You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.

68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.

Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?

-sw

Sqwertz > wrote in
:

>
> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>
> -sw
>

People here are still in shock. Give them some time.

On Mon 29 Dec 2008 10:29:49p, elaich told us...

> Sqwertz > wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>
>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>
>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>
>> -sw
>>
>
> People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>

That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely silly
or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Monday, 12(XII)/29(XXIX)/08(MMVIII)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till New Year's Eve
1dys 1hrs 14mins
************************************************** **********************
I can't hear you. There's a banana republic in my ear.
************************************************** **********************

Wayne Boatwright said...

> On Mon 29 Dec 2008 10:29:49p, elaich told us...
>
>> Sqwertz > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>>
>>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>>
>>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>>
>>> -sw
>>>
>>
>> People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>>
>
> That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely
silly
> or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.


Like YOU'RE Mr. Magic??? Ya BUM!!!

Andy wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright said...
>>
>> That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely
> silly
>> or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.
>
> Like YOU'RE Mr. Magic??? Ya BUM!!!

I don't get this. IIRC, you two used to get along just fine. Obviously I
missed something...

<please bear with me - I feel a rant coming on>

It would appear that Greg Morrow has been polite to cybercat lately (and
has actually been discussing food with her) right here on r.f.c. You
could have knocked me over with a feather when I read some of his
recent posts, but when I thought about it, I had to say, 'Good for
him/them'.

In view of that good example, could I perhaps persuade you two to do the
same?

I, in turn, will promise to continue to abstain from making rude remarks
to and/or about cybercat (which I have been doing for a few weeks, not
that you probably noticed) because I thought it had gone
beyond 'amusing'. FWIW, we used to get along too, believe it or not. I
****ed her off (justifiably so) quite a while back and it just
snowballed from there.

However, I won't make any promises to turn into an 'angel' overnight; I
still have one or two other sparring partners here, and I've gotta do
this in 'baby steps' ;-)

Anyway, my point is this - IMHO, if they can do it, so can we. What say
you?

</rant>

OBFood: Gonna make chicken curry tonight.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy > wrote:

> In view of that good example, could I perhaps persuade you two to do the
> same?
>
> Anyway, my point is this - IMHO, if they can do it, so can we. What say
> you?

Ahh, your turn to be moderator today. Fine by me.

-sw

Cathy,

C'est la vie

Best,

Andy

On Tue 30 Dec 2008 12:49:22a, ChattyCathy told us...

> Andy wrote:
>
>> Wayne Boatwright said...
>>>
>>> That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely
>> silly
>>> or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.
>>
>> Like YOU'RE Mr. Magic??? Ya BUM!!!
>
> I don't get this. IIRC, you two used to get along just fine. Obviously I
> missed something...
>
> <please bear with me - I feel a rant coming on>
>
> It would appear that Greg Morrow has been polite to cybercat lately (and
> has actually been discussing food with her) right here on r.f.c. You
> could have knocked me over with a feather when I read some of his
> recent posts, but when I thought about it, I had to say, 'Good for
> him/them'.
>
> In view of that good example, could I perhaps persuade you two to do the
> same?
>
> I, in turn, will promise to continue to abstain from making rude remarks
> to and/or about cybercat (which I have been doing for a few weeks, not
> that you probably noticed) because I thought it had gone
> beyond 'amusing'. FWIW, we used to get along too, believe it or not. I
> ****ed her off (justifiably so) quite a while back and it just
> snowballed from there.
>
> However, I won't make any promises to turn into an 'angel' overnight; I
> still have one or two other sparring partners here, and I've gotta do
> this in 'baby steps' ;-)
>
> Anyway, my point is this - IMHO, if they can do it, so can we. What say
> you?

I say that I'm better off just ignoring Andy's posts altogether. In fact,
he has been in my killfile for some time, so I only see him quoted.
Actually, I was responding to Steve's post regarding Andy. IMHO, for some
time Andy's posts have basically contributed nothing and have consisted of
little more than silly one-liners or inane, irrelevant or pointless
questions. No, I won't be "making nice" or apologizing for something I
believe to be true. I will however, attempt to abstain from any comments
altogther. If that doesn't satisfy you, then I guess there'll be no
satisfaction. Sorry, Cathy.

Mind you, if he responds to this, don't be surprised at my reply. I didn't
write this to himi, but to you.

Kill file growning by leaps and bounds.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Tuesday, 12(XII)/30(XXX)/08(MMVIII)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till New Year's Eve
18hrs 27mins
************************************************** **********************
Every morning is the dawn of a new error...
************************************************** **********************

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Mon 29 Dec 2008 10:29:49p, elaich told us...
>
>> Sqwertz > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>>
>>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>>
>>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>>
>>> -sw
>>>
>> People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>>
>
> That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely silly
> or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.
>
Does it matter? Folks can read them, respond to them or not.

--
Jean B.

On Tue 30 Dec 2008 08:21:44a, Jean B. told us...

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>> On Mon 29 Dec 2008 10:29:49p, elaich told us...
>>
>>> Sqwertz > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>>>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>>>
>>>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>>>
>>>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>>>
>>>> -sw
>>>>
>>> People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>>>
>>
>> That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely
>> silly or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.
>>
> Does it matter? Folks can read them, respond to them or not.
>

It doesn't matter to me. I don't read them and only see them if they're
quoted.It still doesn't change my opinion.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Tuesday, 12(XII)/30(XXX)/08(MMVIII)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till New Year's Eve
15hrs 10mins
************************************************** **********************
The problem with learning to speed-read is you run out of comic
books too fast.
************************************************** **********************

"Jean B." > wrote
>>
> Does it matter? Folks can read them, respond to them or not.
>

There you go!

> "Jean B." > wrote
>>>
>> Does it matter? Folks can read them, respond to them or not.
>>

WHAT A CONCEPT! YOU'RE A CERTIFIABLE DOUBLE MENSA GENIUS!

Sorry, I got carried away a little there, but your concept is just SOOOO
exciting!

Steve ;-)

cybercat wrote:

> "Jean B." > wrote
> >>
> > Does it matter? Folks can read them, respond to them or not.
> >
>
> There you go!


Yep...*exactly*...and I think that Steve started this thread because he's
having his monthy manopause "moment". He needs to be looking for a date for
New Year's Eve or something...

;-)


--
Best
Greg

Jean B. wrote:

>> That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely
>> silly or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.
> Does it matter? Folks can read them, respond to them or not.
>
I for one think all the flotsam and jetsam that he posts seriously
diminish the quality of this newsgroup. But he"s not alone.

ObFood- testing a recipe for ham balls with Voodoo sauce tonight, to see
how it might rate in case I need to bring an appetizer to work on NY's
Eve. Finding recipes that transport well, and are reheated only in a
microwave is so hard sometimes....

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 12:58:03 -0500, Goomba >
wrote:
>ObFood- testing a recipe for ham balls with Voodoo sauce tonight, to see
>how it might rate in case I need to bring an appetizer to work on NY's
>Eve. Finding recipes that transport well, and are reheated only in a
>microwave is so hard sometimes....


Ooooh...that sounds very good. What is Voodoo sauce?
I have been trying to think of some appetizers and I totally forgot
about ham balls.

Christine, just waking up.

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 12:58:03 -0500, Goomba >
fired up random neurons and synapses to opine:

>ObFood- testing a recipe for ham balls with Voodoo sauce tonight, to see
>how it might rate in case I need to bring an appetizer to work on NY's
>Eve. Finding recipes that transport well, and are reheated only in a
>microwave is so hard sometimes....

Word up, Goomba - I finally made a subcategory in my recipe software
"cookbook" entitled "The Movable Feast" that is entirely about food
that can be made ahead and reheated or made ahead and served cold/room
temperature. A good example (and one I'm making for New Year's Day
Bowl watching with friends) and mondo-simple*:

@@@@@ Now You're Cooking! Export Format

Walking Tostada

appetizers

1 can refried beans
1 recipe guacamole
4 green onions; chopped
1 can green chiles; chopped
1 can black olives; chopped
2 tomatoes; chopped
1 cup cheddar cheese; grated
tortilla chips

In quiche dish, layer in the order the ingredients are listed, with
the refried beans being on the bottom. Serve cold or bake at 350°F
until hot, 10 - 15 mins.

Contributor: Lil Clark

Yield: 12 servings

*And as silly as it sounds, I found a perfect gizmo for keeping food
warm without overheating it like chafing dishes, warming trays, etc.
can do: a heating pad. I just wrap it in a festive square of cloth to
"pretty it up."

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

--

"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "meatloaf" with "cox"

On Dec 30, 12:48�am, Wayne Boatwright >
wrote:
> On Mon 29 Dec 2008 10:29:49p, elaich told us...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sqwertz > wrote in
> :
>
> >> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> >> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> >> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> >> Have you all gone bonkers? �Is this the future of RFC?
>
> >> -sw
>
> > People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>
> That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely silly
> or stupid, no matter how people respond to them. �

And yours are seriously disingenuous... at least Andy is genuine...
Andy contributes good natured character and humor, Duh'Weenie (like
the sqwartz) contributes only nastiness and insincerity.

On Dec 31, 3:22*am, Sheldon > wrote:
> On Dec 30, 12:48 am, Wayne Boatwright >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon 29 Dec 2008 10:29:49p, elaich told us...
>
> > > Sqwertz > wrote in
> > :
>
> > >> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> > >> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> > >> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> > >> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>
> > >> -sw
>
> > > People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>
> > That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely silly
> > or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.
>
> And yours are seriously disingenuous... at least Andy is genuine...
> Andy contributes good natured character and humor, Duh'Weenie (like
> the sqwartz) contributes only nastiness and insincerity.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

R.F.C does not have a future while Peter Lucas is a member

On Tue 30 Dec 2008 09:38:14a, ++Centrelink++ told us...

> On Dec 31, 3:22*am, Sheldon > wrote:
>> On Dec 30, 12:48 am, Wayne Boatwright >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mon 29 Dec 2008 10:29:49p, elaich told us...
>>
>> > > Sqwertz > wrote in
>> > :
>>
>> > >> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>> > >> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>
>> > >> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>
>> > >> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>
>> > >> -sw
>>
>> > > People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>>
>> > That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely
si
> lly
>> > or stupid, no matter how people respond to them.
>>
>> And yours are seriously disingenuous... at least Andy is genuine...
>> Andy contributes good natured character and humor, Duh'Weenie (like
>> the sqwartz) contributes only nastiness and insincerity.

And yours are filthy, vile, denigrating, and full of lies and inaccuracies.
Your tenure on this newsgroup is not a right of entitlement to anything,
much less to hurt, embarrass, or assassinate the character of any other
poste.r

I find it interesting that the majority of poster who used to rush to your
defense totally ignore the fact that you exist.

>>- Hied quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> R.F.C does not have a future while Peter Lucas is a member
>



--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Tuesday, 12(XII)/30(XXX)/08(MMVIII)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till New Year's Eve
13hrs 59mins
************************************************** **********************
A dog is a dog. Unless it's facing you, then it's *Mr.* Dog.
************************************************** **********************

Sheldon wrote:

On Dec 30, 12:48?am, Wayne Boatwright >
wrote:
> On Mon 29 Dec 2008 10:29:49p, elaich told us...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sqwertz > wrote in
> :
>
> >> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> >> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> >> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> >> Have you all gone bonkers? ?Is this the future of RFC?
>
> >> -sw
>
> > People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>
> That doesn't discount the fact that most of Andy's posts are largely silly
> or stupid, no matter how people respond to them. ?

And yours are seriously disingenuous... at least Andy is genuine...
Andy contributes good natured character and humor, Duh'Weenie (like
the sqwartz) contributes only nastiness and insincerity.
---------------------

GM replies:

Yup, and Andy isn't over - weening and unctuous and slopping over with sugar
(or in this case saccharine) like Wayne is...he isn't a pussy - mouthed
whiner like Wayne is, either. And Andy doesn't engage in that odious panty -
waisted 'weak sister' two - faced typically sissy behavior that was passe
even when _Tea and Sympathy_ was new on Broadway...

The fact of even knowing that Wayne is smarming about here makes my skin
postively crawl, like it's covered with a BILLION burrowing and biting
cooties...Andy's presence does *not*.

[And the fact that Andy gets under Steve's martinet skin makes me laff in
any case...]

I'm SURE I can think of many more good things to say about Andy as opposed
to Wayne, just give me a second or two...I WON'T hold back!

;-P


--
Best
Greg

On 30 Dec 2008 05:29:49 GMT, elaich > wrote:

>Sqwertz > wrote in
:
>
>>
>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>
>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>
>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>
>> -sw
>>
>
>People here are still in shock. Give them some time.

It's halfway between Christmas and New Years... nobody is posting
ANYTHING of substance ANYWHERE on the internet - everyone's in their
annual holiday torpor or they're too busy celebrating years-end with
their families.

"Kajikit" > wrote in message
...
> On 30 Dec 2008 05:29:49 GMT, elaich > wrote:
>
>>Sqwertz > wrote in
:
>>
>>>
>>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>>
>>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>>
>>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>>
>>> -sw
>>>
>>
>>People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>
> It's halfway between Christmas and New Years... nobody is posting
> ANYTHING of substance ANYWHERE on the internet - everyone's in their
> annual holiday torpor or they're too busy celebrating years-end with
> their families.

In other words, it's business as usual. Usenet wouldn't be Usenet without
the whiners who are lamenting what it is not that they wish it was. "What it
used to be," "more on topic," and, my personal favorite, filled with only
the types of posts by the types of people they want to read.

The end of Usenet comes when any of these freaks can actually control what
is being posted, including the troll posts and including the spam.

Kajikit wrote:

> It's halfway between Christmas and New Years... nobody is posting
> ANYTHING of substance ANYWHERE on the internet - everyone's in their
> annual holiday torpor or they're too busy celebrating years-end with
> their families.

But it's a cooking group. It's the busiest kitchen season of the year.

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> Kajikit wrote:
>
>> It's halfway between Christmas and New Years... nobody is posting
>> ANYTHING of substance ANYWHERE on the internet - everyone's in their
>> annual holiday torpor or they're too busy celebrating years-end with
>> their families.
>
> But it's a cooking group. It's the busiest kitchen season of the year.
>
> -sw

The Internet reports a spike in liquor sales, particularly "cooking" sherry,
which is up 1,012% vs. vodka which is only up 568%.

Steve

In article >,
Kajikit > wrote:

> On 30 Dec 2008 05:29:49 GMT, elaich > wrote:
>
> >Sqwertz > wrote in
> :
> >
> >>
> >> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> >> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
> >>
> >> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
> >>
> >> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
> >>
> >> -sw
> >>
> >
> >People here are still in shock. Give them some time.
>
> It's halfway between Christmas and New Years... nobody is posting
> ANYTHING of substance ANYWHERE on the internet - everyone's in their
> annual holiday torpor or they're too busy celebrating years-end with
> their families.

And probably living on yummy leftovers. <g>

Here is Ham, rice dressing (that I just added eggs and peas to at dad's
request), sweet potatoes, roasted carrots and baby bok choy.

There are also some sweets from my sister in the 'frige including a
small loaf of zucchini bread I've not tried yet.
--
Peace! Om

"Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them humanity cannot survive." -- Dalai Lama

elaich wrote:

> People here are still in shock. Give them some time.

Many of them NEED shock. About 20,000V and a couple amps through the
temples.

-sw

Sqwertz said...

>
> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>
> -sw


Wartz,

Your inferiority complex never ceases to amaze me.

Andy

Andy wrote:
> Sqwartz squeaked:
>
> > You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> > mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> > 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> > Have you all gone bonkers? �Is this the future of RFC?
>
> Wartz,
>
> Your inferiority complex never ceases to amaze me.


Why are you amazed that the sqwartz runt has an inferiority complex...
the megalomaniacal midget has a definite napoleon complex... and I
ain't tawkin' pastry. LOL

*Miniature* (sqwartz) Roquefort Napoleons
Gourmet | June 1990

Can be prepared in 45 minutes or less.

Makes 64 napoleons

a 17 1/4-ounce package (2 sheets) frozen puff pastry, thawed
3/4 cup walnuts, chopped fine
6 ounces Roquefort at room temperature, mashed with a fork
4 ounces cream cheese, softened
1/4 cup heavy cream
1 teaspoon fresh lemon juice
white pepper to taste

On a lightly floured surface, working with 1 half of the pastry at a
time, roll out the pastry to form 16- by 12-inch rectangles and
transfer each rectangle to a baking sheet. On 1 of the baking sheet
draw 2 shallow crosswise lines with a blunt knife, dividing the sheet
into thirds, and sprinkle the walnuts over two thirds of the pastry
sheet. Cover each pastry sheet directly with the buttered bottom
surface of another baking sheet to weight it. Bake the pastry sheets
in a preheated 400�F.oven for 5 minutes, remove the baking sheet
weights, and with a fork prick the pastry sheet all over. Return the
baking sheet weights to the pastry sheets for 10 minutes more, and
remove the baking sheet weights. Prick the pastry sheets again, switch
the baking sheets in the oven so the pastry sheets bake evenly, and
bake the pastry sheets for 7 to 10 minutes more, or until they are
crisp and golden. While the pastry sheets are still warm, with a
pastry wheel cut each sheet crosswise into sixteen 1-inch strips and
cut the strips into sixths, making ninety-six 2-by 1-inch rectangles
per sheet. The pastry rectangles may be made 1 day in advance and
kept, covered with plastic wrap, on the baking sheets.

In a bowl with an electric mixer beat together the Roquefort, the
cream cheese, the lemon juice, the white pepper, and salt to taste
until the mixture is creamy and smooth. The filling may be made 2 days
in advance and kept covered and chilled. Let the filling return to
room temperature before spreading it.

Spread a thin layer of the filling on each of the rectangles without
walnuts. To assemble each napoleon stack 2 Roquefort-topped layers and
top them with a walnut topped layer.

In a bowl with an electric mixer beat together the Roquefort, the
cream cheese, the lemon juice, the white pepper, and salt to taste
until the mixture is creamy and smooth. The filling may be made 2 days
in advance and kept covered and chilled. Let the filling return to
room temperature before spreading it.

Spread a thin layer of the filling on each of the rectangles without
walnuts. To assemble each napoleon stack 2 Roquefort-topped layers and
top them with a walnut topped layer.


Review:
Pretty boring; it [sqwartz] doesn't have any panache.

by Anne from Cambridge, MA on 12/13/03


Ahahahahahahahahahahaha. . . .

In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:

> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?

Maybe you should unsubscribe? At least for a trial withdrawal period?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> Sqwertz > wrote:
>
>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>
>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>
>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>
> Maybe you should unsubscribe? At least for a trial withdrawal period?

I didn't read/participate much a couple weeks earlier this month for a
couple weeks.

Every time I come back I realize it's even more pathetic than I thought
when I left.

But I'm a die-hard usenetter, administering servers and participating
when it was all run over UUCP and stored in local spooldirs. I kinda
wanna stick around and see it crash and burn. And I have a bag of
marshmallows and a pointy stick, too.

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> Dan Abel wrote:
>> In article >,
>> Sqwertz > wrote:
>>
>>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>>
>>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>>
>>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>
>> Maybe you should unsubscribe? At least for a trial withdrawal period?
>
> I didn't read/participate much a couple weeks earlier this month for a
> couple weeks.
>
> Every time I come back I realize it's even more pathetic than I thought
> when I left.
>
> But I'm a die-hard usenetter, administering servers and participating when
> it was all run over UUCP and stored in local spooldirs. I kinda wanna
> stick around and see it crash and burn.

Then what are you complaining about?

cybercat > wrote:

> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> Sqwertz > wrote:
>>>
>>>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>>>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>>>
>>>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>>>
>>>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>>
>>> Maybe you should unsubscribe? At least for a trial withdrawal period?
>>
>> I didn't read/participate much a couple weeks earlier this month for a
>> couple weeks.
>>
>> Every time I come back I realize it's even more pathetic than I thought
>> when I left.
>>
>> But I'm a die-hard usenetter, administering servers and participating when
>> it was all run over UUCP and stored in local spooldirs. I kinda wanna
>> stick around and see it crash and burn.
>
> Then what are you complaining about?

Just trying to speed it up before my marshmallows get stale.

-sw

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 19:26:19 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:

> cybercat > wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Sqwertz > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>>>>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>>>>
>>>>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you should unsubscribe? At least for a trial withdrawal period?
>>>
>>> I didn't read/participate much a couple weeks earlier this month for a
>>> couple weeks.
>>>
>>> Every time I come back I realize it's even more pathetic than I thought
>>> when I left.
>>>
>>> But I'm a die-hard usenetter, administering servers and participating when
>>> it was all run over UUCP and stored in local spooldirs. I kinda wanna
>>> stick around and see it crash and burn.
>>
>> Then what are you complaining about?
>
> Just trying to speed it up before my marshmallows get stale.
>
> -sw

you have absolutely no consideration for future knuckleheads.

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 12:34:38 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
>> In article >,
>> Sqwertz > wrote:
>>
>>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>>
>>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>>
>>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>
>> Maybe you should unsubscribe? At least for a trial withdrawal period?
>
> I didn't read/participate much a couple weeks earlier this month for a
> couple weeks.
>
> Every time I come back I realize it's even more pathetic than I thought
> when I left.
>
> But I'm a die-hard usenetter, administering servers and participating
> when it was all run over UUCP and stored in local spooldirs. I kinda
> wanna stick around and see it crash and burn. And I have a bag of
> marshmallows and a pointy stick, too.
>
> -sw

usenet will never go away completely as long as there are free pictures of
naked ladies.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy > wrote:

> usenet will never go away completely as long as there are free pictures of
> naked ladies.

That's what bittorrent is for. And they have moving pictures
with sound, too.

-sw

On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 21:39:21 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> usenet will never go away completely as long as there are free pictures of
>> naked ladies.
>
> That's what bittorrent is for. And they have moving pictures
> with sound, too.
>
> -sw

uh-oh.

your pal,
blake

Sqwertz wrote:

>
> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?

Ah. I see it's your turn to be moderator today. OK with me.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
>
> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>
> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>
> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>


Time to back away from the computer, Steve. It's Usenet, not a shrine.

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> You know it's a sad day in RFC when all people can do is respond
>> mindlessly to drunken stupor Andy posts.
>>
>> 68% of the posts today were about absolutely nothing.
>>
>> Have you all gone bonkers? Is this the future of RFC?
>>
>
>
> Time to back away from the computer, Steve. It's Usenet, not a shrine.

Ha, ha.

Nice line.

Shouldn't encourage her though.

Food: backed off from a tin of frankfurters today.

Things haven't got THAT bad, yet.

--
http://www.gillsmith999.plus.com/

"Gill Smith" > wrote
> Food: backed off from a tin of frankfurters today.
>
> Things haven't got THAT bad, yet.
>

A tin? You mean, like cocktail franks?