On 8/17/2014 12:51 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 00:44:09 -0700 (PDT), Cherry >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>>> Maybe they should make an example out of her for brazenly promoting theft.
>>>
>>>> --Bryan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Honestly, I don't think she has any idea they are pirated and her family is cheating the actors and makers out of royalties.
>>> --
>>> Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.
>>
>> I don't know how it is in the US, but here (UK) a lot of ISPs are blocking sites like The Pirate Bay. I couldn't download from them even if I wanted to.
>>
>
> That is probably the case here too, but those who pirate find a way.
>
>
I admit, sheepishly, that I get e-books from Pirate Bay. They are not
always perfect, but for free, I can't complain.

--
From somewhere very deep in the heart of Texas

On 8/16/2014 3:13 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:

> Out of curiosity, I would however, love to know the percentage of
> people in the US that do not have online access in this day and age.
> That's the weakest argument. Janet US


"But a 2013 Pew Research Center report found that more than 4 out of 10
Americans aged 65 and older still do not use the Internet €” compared
with 15 percent of those over 18; the number offline rose to 62 percent
among the €œG.I. Generation,€� people older than 77."

<http://www.aarp.org/aarp-foundation/our-work/isolation/info-2014/overcoming-isolation-with-technology.html?intcmp=ILC-DSO-THKSWPS2014-Q24>

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/17/2014 1:15 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't make me laugh. I had a Blockbuster card and John and I were on
>>> a trip out of town. The hotel room had a DVD player so we went to
>>> Blockbuster thinking we'd rent a movie. The clerk at Blockbuster
>>> insisted he had to call home to confirm I was 'allowed' to rent a
>>> movie. I said, "Who do you expect to answer the phone, my cat?!"
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>> They wouldn't rent to my husband because he had out of state I.D.
>
> As if people don't move around. It was the silliest thing, you want to
> call me when I'm standing right in front of you? Dude, I'm not home, I'm
> here!
>
> Jill

He had military I.D. too so didn't need WA I.D.

"Janet Bostwick" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 14:14:54 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
> > wrote:
>
>>According to a report one year ago, 2% of US citizens do not have access,
>>but 20% prefer not to.
>>That is one in five who do not have access for one reason or another.
>>That is significant.
>>
>>Perhaps rude was not the best word for what you meant. If someone passing
>>by a Redbox when
>>they enter or leave a store decides on the spur of the moment to rent a
>>movie, I don't consider that rude.
>>
>>
>>N.
> What I said was " If
> you can make your choice at home, why be rude and take up other
> people's time as you quibble about what to get?" I am willing to
> change rude to inconsiderate.
> Of the one in five, many of those will not be standing at a Red Box
> with a credit card due to age, finances or lack of video equipment.
>
> Janet US

Again, that isn't rude! Is it rude to go in and order a pizza when you
could have ordered it online? What about ordering flowers? Do that online
instead of going into the shop? The list just goes on and on.

On 8/13/2014 12:15 PM, James Silverton wrote:
> For at least a decade, I have collected my loose change at the end of
> the day and put it in a plastic jar. I used to take the contents of the
> jar about once a month to the no-fee coin counting machine at my
> Capital-One bank. Now, the bank has discontinued its machines. I wonder
> if any other banks have such machines and I am sufficiently displeased
> to think of changing banks even if Capital-One's online banking is
> fairly satisfactory.

I have not kept up with RFC lately, so someone may have mentioned this
already regarding "money" AKA "legal tender." I do the same with my
loose change, too. Those coins are put into a old-fashioned glass pint
milk jar on my bedroom bureau/dresser. When it gets nearly full, that
jar goes with me to the bank or credit union to get exchanged for paper
bills or deposited. Usually, the total comes to anywhere between
approximately $40 - $70, depending on the coinage (more quarters vs.
pennies and such). It's a small amount enough to treat myself to a nice
dinner out alone, or some similar small splurge

As "legal tender" and considered as "money," coins (paper bills, too)
_must be accepted_ as payment, deposit, etc. At least this is my
understanding. So, if a bank customer brings in a load of coins to be
'cashed in', deposited, or made as payment for a loan (etc.), the
vendor/bank must accept receipt. More than likely there is some
fine-print someplace that says so-called 'vendor' will not accept coins.
I believe this may be contrary to any "legal tender" 'law', but then,
I am not a lawyer or USA government official (whew!)!!

I remember either watching on a local or national evening news show how
a college student made his final and rather large payment for his
student loans with nothing but pennies!! The school had to take his
payment. Those boxed (but loose, IIRC) pennies definitely had
significant weight and were rolled in on a 'dolly'!

Sky, former bank teller

"Cherry" > wrote in message
...
Surely that would depend on the authors' target readership. Eighth grade is
teenage level. I'm 56 years-old, I don't want books that read like they're
written for teenagers.
>
>
>
> That is what newspapers are written at.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readability

That's only the readability of newspapers from a study that was done in
1948. A few years later the readability level went up to 11th grade not
8th. However, reading and writing isn't just about newspapers and
magazines, it's about the wonderful world of books.

"In 1948, Bernard Feld did a study of every item and ad in the Birmingham
News of 20 November 1947. He divided the items into those above the
8th-grade level and those at the 8th grade or below. He chose the 8th-grade
breakpoint because that was the average reading level of adult readers. An
8th-grade text "will reach about 50 percent of all American grown-ups," he
wrote. Among the wire-service stories, the lower group got two-thirds more
readers, and among local stories, 75 percent more readers. Feld also
believed in drilling writers in Flesch's clear-writing principles.[54]
Both Rudolf Flesch and Robert Gunning worked extensively with newspapers and
the wire services in improving readability. Mainly through their efforts in
a few years, the readability of U.S. newspapers went from the 16th to the
11th-grade level, where it remains today."

Cherry

---

Well when I was in high school we were cautioned to keep our writing at an
8th grade level and we were told then that's how newspapers were written.

"Cherry" > wrote in message
...
> If you are taking the time to decide in a restaurant, you are taking up
> time
> that the waiter could be spending somewhere else. Usually when I sit
> down,
> I already know what I want. I might have to ask questions though to make
> sure that I can eat it.
>>
>> If you are in the aisle of the store, you may well be in someone's way
>>
>> >
> Not the same thing at all. If someone is in my way I just say, "excuse
> me,
> may I pass" and that person moves out of the way. So you can't use that
> as
> justification.
>>
>> Cherry
>>
>> ---
>> Actually I can use whatever I want. Those machines are put there for
>> people to use. They are using them as intended. How in the world is
>> that rude? It isn't.
>
> Of course you can use whatever you want, but that doesn't make you right.

What?

"Janet Bostwick" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 22:26:23 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
> snip
>>
>>Even if I did have to wait 5-10 minutes behind someone, I do have
>>patience.
>>Sheesh.
>
> Wait -- didn't you just say in another thread that the reason you keep
> paper towel in the bathroom is because walking back and forth from
> kitchen to bathroom was difficult for you because of your handicap?
> Yet you can stand for 15 minutes without a problem?
> Janet US

No. Of course not. Standing is even harder for me than walking. But I
sure wouldn't get my panties in a bunch over it. If I did noticed people
fighting at the Redbox, I'd just assume that was a bad location and not use
it again. But bottom line is, I won't do Redbox period!

Only reason I did it the first time was that my mom said I was being mean by
not doing it. Then they offered me a free one. I can't remember why I did
it that last time. Angela might have been sick or something. After that I
got her Nexflix.

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
b.com...
> On 8/16/2014 3:13 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
>> Out of curiosity, I would however, love to know the percentage of
>> people in the US that do not have online access in this day and age.
>> That's the weakest argument. Janet US
>
>
> "But a 2013 Pew Research Center report found that more than 4 out of 10
> Americans aged 65 and older still do not use the Internet €” compared
> with 15 percent of those over 18; the number offline rose to 62 percent
> among the €œG.I. Generation,€� people older than 77."
>
> <http://www.aarp.org/aarp-foundation/our-work/isolation/info-2014/overcoming-isolation-with-technology.html?intcmp=ILC-DSO-THKSWPS2014-Q24>
>
> --
> ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
> Cheryl

The place where my dad was living did not allow Internet. They were worried
that the seniors would go online and buy things they didn't need as many had
dementia. My MIL never had a computer and wouldn't be capable of using one.

On 8/17/2014 5:28 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "Cheryl" > wrote in message
> b.com...
>> On 8/16/2014 3:13 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>>
>>> Out of curiosity, I would however, love to know the percentage of
>>> people in the US that do not have online access in this day and age.
>>> That's the weakest argument. Janet US
>>
>>
>> "But a 2013 Pew Research Center report found that more than 4 out of 10
>> Americans aged 65 and older still do not use the Internet €” compared
>> with 15 percent of those over 18; the number offline rose to 62 percent
>> among the €œG.I. Generation,€� people older than 77."
>>
>> <http://www.aarp.org/aarp-foundation/our-work/isolation/info-2014/overcoming-isolation-with-technology.html?intcmp=ILC-DSO-THKSWPS2014-Q24>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
>> Cheryl
>
> The place where my dad was living did not allow Internet. They were
> worried that the seniors would go online and buy things they didn't need
> as many had dementia. My MIL never had a computer and wouldn't be
> capable of using one.

You don't have to have Internet access to order things. Just a
telephone and a television: "Call NOW! We'll send you TWO! Just pay
separate processing & handling."

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/17/2014 5:28 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "Cheryl" > wrote in message
>> b.com...
>>> On 8/16/2014 3:13 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>>>
>>>> Out of curiosity, I would however, love to know the percentage of
>>>> people in the US that do not have online access in this day and age.
>>>> That's the weakest argument. Janet US
>>>
>>>
>>> "But a 2013 Pew Research Center report found that more than 4 out of 10
>>> Americans aged 65 and older still do not use the Internet €” compared
>>> with 15 percent of those over 18; the number offline rose to 62 percent
>>> among the €œG.I. Generation,€� people older than 77."
>>>
>>> <http://www.aarp.org/aarp-foundation/our-work/isolation/info-2014/overcoming-isolation-with-technology.html?intcmp=ILC-DSO-THKSWPS2014-Q24>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
>>> Cheryl
>>
>> The place where my dad was living did not allow Internet. They were
>> worried that the seniors would go online and buy things they didn't need
>> as many had dementia. My MIL never had a computer and wouldn't be
>> capable of using one.
>
> You don't have to have Internet access to order things. Just a telephone
> and a television: "Call NOW! We'll send you TWO! Just pay separate
> processing & handling."

Not likely that they'd be able to do that either. They aren't allowed to
have credit cards or money. Online, numbers can be stored.

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 6:18:29 PM UTC+1, dsi1 wrote:
> On 8/16/2014 9:53 PM, Cherry wrote:

> >> It is not a word that I ever heard before and not one that I'm likely to hear again. Good writers know that they had best write at an 8th grade level or less if they want to be understood!
>
> >
Surely that would depend on the authors' target readership. Eighth grade is teenage level. I'm 56 years-old, I don't want books that read like they're written for teenagers.
>
> > Cherry
>
>
I learned to write for the age level suitable for broadcasting - understandable by the average 14 year old. This is a good thing.

It's only a good thing if that is the age range of the audience you were targetting.

Cherry

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 10:23:59 PM UTC+1, Julie Bove wrote:
> "Cherry" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > If you are taking the time to decide in a restaurant, you are taking up
>
> > time
>
> > that the waiter could be spending somewhere else. Usually when I sit
>
> > down,
>
> > I already know what I want. I might have to ask questions though to make
>
> > sure that I can eat it.
>
> >>
>
> >> If you are in the aisle of the store, you may well be in someone's way
>
> >>
>
> >> >
>
> > Not the same thing at all. If someone is in my way I just say, "excuse
>
> > me,
>
> > may I pass" and that person moves out of the way. So you can't use that
>
> > as
>
> > justification.
>
> >>
>
> >> Cherry
>
> >>
>
> >> ---
>
> >> Actually I can use whatever I want. Those machines are put there for
>
> >> people to use. They are using them as intended. How in the world is
>
> >> that rude? It isn't.
>
> >
>
> > Of course you can use whatever you want, but that doesn't make you right.
>
>
>
> What?

You seem to have a problem with simple English.

Cherry

Cheryl, the AARP stats you quote don't point out how many of those seniors who
don't use the net do have access, which was the point I made earlier.

N.

On 8/17/2014 12:48 PM, Cherry wrote:
> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 6:18:29 PM UTC+1, dsi1 wrote:
>> On 8/16/2014 9:53 PM, Cherry wrote:
>
>>>> It is not a word that I ever heard before and not one that I'm likely to hear again. Good writers know that they had best write at an 8th grade level or less if they want to be understood!
>>
>>>
> Surely that would depend on the authors' target readership. Eighth grade is teenage level. I'm 56 years-old, I don't want books that read like they're written for teenagers.
>>
>>> Cherry
>>
>>
> I learned to write for the age level suitable for broadcasting - understandable by the average 14 year old. This is a good thing.
>
> It's only a good thing if that is the age range of the audience you were targetting.
>
> Cherry
>

That would be true but that's the general rule for broadcasting. You
have to know the target audience but you still don't write at a level
higher than a 14 year old. That's just the nature of radio.

OTOH, it's probably a good idea to write at a level a little lower than
14 for this newsgroup. :-)

On Saturday, August 16, 2014 2:13:36 PM UTC-5, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
> If that gets your panties in a twist, I can't help you.
>
I can understand how knickers might get twisted, like in the washing machine
or something, requiring untangling, but I can't imagine how panties would end
up in a frustrating condition of twistedness. I've always found them very
easy to manipulate.
>
> Janet US

--Bryan

On 8/17/2014 5:22 PM, Sky wrote:

> As "legal tender" and considered as "money," coins (paper bills, too)
> _must be accepted_ as payment, deposit, etc. At least this is my
> understanding. So, if a bank customer brings in a load of coins to be
> 'cashed in', deposited, or made as payment for a loan (etc.), the
> vendor/bank must accept receipt. More than likely there is some
> fine-print someplace that says so-called 'vendor' will not accept coins.
> I believe this may be contrary to any "legal tender" 'law', but then,
> I am not a lawyer or USA government official (whew!)!!
>
<http://www.snopes.com/business/money/pennies.asp>

On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 13:11:59 -1000, dsi1
> wrote:

>On 8/17/2014 12:48 PM, Cherry wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 6:18:29 PM UTC+1, dsi1 wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2014 9:53 PM, Cherry wrote:
>>
>>>>> It is not a word that I ever heard before and not one that I'm likely to hear again. Good writers know that they had best write at an 8th grade level or less if they want to be understood!
>>>
>>>>
>> Surely that would depend on the authors' target readership. Eighth grade is teenage level. I'm 56 years-old, I don't want books that read like they're written for teenagers.
>>>
>>>> Cherry
>>>
>>>
>> I learned to write for the age level suitable for broadcasting - understandable by the average 14 year old. This is a good thing.
>>
>> It's only a good thing if that is the age range of the audience you were targetting.
>>
>> Cherry
>>
>
>That would be true but that's the general rule for broadcasting. You
>have to know the target audience but you still don't write at a level
>higher than a 14 year old. That's just the nature of radio.
>
>OTOH, it's probably a good idea to write at a level a little lower than
>14 for this newsgroup. :-)

I respect the members of this group more than that.
Janet US

"Cherry" > wrote in message
...
> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 10:23:59 PM UTC+1, Julie Bove wrote:
>> "Cherry" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > If you are taking the time to decide in a restaurant, you are taking up
>>
>> > time
>>
>> > that the waiter could be spending somewhere else. Usually when I sit
>>
>> > down,
>>
>> > I already know what I want. I might have to ask questions though to
>> > make
>>
>> > sure that I can eat it.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> If you are in the aisle of the store, you may well be in someone's way
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >
>>
>> > Not the same thing at all. If someone is in my way I just say, "excuse
>>
>> > me,
>>
>> > may I pass" and that person moves out of the way. So you can't use
>> > that
>>
>> > as
>>
>> > justification.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> Cherry
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> ---
>>
>> >> Actually I can use whatever I want. Those machines are put there for
>>
>> >> people to use. They are using them as intended. How in the world is
>>
>> >> that rude? It isn't.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Of course you can use whatever you want, but that doesn't make you
>> > right.
>>
>>
>>
>> What?
>
> You seem to have a problem with simple English.
>
> Cherry

How is using a machine for its intended purpose wrong or rude? I have only
used those machines three times and I don't intend to use them again.

"Nancy2" > wrote in message
...
> Cheryl, the AARP stats you quote don't point out how many of those seniors
> who
> don't use the net do have access, which was the point I made earlier.
>
> N.

They might have access but they might not know how or remember how to use
it. My dad had to quit using his computer because he kept getting confused
and doing the wrong things.

On 8/17/2014 2:02 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 13:11:59 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> On 8/17/2014 12:48 PM, Cherry wrote:
>>> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 6:18:29 PM UTC+1, dsi1 wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2014 9:53 PM, Cherry wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> It is not a word that I ever heard before and not one that I'm likely to hear again. Good writers know that they had best write at an 8th grade level or less if they want to be understood!
>>>>
>>>>>
>>> Surely that would depend on the authors' target readership. Eighth grade is teenage level. I'm 56 years-old, I don't want books that read like they're written for teenagers.
>>>>
>>>>> Cherry
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I learned to write for the age level suitable for broadcasting - understandable by the average 14 year old. This is a good thing.
>>>
>>> It's only a good thing if that is the age range of the audience you were targetting.
>>>
>>> Cherry
>>>
>>
>> That would be true but that's the general rule for broadcasting. You
>> have to know the target audience but you still don't write at a level
>> higher than a 14 year old. That's just the nature of radio.
>>
>> OTOH, it's probably a good idea to write at a level a little lower than
>> 14 for this newsgroup. :-)
>
> I respect the members of this group more than that.
> Janet US
>

Most times it sounds like a schoolyard of 12 year olds. There's lots of
complaining and gossip about others in the play area, and the spreading
of mean, nasty, lies and a lot of "you can't be my friend if you're his
friend" kind of stuff. I can scarcely believe that adults can act in
such a way. Evidently, when people get old, they revert to a more
childlike state. That's the breaks.

As it goes, I won't abide by that nor will I partake. Of course, there
are some posters worthy of respect here too. Kudos to those folks.

On 8/17/2014 8:14 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
> How is using a machine for its intended purpose wrong or rude?

How is reading a book in a restaurant rude? Sorry, but I don't want you
chatting me up when I'm trying to eat.

Jill

"S Viemeister" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/17/2014 5:22 PM, Sky wrote:
>
>> As "legal tender" and considered as "money," coins (paper bills, too)
>> _must be accepted_ as payment, deposit, etc. At least this is my
>> understanding. So, if a bank customer brings in a load of coins to be
>> 'cashed in', deposited, or made as payment for a loan (etc.), the
>> vendor/bank must accept receipt. More than likely there is some
>> fine-print someplace that says so-called 'vendor' will not accept coins.
>> I believe this may be contrary to any "legal tender" 'law', but then,
>> I am not a lawyer or USA government official (whew!)!!
>>
> <http://www.snopes.com/business/money/pennies.asp>

Yes. There are a few businesses around here who won't bother with pennies.
They will just round up or down and if you balk, they'll round in your
favor.

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/17/2014 8:14 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>> How is using a machine for its intended purpose wrong or rude?
>
> How is reading a book in a restaurant rude? Sorry, but I don't want you
> chatting me up when I'm trying to eat.

Oh for sure I wouldn't chat *you* up. I know what you look like. If I saw
you, I would avoid you. I don't chat up other diners either. But I was
taught that it was rude to read at the table. Now obviously those coffee
shops with books in them are an exception. We do have an awful lot of those
around here. If you want to read a book you go there.

I have seen people who were asked to leave because they were sitting in a
restaurant for hours, reading. They didn't order a meal either. Just a cup
of coffee and perhaps a piece of pie.

"dsi1" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/17/2014 2:02 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 13:11:59 -1000, dsi1
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/17/2014 12:48 PM, Cherry wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 6:18:29 PM UTC+1, dsi1 wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2014 9:53 PM, Cherry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> It is not a word that I ever heard before and not one that I'm
>>>>>>> likely to hear again. Good writers know that they had best write at
>>>>>>> an 8th grade level or less if they want to be understood!
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> Surely that would depend on the authors' target readership. Eighth
>>>> grade is teenage level. I'm 56 years-old, I don't want books that read
>>>> like they're written for teenagers.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Cherry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I learned to write for the age level suitable for broadcasting -
>>>> understandable by the average 14 year old. This is a good thing.
>>>>
>>>> It's only a good thing if that is the age range of the audience you
>>>> were targetting.
>>>>
>>>> Cherry
>>>>
>>>
>>> That would be true but that's the general rule for broadcasting. You
>>> have to know the target audience but you still don't write at a level
>>> higher than a 14 year old. That's just the nature of radio.
>>>
>>> OTOH, it's probably a good idea to write at a level a little lower than
>>> 14 for this newsgroup. :-)
>>
>> I respect the members of this group more than that.
>> Janet US
>>
>
> Most times it sounds like a schoolyard of 12 year olds. There's lots of
> complaining and gossip about others in the play area, and the spreading of
> mean, nasty, lies and a lot of "you can't be my friend if you're his
> friend" kind of stuff. I can scarcely believe that adults can act in such
> a way. Evidently, when people get old, they revert to a more childlike
> state. That's the breaks.
>
> As it goes, I won't abide by that nor will I partake. Of course, there are
> some posters worthy of respect here too. Kudos to those folks.

For sure, a lot of people here do not act like grownups. Odd thing is, few
people in my real life are like that. I have encountered a few. Thankfully
only a few. The thing I think is funny is that those same people always
think they are better than other people. Smarter, wittier, better looking,
etc. Sort of the same thing that I see here.

On 8/17/2014 2:35 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> For sure, a lot of people here do not act like grownups. Odd thing is,
> few people in my real life are like that. I have encountered a few.
> Thankfully only a few. The thing I think is funny is that those same
> people always think they are better than other people. Smarter,
> wittier, better looking, etc. Sort of the same thing that I see here.

Hey, wait a minute. Don't you think you're smarter, wittier, better
looking, etc., than most of the posters here? Just checking. :-)

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:16:06 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> "Nancy2" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Cheryl, the AARP stats you quote don't point out how many of those seniors
>
> > who
>
> > don't use the net do have access, which was the point I made earlier.
>
> >
>
> > N.
>
>
>
> They might have access but they might not know how or remember how to use
>
> it.
>
You surround yourself with sub-normal, defective humans.
>
> My dad had to quit using his computer because he kept getting confused
>
> and doing the wrong things.

When you started out stupid, getting old must be especially challenging.

--Bryan

On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 17:34:08 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

snip
>
>I have seen people who were asked to leave because they were sitting in a
>restaurant for hours, reading. They didn't order a meal either. Just a cup
>of coffee and perhaps a piece of pie.
You stayed for hours to watch this happen?
Janet US

"dsi1" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/17/2014 2:35 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> For sure, a lot of people here do not act like grownups. Odd thing is,
>> few people in my real life are like that. I have encountered a few.
>> Thankfully only a few. The thing I think is funny is that those same
>> people always think they are better than other people. Smarter,
>> wittier, better looking, etc. Sort of the same thing that I see here.
>
> Hey, wait a minute. Don't you think you're smarter, wittier, better
> looking, etc., than most of the posters here? Just checking. :-)

I have seen some pics. I might be better looking than some. Not saying
which ones. I am probably younger than most. Really, I don't go around
comparing myself to others but based on what I see here, a lot of the
posters are very juvenile. If their behavior now is any indication of how
they were as kids or teens, then for sure I wouldn't have been friends with
any of them then. Just like I sure wouldn't want to be friends with them
now.

"Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
...
> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:16:06 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>> "Nancy2" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > Cheryl, the AARP stats you quote don't point out how many of those
>> > seniors
>>
>> > who
>>
>> > don't use the net do have access, which was the point I made earlier.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > N.
>>
>>
>>
>> They might have access but they might not know how or remember how to use
>>
>> it.
>>
> You surround yourself with sub-normal, defective humans.
>>
>> My dad had to quit using his computer because he kept getting confused
>>
>> and doing the wrong things.
>
> When you started out stupid, getting old must be especially challenging.

My dad was not stupid. You try having some strokes and senile dementia and
see how well you function!

"Janet Bostwick" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 17:34:08 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
> snip
>>
>>I have seen people who were asked to leave because they were sitting in a
>>restaurant for hours, reading. They didn't order a meal either. Just a
>>cup
>>of coffee and perhaps a piece of pie.
> You stayed for hours to watch this happen?
> Janet US

No. But I heard the waitress say that the person was there for several
hours and they needed the table for diners. This was at the same
restaurant. They do have some small tables that are tucked away sort of in
corners and that's where those people were sitting.

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:17:37 PM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
> On 8/17/2014 8:14 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> > How is using a machine for its intended purpose wrong or rude?
>
>
>
> How is reading a book in a restaurant rude? Sorry, but I don't want you
>
> chatting me up when I'm trying to eat.
>
It isn't rude to read, but I like to pay attention to the food. I don't
need chit-chat, or a book, or music, or whatever. Of course, so many
folks on this NG have such low standards for food that it's understandable
that they'd need to supplement the food's entertainment value.

What with slopping ketchup into recipes, slathering on jarred mayo, canned
"cream of" soups as bases...

I'm sure the restaurant standards must be low as well.
>
> Jill

--Bryan

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:34:08 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
> > How is reading a book in a restaurant rude? Sorry, but I don't want you
>
> > chatting me up when I'm trying to eat.
>
>
>
> Oh for sure I wouldn't chat *you* up. I know what you look like.
>
LOL! I don't chat up women who look like Jill either.

Actually, that's not true. I talk to anyone and everyone, regardless of
appearance, as long as they don't smell. That was just too good to pass up.

--Bryan

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:35:44 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> "dsi1" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On 8/17/2014 2:02 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
> >> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 13:11:59 -1000, dsi1
>
> >> > wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>> On 8/17/2014 12:48 PM, Cherry wrote:
>
> >>>> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 6:18:29 PM UTC+1, dsi1 wrote:
>
> >>>>> On 8/16/2014 9:53 PM, Cherry wrote:
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>>>> It is not a word that I ever heard before and not one that I'm
>
> >>>>>>> likely to hear again. Good writers know that they had best write at
>
> >>>>>>> an 8th grade level or less if they want to be understood!
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>>> Surely that would depend on the authors' target readership. Eighth
>
> >>>> grade is teenage level. I'm 56 years-old, I don't want books that read
>
> >>>> like they're written for teenagers.
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>>>>> Cherry
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>>> I learned to write for the age level suitable for broadcasting -
>
> >>>> understandable by the average 14 year old. This is a good thing.
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> It's only a good thing if that is the age range of the audience you
>
> >>>> were targetting.
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> Cherry
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>> That would be true but that's the general rule for broadcasting. You
>
> >>> have to know the target audience but you still don't write at a level
>
> >>> higher than a 14 year old. That's just the nature of radio.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> OTOH, it's probably a good idea to write at a level a little lower than
>
> >>> 14 for this newsgroup. :-)
>
> >>
>
> >> I respect the members of this group more than that.
>
> >> Janet US
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> > Most times it sounds like a schoolyard of 12 year olds. There's lots of
>
> > complaining and gossip about others in the play area, and the spreading of
>
> > mean, nasty, lies and a lot of "you can't be my friend if you're his
>
> > friend" kind of stuff. I can scarcely believe that adults can act in such
>
> > a way. Evidently, when people get old, they revert to a more childlike
>
> > state. That's the breaks.
>
> >
>
> > As it goes, I won't abide by that nor will I partake. Of course, there are
>
> > some posters worthy of respect here too. Kudos to those folks.
>
>
>
> For sure, a lot of people here do not act like grownups. Odd thing is, few
>
> people in my real life are like that. I have encountered a few. Thankfully
>
> only a few.
>
Why don't you stick with your own kind then? You know, stupid, ugly,
unhealthy folks who oughtn't pollute the gene pool by reproducing?

--Bryan

"Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
...
> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:17:37 PM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
>> On 8/17/2014 8:14 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> > How is using a machine for its intended purpose wrong or rude?
>>
>>
>>
>> How is reading a book in a restaurant rude? Sorry, but I don't want you
>>
>> chatting me up when I'm trying to eat.
>>
> It isn't rude to read, but I like to pay attention to the food. I don't
> need chit-chat, or a book, or music, or whatever. Of course, so many
> folks on this NG have such low standards for food that it's understandable
> that they'd need to supplement the food's entertainment value.
>
> What with slopping ketchup into recipes, slathering on jarred mayo, canned
> "cream of" soups as bases...
>
> I'm sure the restaurant standards must be low as well.

That may well be. There are tons of restaurants I won't set foot in.
Mainly chain type places. I did try Applebee's I think twice. Chili's
once. TGI Fridays a few times. Never my choice. I found most of the
diners in there to be loud, rude and not the sort of people I wanted to be
around. Just not my kind of place.

"Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
...
> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:34:08 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>> > How is reading a book in a restaurant rude? Sorry, but I don't want
>> > you
>>
>> > chatting me up when I'm trying to eat.
>>
>>
>>
>> Oh for sure I wouldn't chat *you* up. I know what you look like.
>>
> LOL! I don't chat up women who look like Jill either.
>
> Actually, that's not true. I talk to anyone and everyone, regardless of
> appearance, as long as they don't smell. That was just too good to pass
> up.
>
> --Bryan

I didn't mean that to say that I wouldn't chat her up because of the way
that she looks. I just find her to be a rather petty and obnoxious person
and in real life I would make an effort to avoid her.

I too will talk to most people but I know that I wouldn't want to talk to
her. And since I would recognize her if I saw her, I would avoid her.

"Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
...
> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:35:44 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>> "dsi1" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > On 8/17/2014 2:02 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>>
>> >> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 13:11:59 -1000, dsi1
>>
>> >> > wrote:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>> On 8/17/2014 12:48 PM, Cherry wrote:
>>
>> >>>> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 6:18:29 PM UTC+1, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> On 8/16/2014 9:53 PM, Cherry wrote:
>>
>> >>>>
>>
>> >>>>>>> It is not a word that I ever heard before and not one that I'm
>>
>> >>>>>>> likely to hear again. Good writers know that they had best write
>> >>>>>>> at
>>
>> >>>>>>> an 8th grade level or less if they want to be understood!
>>
>> >>>>>
>>
>> >>>>>>
>>
>> >>>> Surely that would depend on the authors' target readership. Eighth
>>
>> >>>> grade is teenage level. I'm 56 years-old, I don't want books that
>> >>>> read
>>
>> >>>> like they're written for teenagers.
>>
>> >>>>>
>>
>> >>>>>> Cherry
>>
>> >>>>>
>>
>> >>>>>
>>
>> >>>> I learned to write for the age level suitable for broadcasting -
>>
>> >>>> understandable by the average 14 year old. This is a good thing.
>>
>> >>>>
>>
>> >>>> It's only a good thing if that is the age range of the audience you
>>
>> >>>> were targetting.
>>
>> >>>>
>>
>> >>>> Cherry
>>
>> >>>>
>>
>> >>>
>>
>> >>> That would be true but that's the general rule for broadcasting. You
>>
>> >>> have to know the target audience but you still don't write at a level
>>
>> >>> higher than a 14 year old. That's just the nature of radio.
>>
>> >>>
>>
>> >>> OTOH, it's probably a good idea to write at a level a little lower
>> >>> than
>>
>> >>> 14 for this newsgroup. :-)
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> I respect the members of this group more than that.
>>
>> >> Janet US
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Most times it sounds like a schoolyard of 12 year olds. There's lots of
>>
>> > complaining and gossip about others in the play area, and the spreading
>> > of
>>
>> > mean, nasty, lies and a lot of "you can't be my friend if you're his
>>
>> > friend" kind of stuff. I can scarcely believe that adults can act in
>> > such
>>
>> > a way. Evidently, when people get old, they revert to a more childlike
>>
>> > state. That's the breaks.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > As it goes, I won't abide by that nor will I partake. Of course, there
>> > are
>>
>> > some posters worthy of respect here too. Kudos to those folks.
>>
>>
>>
>> For sure, a lot of people here do not act like grownups. Odd thing is,
>> few
>>
>> people in my real life are like that. I have encountered a few.
>> Thankfully
>>
>> only a few.
>>
> Why don't you stick with your own kind then? You know, stupid, ugly,
> unhealthy folks who oughtn't pollute the gene pool by reproducing?
>
> --Bryan

You are another person I wouldn't talk to in real life! Thankfully the
real world, at least where I live is pretty nice.

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 8:37:34 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> "Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On Sunday, August 17, 2014 7:35:44 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>
> >> For sure, a lot of people here do not act like grownups. Odd thing is,
>
> >> few
>
> >>
>
> >> people in my real life are like that. I have encountered a few.
>
> >> Thankfully
>
> >>
>
> >> only a few.
>
> >>
>
> > Why don't you stick with your own kind then? You know, stupid, ugly,
>
> > unhealthy folks who oughtn't pollute the gene pool by reproducing?
>
> >
>
> > --Bryan
>
>
>
> You are another person I wouldn't talk to in real life! Thankfully the
>
> real world, at least where I live is pretty nice.

Then why do you hang out here ALL OF THE TIME? Have you not gathered
that folks here try to make your experience unpleasant so that you will
crawl back into your hole?

--Bryan

"Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
...
> Then why do you hang out here ALL OF THE TIME? Have you not gathered
> that folks here try to make your experience unpleasant so that you will
> crawl back into your hole?
>
> --Bryan

Some do. Like you. Haven't you noticed that tactic doesn't work?

On 8/17/2014 2:57 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>
> I have seen some pics. I might be better looking than some. Not saying
> which ones. I am probably younger than most. Really, I don't go around
> comparing myself to others but based on what I see here, a lot of the
> posters are very juvenile. If their behavior now is any indication of
> how they were as kids or teens, then for sure I wouldn't have been
> friends with any of them then. Just like I sure wouldn't want to be
> friends with them now.

This sounds reasonable.