:
> > This last couple days I get several email's from people who very nicely
> > asked to be removed from my kill-file. �I think it's been long enough that
> > most of you have learned your lesson.
>
> > HERE'S THE DWEAL: �There are currently 13 people in my kill-file. �I will
> > copy the name's to a separate file, and eliminate the kill-file for ONE
> > WEEK.
>
> > Some time during the week. those of you who want to be removed permanently
> > from the file will be expected to write a 200 word apology to me for calling
> > me dead.
>
> > �Explaining what you have learned and that you won't do it again.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> cybercat > wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>>
>>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>>
>>> At least this one is entertaining.
>>
>> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
>> crossposting this shit.
>
> Yeah - so? I know who you were referring to (mostly ME).

So then you're saying you were having a hissy fit?

> And I was talking about you, not Jerry or Ed.
>

Uh, right.

Let me know when the hangover fog clears, Steve.

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat > wrote:
>>
>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>
>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>
>> At least this one is entertaining.
>>
>
> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
> crossposting this shit.
>

I didn't crosspost anything. It was sent to one group only.

Childish? Maybe, but I thought is was worth a chuckle.

cybercat > wrote:

> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat > wrote:
>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>>>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>>>
>>>> At least this one is entertaining.
>>>
>>> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
>>> crossposting this shit.
>>
>> Yeah - so? I know who you were referring to (mostly ME).
>
> So then you're saying you were having a hissy fit?
>
>> And I was talking about you, not Jerry or Ed.
>
> Uh, right.
>
> Let me know when the hangover fog clears, Steve.

<yawn> That's so lame.

These double-standards of yours are kinda ironic. And then when
called on them, you call the other guy drunk.

Is it that time of the month for you? (one sexist remark deserves
another).

-sw

Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> "cybercat" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
>> crossposting this shit.
>
> I didn't crosspost anything. It was sent to one group only.

You must be drunk, too.

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> cybercat > wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>>>>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>>>>
>>>>> At least this one is entertaining.
>>>>
>>>> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
>>>> crossposting this shit.
>>>
>>> Yeah - so? I know who you were referring to (mostly ME).
>>
>> So then you're saying you were having a hissy fit?
>>
>>> And I was talking about you, not Jerry or Ed.
>>
>> Uh, right.
>>
>> Let me know when the hangover fog clears, Steve.
>
> <yawn> That's so lame.
>
> These double-standards of yours are kinda ironic. And then when
> called on them, you call the other guy drunk.
>
> Is it that time of the month for you? (one sexist remark deserves
> another).
>

How is speculating that you have a hangover "sexist?" For all you know, *I*
have a hangover.

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
>
> "cybercat" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>>
>>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>>
>>> At least this one is entertaining.
>>>
>>
>> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
>> crossposting this shit.
>>
>
> I didn't crosspost anything. It was sent to one group only.
>
> Childish? Maybe, but I thought is was worth a chuckle.
So did Steve. Granted, I don't share your history with Jerry, but I have to
admit, that post makes me feel sorry for him. Hence my comment. He
demonstrates that he is too far beyond lame to be amusing, to me.

cybercat > wrote:

> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat > wrote:
>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>>>>>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At least this one is entertaining.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
>>>>> crossposting this shit.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah - so? I know who you were referring to (mostly ME).
>>>
>>> So then you're saying you were having a hissy fit?
>>>
>>>> And I was talking about you, not Jerry or Ed.
>>>
>>> Uh, right.
>>>
>>> Let me know when the hangover fog clears, Steve.
>>
>> <yawn> That's so lame.
>>
>> These double-standards of yours are kinda ironic. And then when
>> called on them, you call the other guy drunk.
>>
>> Is it that time of the month for you? (one sexist remark deserves
>> another).
>
> How is speculating that you have a hangover "sexist?" For all you know, *I*
> have a hangover.

I was referring to your earlier comment. ARe you that out of it?

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> cybercat > wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>>>>>>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At least this one is entertaining.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
>>>>>> crossposting this shit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah - so? I know who you were referring to (mostly ME).
>>>>
>>>> So then you're saying you were having a hissy fit?
>>>>
>>>>> And I was talking about you, not Jerry or Ed.
>>>>
>>>> Uh, right.
>>>>
>>>> Let me know when the hangover fog clears, Steve.
>>>
>>> <yawn> That's so lame.
>>>
>>> These double-standards of yours are kinda ironic. And then when
>>> called on them, you call the other guy drunk.
>>>
>>> Is it that time of the month for you? (one sexist remark deserves
>>> another).
>>
>> How is speculating that you have a hangover "sexist?" For all you know,
>> *I*
>> have a hangover.
>
> I was referring to your earlier comment. ARe you that out of it?
>

Steve, you are a collection of non-sequiturs today.

On Oct 19, 3:26�pm, "cybercat" > wrote:
> "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "cybercat" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>> cybercat > wrote:
>
> >>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>
> >>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. �It's not like you haven't had
> >>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>
> >>> At least this one is entertaining.
>
> >> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
> >> crossposting this shit.
>
> > I didn't crosspost anything. �It was sent to one group only.
>
> > Childish? �Maybe, but I thought is was worth a chuckle.
>
> So did Steve. Granted, I don't share your history with Jerry, but I have to
> admit, that post makes me feel sorry for him. Hence my comment. He
> demonstrates that he is too far beyond lame to be amusing, to me.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I have one word for jerry-- Dickhead....

Rosie

"rosie" > wrote

>I have one word for jerry-- Dickhead....


I must defer to your judgment. You have an excellent Dickhead Detector.

In article >,
"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote:


I'm not going to right<sic> a<sic> apology to Jerry. In fact, I thought
I had killfile alt.food.fast-food. But I couldn't find the entry, so I
added one, for an extra long time.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat > wrote:
>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think all of you aging boys need to ****ing grow up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, please - get off your high horse. It's not like you haven't had
>>>>>> a handful or three of OT hissy fits here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At least this one is entertaining.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who said I was talking about Jerry? I'm talking about you and Edwin
>>>>> crossposting this shit.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah - so? I know who you were referring to (mostly ME).
>>>
>>> So then you're saying you were having a hissy fit?
>>>
>>>> And I was talking about you, not Jerry or Ed.
>>>
>>> Uh, right.
>>>
>>> Let me know when the hangover fog clears, Steve.
>>
>> <yawn> That's so lame.
>>
>> These double-standards of yours are kinda ironic. And then when
>> called on them, you call the other guy drunk.
>>
>> Is it that time of the month for you? (one sexist remark deserves
>> another).
>>
>
> How is speculating that you have a hangover "sexist?" For all you know,
> *I* have a hangover.
>

Yep. Your tits hang over the keyboard 24-7. You should see a specialist.

TFM®

On Oct 19, 12:21 pm, Sqwertz > wrote:
> Jerry Sauk > wrote:
> > SO I TAKE IT THAT'S A "NO" FOR YOU STEVE???!?!!
>
> Ahh, but I have a free, weekly pass. Who knows - maybe I'll write
> you a 200-word apology next Sunday at 12:00pm. I still have 82
> hours to think about it, right? That is, if you keep your word.
>
> Can I write 400 words? I've never seen you read a 200-word post
> without complaining that you didn't have time to read it all.
>
> > And I thought you told me NOT TO TOP-POST OR CROSS-POST!!! fOLLOW YOUR OWN
> > RULE'S!!!
>
> Again - you imagined that. I never told you that, liar. I expect a
> 200-word apology for that comment.
>
> [Oops - I mispelled kibology on my first crosspost - no big loss I
> guess]

It's all right, rememeber (one of) the first rule(s) of kibology;
You're Allowed. We donut mind, especially if we donut know about it.


Dr. Hot"who are you, again?"Salt

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> Jerry Sauk > wrote:
>
> > SO I TAKE IT THAT'S A "NO" FOR YOU STEVE???!?!!
>
> Ahh, but I have a free, weekly pass. Who knows - maybe I'll write
> you a 200-word apology next Sunday at 12:00pm. I still have 82
> hours to think about it, right? That is, if you keep your word.

WRONG. You have until I wake up on Saturday, October 25. That's the
dead-line. And oh, by the way my WORD was that I can do whatever I want, so
technically I can kill-file you RIGHT NOW if I wanted and still keep my
word. Didn't you read the Warning's?

>Can I write 400 words?

No. I don't have time for that.

> Again - you imagined that. I never told you that, liar.

Yes you did. You must have been drunk.

"Sheldon" > wrote in message
...
Sqwertz AKA Jerry Sauk wrote:
> Oh...... MY....... GOD!
>
> You are so ****ing pathetic it's un-****ing-believable.
>
> I'll leave the rest of this in tact for others to read while I
> crosspost the shit out of this for the rest of the world to see how
> ****ing lame you are.
>
> And those us following his kook-posts know he's not a troll. ?He
> really IS a genuine USDA Grade AA moron. ?This is why we killed him
> in the first place. ?As you can see, he took it kinda hard. ?Talk
> about a mental melt-down...
>
>
>
>
> Jerry Sauk AKA Sqwertz wrote:
> > This last couple days I get several email's from people who very nicely
> > asked to be removed from my kill-file. ?I think it's been long enough
that
> > most of you have learned your lesson.
>
> > HERE'S THE DWEAL: ?There are currently 13 people in my kill-file. ?I
will
> > copy the name's to a separate file, and eliminate the kill-file for ONE
> > WEEK.
>
> > Some time during the week. those of you who want to be removed
permanently
> > from the file will be expected to write a 200 word apology to me for
calling
> > me dead.
>
> > ?Explaining what you have learned and that you won't do it again.
> > WARNING: ?DO NOT say that I WAS dead but came back to life, BUT rather
that
> > I was NEVER dead and it was all a lie. ?If you say that I was dead, you
will
> > not be removed from my kill-file. ?Anyone who does not right a apology
and
> > post it on the group in this thread will be put back in the kill-file at
the
> > end of the week. ?Apology's 199 words or less will be ignored.
>
> > TFM and Paco may or may not be unkillfiled since they were in it
before...
> > we'll see how they behave and then I will make a decision. ?They WILL
need
> > to write an apology tostay out of it though.
>
> > Writing the apology does NOT gaurentee you will be removed... ?it is
> > strictly by my own choice who gets removed.
>
> > WARNING!!!!! ?If you take back your apology at any point in the future
or
> > say that I died EVEN JUST ONCE, you will be immediately re-kill-filed.
>
> > I think I am being EXTREMELY fair about this, I am NOT asking you to say
> > that you like the taste of fast-food or even that you like ME, or that
any
> > of my past arguement's you now agree with, all I doing is asking you to
> > apologize for the damge you done to me personally. ?Example, I am NOT
> > telling you to say that Taco Blell is Public Property, to be
unkillfiled,
> > but if the discussion wasn't closed we could discuss it at a later time.
>
> > Jerry- http://tinyurl.com/4n3sbk


>You are definitely dead... with how you write you are certainly brain
>dead, and that is dead. It's obvious you were birthed through the
>nether end of your momma's alimentary canal... too bad she neglected
>to flush... please leave me in your killfile, I'm not interested in
>experiencing your stench.

You never were in my killfile. I don't even know who you are. If you
don't want to read my post's, then stay out of alt.fast-food.

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:40:26 -0500, Jerry Sauk wrote:

> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Jerry Sauk > wrote:
>>
>>> SO I TAKE IT THAT'S A "NO" FOR YOU STEVE???!?!!
>>
>> Ahh, but I have a free, weekly pass. Who knows - maybe I'll write
>> you a 200-word apology next Sunday at 12:00pm. I still have 82
>> hours to think about it, right? That is, if you keep your word.
>
> WRONG. You have until I wake up on Saturday, October 25. That's the
> dead-line. And oh, by the way my WORD was that I can do whatever I want, so
> technically I can kill-file you RIGHT NOW if I wanted and still keep my
> word. Didn't you read the Warning's?
>

i think you should travel in time back to last week and killfile him then.
that's what happens to people who don't read Warning's!

blake

Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> So you died and now think you own alt.fast-food? That's not the way it
> works.

Jerry never really died. He's been in a coma for 8 months and is
posting VIA mental telepathy.

-sw

Jerry Sauk wrote:

> Didn't you read the Warning's?

You mena the one that said From: Jerry Sauk > ??

>> Can I write 400 words?
>
> No. I don't have time for that.

So, what if - by some act of Satan - would you do if *two* people mailed
you their 200-word apologies? That would be 400 words.

-sw

"Sqwertz"
> Jerry Sauk wrote:
>
>> Didn't you read the Warning's?
>
> You mena the one that said From: Jerry Sauk > ??
>
>>> Can I write 400 words?
>>
>> No. I don't have time for that.
>
> So, what if - by some act of Satan - would you do if *two* people mailed
> you their 200-word apologies? That would be 400 words.
>
> -sw

Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects to stray
animals. It is not pretty.

"Giusi" > wrote in message
...
> "Sqwertz"
>> Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>
>>> Didn't you read the Warning's?
>>
>> You mena the one that said From: Jerry Sauk > ??
>>
>>>> Can I write 400 words?
>>>
>>> No. I don't have time for that.
>>
>> So, what if - by some act of Satan - would you do if *two* people mailed
>> you their 200-word apologies? That would be 400 words.
>>
>> -sw
>
> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects to stray
> animals. It is not pretty.
>
That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.

cybercat wrote:

>
> "Giusi" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Sqwertz"
>>> Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>>
>>>> Didn't you read the Warning's?
>>>
>>> You mena the one that said From: Jerry Sauk >
>>> ??
>>>
>>>>> Can I write 400 words?
>>>>
>>>> No. I don't have time for that.
>>>
>>> So, what if - by some act of Satan - would you do if *two* people
>>> mailed
>>> you their 200-word apologies? That would be 400 words.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects to
>> stray
>> animals. It is not pretty.
>>
> That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.

<LOL!>. Talk about PKB.

I know, I know... who am *I* to respond to your posts, seeing as how you
have me killfiled <more laughing>

OBFood: Pan fried hake, with (real) mashed potatoes and peas.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"ChattyCathy"
> cybercat wrote:
>
>>
>> "Giusi" > wrote in message
>>> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects to
>>> stray
>>> animals. It is not pretty.
>>>
>> That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.
>
> <LOL!>. Talk about PKB.
> OBFood: Pan fried hake, with (real) mashed potatoes and peas.
>
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

You honestly don't see the difference between slanging with what professes
to be a normal adult and toying with someone who shows every sign of damage?

Giusi wrote:

> "ChattyCathy"
>> cybercat wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Giusi" > wrote in message
>>>> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects
>>>> to stray
>>>> animals. It is not pretty.
>>>>
>>> That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.
>>
>> <LOL!>. Talk about PKB.
>> OBFood: Pan fried hake, with (real) mashed potatoes and peas.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
> You honestly don't see the difference between slanging with what
> professes to be a normal adult and toying with someone who shows every
> sign of damage?

<Cathy smells popcorn, and pulls up a lawn chair...>

So which one are you?

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"Giusi" > wrote in message
...
> "ChattyCathy"
>> cybercat wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Giusi" > wrote in message
>>>> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects to
>>>> stray
>>>> animals. It is not pretty.
>>>>
>>> That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.
>>
>> <LOL!>. Talk about PKB.
>> OBFood: Pan fried hake, with (real) mashed potatoes and peas.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
> You honestly don't see the difference between slanging with what professes
> to be a normal adult and toying with someone who shows every sign of
> damage?

Of course she doesn't. She's a shallow bitch.

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> cybercat wrote:
>
>>
>> "Giusi" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Sqwertz"
>>>> Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Didn't you read the Warning's?
>>>>
>>>> You mena the one that said From: Jerry Sauk >
>>>> ??
>>>>
>>>>>> Can I write 400 words?
>>>>>
>>>>> No. I don't have time for that.
>>>>
>>>> So, what if - by some act of Satan - would you do if *two* people
>>>> mailed
>>>> you their 200-word apologies? That would be 400 words.
>>>>
>>>> -sw
>>>
>>> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects to
>>> stray
>>> animals. It is not pretty.
>>>
>> That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.
>
> <LOL!>. Talk about PKB.
>
> I know, I know... who am *I* to respond to your posts, seeing as how you
> have me killfiled <more laughing>
>

Actually, you're not killfiled, I just usually click past your posts. You're
ugly when you laugh. I think that's kind of unusual.

cybercat wrote:

> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > cybercat wrote:
>
> >> "Giusi" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>> "Sqwertz"
> >>>> Jerry Sauk wrote:
>
> >>>>> Didn't you read the Warning's?
>
> >>>> You mena the one that said *From: Jerry Sauk >
> >>>> *??
>
> >>>>>> Can I write 400 words?
>
> >>>>> * No. *I don't have time for that.
>
> >>>> So, what if - by some act of Satan - would you do if *two* people
> >>>> mailed
> >>>> you their 200-word apologies? *That would be 400 words.
>
> >>>> -sw
>
> >>> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects to
> >>> stray
> >>> animals. *It is not pretty.
>
> >> That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.
>
> > <LOL!>. *Talk about PKB.
>
> > I know, I know... who am *I* to respond to your posts, seeing as how you
> > have me killfiled <more laughing>
>
> Actually, you're not killfiled, I just usually click past your posts. You're
> ugly when you laugh. I think that's kind of unusual.


"cybercat had a boy friend named Dick

And like to put her hand on his prick

She would tease and fool

With her hand on his tool

Then swallow the cream white and thick..."


--
Best
Greg

cybercat wrote:

>
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Giusi" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Sqwertz"
>>>>> Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Didn't you read the Warning's?
>>>>>
>>>>> You mena the one that said From: Jerry Sauk
>>>>> >
>>>>> ??
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can I write 400 words?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No. I don't have time for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what if - by some act of Satan - would you do if *two* people
>>>>> mailed
>>>>> you their 200-word apologies? That would be 400 words.
>>>>>
>>>>> -sw
>>>>
>>>> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects
>>>> to stray
>>>> animals. It is not pretty.
>>>>
>>> That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.
>>
>> <LOL!>. Talk about PKB.
>>
>> I know, I know... who am *I* to respond to your posts, seeing as how
>> you have me killfiled <more laughing>
>>
>
> Actually, you're not killfiled, I just usually click past your posts.

Really? I could have sworn you announced to the group that I was in your
kf (several times).

> You're ugly when you laugh. I think that's kind of unusual.

Heh. Got to hand it to you cybercat, you sure come up with some
very 'grown up' comments.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"Michael "Dog3"" > wrote in message
5.247...
> Sqwertz > news:gdl1l9$70r$2
> @registered.motzarella.org: in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>>
>>> So you died and now think you own alt.fast-food? That's not the way it
>>> works.
>>
>> Jerry never really died. He's been in a coma for 8 months and is
>> posting VIA mental telepathy.
>
> Mea culpa! I thought he was communicating via seance.
>
> Michael


He wasn't in a comma, he was in an apostrophe!

TFM®

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Giusi" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Sqwertz"
>>> Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>>
>>>> Didn't you read the Warning's?
>>>
>>> You mena the one that said From: Jerry Sauk > ??
>>>
>>>>> Can I write 400 words?
>>>>
>>>> No. I don't have time for that.
>>>
>>> So, what if - by some act of Satan - would you do if *two* people mailed
>>> you their 200-word apologies? That would be 400 words.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> Guys, this is beginning to seem like when brats tie sharp objects to
>> stray animals. It is not pretty.
>>
> That's what I meant when I suggested they grow up.
>

Dahlink, men never grow up.

TFM®

Giusi > wrote:

> You honestly don't see the difference between slanging with what professes
> to be a normal adult and toying with someone who shows every sign of damage?

Hmm. I can't figure out which one is which pair is which in this
comparison.

-sw

"Michael "Dog3"" > wrote:

> Sqwertz > news:gdl1l9$70r$2
> @registered.motzarella.org: in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>>
>>> So you died and now think you own alt.fast-food? That's not the way it
>>> works.
>>
>> Jerry never really died. He's been in a coma for 8 months and is
>> posting VIA mental telepathy.
>
> Mea culpa! I thought he was communicating via seance.

That's exactly what we're doing here - trying to revive him. If it
weren't for us, the light would have faded months ago.

-sw