Skwerts > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 05:54:20 GMT, PL wrote:
>
>> Omelet > wrote in
>> news >>
>>> In article >,
>>> Sqwertz > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> <snork> That's really reaching babe. ;-)
>>> I suppose I'm routing my computer thru Australia now?
>>>
>>> I'd not know how to do that even if I wanted to...
>>
>> You should know by now that spurtz will say practically *anything* to
>> try and 'score points' against you and I, because it has it's nose out
>> of joint because we're still talking!!
>>
>> It doesn't want to 'share' you with me :-)
>
> Oh, gawd, Peter. You are a real class act. You can have as much
> of Om as the next guy.
>
> So that's Peter's game here - He's jealous!?!?! Heh. He's even
> more ****ed up in the head than we originally suspected.
>
> All your's Peter. I bow to your charismatic charm and superior
> wit - you are the better man for Om. I'm handing my reins <cough>
> over to you.
>
> Giddyup and Carry on, my good man.
>
> -sw
>


Which all goes to show what the truly pathetic, immature, little arse wipe
you really are....... and that's discounting your pathetic morphing.

*You* are the one, spurtz, that *demanded* Om not talk to me anymore "if
she wanted to stay as your friend"!!

LOL!!!


You've never really left the Grade School yard, have you spurtz?


Get your mummy and daddy to pay for a Rhinoplasty to get that huge honker
of yours back into its proper shape... after it's been all bent out of
shape!! ROFLMAO!!!!!

Now run along you little drama queen.

--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

Pain is your friend, your ally, it will tell you when you are seriously
injured, it will keep you awake and angry, and remind you to finish the
job and get the hell home. But you know the best thing about pain?

It lets you know you're not dead yet!

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:15:39 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:07:58 -0500, Stu wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:44:21 +0100, Janet Baraclough
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>The message >
>>>from "Bob Terwilliger" > contains these words:
>>>
>>>
>>>> You have to get up pretty early in the morning if you want to out-feeble
>>>> Chester. He waited 72 hours and then took no further action!
>>>
>>> Whaaaat, are you telling me you still haven't heard from Gary The Lawyer?
>>>
>>> I hope he hasn't had an accident at the squash court.
>>>
>>> Janet
>>
>> he will
>
> Gary's gonna have accident at the squash court? O.M.G. Sure somebody can
> sue you for predicting *that* on Usenet, Stu.

sounds more like a threat to me.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:22:22 -0500, Stu wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:15:39 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:07:58 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:44:21 +0100, Janet Baraclough
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>The message >
>>>>from "Bob Terwilliger" > contains these words:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> You have to get up pretty early in the morning if you want to out-feeble
>>>>> Chester. He waited 72 hours and then took no further action!
>>>>
>>>> Whaaaat, are you telling me you still haven't heard from Gary The Lawyer?
>>>>
>>>> I hope he hasn't had an accident at the squash court.
>>>>
>>>> Janet
>>>
>>> he will
>>
>>Gary's gonna have accident at the squash court? O.M.G. Sure somebody can
>>sue you for predicting *that* on Usenet, Stu.
>
> Been in the wine again have you Chatty

being drunk doesn't help to decipher gibberish.

blake

"sf" > wrote in message
...
>
> People who are off site IT support use it... or if someone had a
> software problem and wanted my help, we could figure it out via VNC.
> I can take control of the pointer and look around the other computer
> but I'm not even in the room. It's very cool.

Even people who are ON site IT use remote control software. Sometimes only
the port used by whatever choice is used is the only one open through a
firewall between the user's network and the production hosting network. Of
course it would not be open through the firewall and the Internet.

In article >,
PL > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote in
> news >
> > In article >,
> > Sqwertz > wrote:
>
> >
> > <snork> That's really reaching babe. ;-)
> > I suppose I'm routing my computer thru Australia now?
> >
> > I'd not know how to do that even if I wanted to...
>
>
>
> You should know by now that spurtz will say practically *anything* to try and
> 'score points' against you and I, because it has it's nose out of joint
> because we're still talking!!
>
> It doesn't want to 'share' you with me :-)

Hm. Never had boys fight over me before...

JUST KIDDING!!! <g>
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine

Omelet > wrote in
news

>> You should know by now that spurtz will say practically *anything* to
>> try and 'score points' against you and I, because it has it's nose out
>> of joint because we're still talking!!
>>
>> It doesn't want to 'share' you with me :-)
>
> Hm. Never had boys fight over me before...
>
> JUST KIDDING!!! <g>



No fight on my part...... I'm just amused at it's childish pettiness.

You can just picture it in a schoolyard stamping it's little feet and
screaming till it was red in the face!!! ROFL!!!



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

Pain is your friend, your ally, it will tell you when you are seriously
injured, it will keep you awake and angry, and remind you to finish the job
and get the hell home. But you know the best thing about pain?

It lets you know you're not dead yet!

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:02:39 -0500, Stu wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:23:01 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:15:39 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:07:58 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:44:21 +0100, Janet Baraclough
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The message >
>>>>>from "Bob Terwilliger" > contains these words:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> You have to get up pretty early in the morning if you want to out-feeble
>>>>>> Chester. He waited 72 hours and then took no further action!
>>>>>
>>>>> Whaaaat, are you telling me you still haven't heard from Gary The Lawyer?
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope he hasn't had an accident at the squash court.
>>>>>
>>>>> Janet
>>>>
>>>> he will
>>>
>>> Gary's gonna have accident at the squash court? O.M.G. Sure somebody can
>>> sue you for predicting *that* on Usenet, Stu.
>>
>>sounds more like a threat to me.
>>
>>your pal,
>>blake
>
> ...you're getting testy Blake, why not shut the computer off and go
> for a walk.

better testy than stupid.

blake

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:30:40 -0500, Stu wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:51:36 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:02:39 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:23:01 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:15:39 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:07:58 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:44:21 +0100, Janet Baraclough
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The message >
>>>>>>>from "Bob Terwilliger" > contains these words:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You have to get up pretty early in the morning if you want to out-feeble
>>>>>>>> Chester. He waited 72 hours and then took no further action!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whaaaat, are you telling me you still haven't heard from Gary The Lawyer?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope he hasn't had an accident at the squash court.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Janet
>>>>>>
>>>>>> he will
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary's gonna have accident at the squash court? O.M.G. Sure somebody can
>>>>> sue you for predicting *that* on Usenet, Stu.
>>>>
>>>>sounds more like a threat to me.
>>>>
>>>>your pal,
>>>>blake
>>>
>>> ...you're getting testy Blake, why not shut the computer off and go
>>> for a walk.
>>
>>better testy than stupid.
>>
>>blake
>
> Sandbox getting crowded blakey?

Website hits declining Stuey?

--
Chatty Cathy

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:59:12 -0500, Stu wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 18:44:53 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:30:40 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:51:36 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:02:39 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:23:01 -0400, blake murphy
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:15:39 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:07:58 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:44:21 +0100, Janet Baraclough
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The message > from "Bob
>>>>>>>>>Terwilliger" > contains these words:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You have to get up pretty early in the morning if you want to
>>>>>>>>>> out-feeble Chester. He waited 72 hours and then took no further
>>>>>>>>>> action!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Whaaaat, are you telling me you still haven't heard from Gary
>>>>>>>>> The Lawyer?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hope he hasn't had an accident at the squash court.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Janet
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> he will
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary's gonna have accident at the squash court? O.M.G. Sure
>>>>>>> somebody can sue you for predicting *that* on Usenet, Stu.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>sounds more like a threat to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>your pal,
>>>>>>blake
>>>>>
>>>>> ...you're getting testy Blake, why not shut the computer off and go
>>>>> for a walk.
>>>>
>>>>better testy than stupid.
>>>>
>>>>blake
>>>
>>> Sandbox getting crowded blakey?
>>
>>Website hits declining Stuey?
>
>
> No, but thanks for worrying Chatty, infarct the forecast for the rest of
> the year is 430K, we're already at 266K.

<snork> Love it when I'm right, Stuey.

You know and I know that the one and *only* reason you subscribed to this
group (which has caused me considerable amusement - I hafta admit - when
reading your constant whiny "Oh poor-hard-done-by-me" posts) was to to try
to increase traffic to that run of the mill, technically sub-standard
recipe website of yours. However, no matter how many lawyers you
(allegedly) hire, it ain't going to improve it any time soon. /Infarct/,
you better hope those same lawyers can cover your backside when you get
sued for copyright infringement for publishing a *humongous* number of the
aforementioned recipes without permission from the authors and/or
publishing them without the correct attributions.

Mind you, you'd probably look good in orange too...

--
Chatty Cathy

On 20/06/2010 2:59 AM, Stu wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 18:44:53 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:30:40 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:51:36 -0400, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:02:39 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:23:01 -0400, blake murphy
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:15:39 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:07:58 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:44:21 +0100, Janet Baraclough
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The >
>>>>>>>> >from "Bob > contains these words:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You have to get up pretty early in the morning if you want to out-feeble
>>>>>>>>>> Chester. He waited 72 hours and then took no further action!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Whaaaat, are you telling me you still haven't heard from Gary The Lawyer?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hope he hasn't had an accident at the squash court.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Janet
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> he will
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary's gonna have accident at the squash court? O.M.G. Sure somebody can
>>>>>>> sue you for predicting *that* on Usenet, Stu.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sounds more like a threat to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> your pal,
>>>>>> blake
>>>>>
>>>>> ...you're getting testy Blake, why not shut the computer off and go
>>>>> for a walk.
>>>>
>>>> better testy than stupid.
>>>>
>>>> blake
>>>
>>> Sandbox getting crowded blakey?
>>
>> Website hits declining Stuey?
>
>
> No, but thanks for worrying Chatty, infarct the forecast for the rest
> of the year is 430K, we're already at 266K.

A myocardial infarct no doubt!!!

Krypsis

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 21:59:12 -0500, Stu wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:40:04 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:


>>>>Website hits declining Stuey?
>>>
>>>
>>> No, but thanks for worrying Chatty, infarct the forecast for the rest
>>> of the year is 430K, we're already at 266K.
>>
>><snork> Love it when I'm right, Stuey.

>> You know and I know that the one and *only* reason you subscribed to
>> this group (which has caused me considerable amusement - I hafta admit
>> - when reading your constant whiny "Oh poor-hard-done-by-me" posts) was
>> to to try to increase traffic to that run of the mill, technically
>> sub-standard recipe website of yours. However, no matter how many
>> lawyers you (allegedly) hire, it ain't going to improve it any time
>> soon. /Infarct/, you better hope those same lawyers can cover your
>> backside when you get sued for copyright infringement for publishing a
>> *humongous* number of the aforementioned recipes without permission
>> from the authors and/or publishing them without the correct
>> attributions.

>>Mind you, you'd probably look good in orange too...
>
> Oh yes you're always right, watch that swelling head doesn't explode.

Truth hurts, 'eh Stuey? BTW, the number of hits you're bragging about is
nothing to write home to your mommy about; that's only an average of 36k
per month - I even get that on the RFC site. And I hate to break it to
you, in the grand scheme of the 'net, that's peanuts...

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:40:04 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:59:12 -0500, Stu wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 18:44:53 +0200, ChattyCathy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:30:40 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:51:36 -0400, blake murphy
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:02:39 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...you're getting testy Blake, why not shut the computer off and go
>>>>>> for a walk.
>>>>>
>>>>>better testy than stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>>blake
>>>>
>>>> Sandbox getting crowded blakey?
>>>
>>>Website hits declining Stuey?
>>
>> No, but thanks for worrying Chatty, infarct the forecast for the rest of
>> the year is 430K, we're already at 266K.
>
> <snork> Love it when I'm right, Stuey.
>
> You know and I know that the one and *only* reason you subscribed to this
> group (which has caused me considerable amusement - I hafta admit - when
> reading your constant whiny "Oh poor-hard-done-by-me" posts) was to to try
> to increase traffic to that run of the mill, technically sub-standard
> recipe website of yours. However, no matter how many lawyers you
> (allegedly) hire, it ain't going to improve it any time soon. /Infarct/,
> you better hope those same lawyers can cover your backside when you get
> sued for copyright infringement for publishing a *humongous* number of the
> aforementioned recipes without permission from the authors and/or
> publishing them without the correct attributions.
>
> Mind you, you'd probably look good in orange too...

i liked 'infarct,' too.

your pal,
blake

ChattyCathy wrote to Chester:

> You know and I know that the one and *only* reason you subscribed to this
> group (which has caused me considerable amusement - I hafta admit - when
> reading your constant whiny "Oh poor-hard-done-by-me" posts) was to to try
> to increase traffic to that run of the mill, technically sub-standard
> recipe website of yours.


Common US parlance has a term for Chester's attitude:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...term=butt-hurt

Butt-Hurt: "Taking offense at something and getting ****y and dramatic about
it."

(Of course, the people whose butts *really* hurt are the kids who climb into
Chester's van!)


Bob