This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.

This RFD is being posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups,
rec.food.cooking, rec.food.drink, rec.food.historic, rec.food.recipes,
rec.food.sourdough, rec.food.veg and rec.food.veg.cooking, with followups
set to news.groups. All discussion regarding this proposal should take
place in news.groups.


Rationale: Rec.food.cooking has been a high-volume newsgroup for several
years, and the subject of splitting has been brought up with a fair amount
of regularity. Traditionally, rec.food.cooking has been an amazingly civil,
calm and flame-free newsgroup, so a split never seemed to be justified.

However, in recent weeks the noise level and number of inappropriate posts
has skyrocketed, and polite pointers to the FAQs (which usually did the
trick before) now go ignored or become targets for flames. I feel that
splitting rec.food.cooking will help bring back the focus that it once had.


Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:

rec.food.cooking.misc
rec.food.cooking.cookware
rec.food.cooking.recipes
rec.food.cooking.books
rec.food.cooking.discuss

Charters:

rec.food.cooking.misc (unmoderated)
What rfc used to be and should be. For general cooking discussion. This
newsgroup will replace rec.food.cooking.

rec.food.cooking.cookware (unmoderated)
Bread machines, microwaves, crockpots, knives, cutting boards, glass-top
stoves, barbecues, cast iron, woks, Calphalon, aluminum, dehydrators,
pasta makers, rice cookers, etc.

rec.food.cooking.recipes (unmoderated)
Recipes and requests. Before you say that this is redundant with
rec.food.recipes, from moderating rec.food.recipes, I've discovered
that crossposting between rec.food.cooking and rec.food.recipes is
virtually non-existent. Recipe management software discussion should
go in here as well.

rec.food.cooking.books (unmoderated)
Cookbooks, cookbook authors, tv shows.

rec.food.cooking.discuss (unmoderated)
For all the spam and tripe that currently plagues the group. For flames,
rumors, controversial topics (such as food poisoning), the $250 cookie,
and those threads that bear marginal relevance that seem to go on forever
like, "What did you have for dinner last night?" "What is your favourite
fast food restaurant?" "What is your least favourite fast food
restaurant?" Etc, etc.


Discussion will run for a minimum of 21 days. The newsgroups in this
proposal are subject to change, and if major changes are necessary, the
discussion period may be extended an additional 7 days.

A Call for Votes (CFV) will be posted after the end of the discussion
period. The vote will be run by a neutral third party.

This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines
set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
document if you have questions about the process.

"Usenet Support Personnel" > wrote in message
...
> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
> the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
>
> This RFD is being posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups,
> rec.food.cooking, rec.food.drink, rec.food.historic, rec.food.recipes,
> rec.food.sourdough, rec.food.veg and rec.food.veg.cooking, with followups
> set to news.groups. All discussion regarding this proposal should take
> place in news.groups.
>
>
> Rationale: Rec.food.cooking has been a high-volume newsgroup for several
> years, and the subject of splitting has been brought up with a fair amount
> of regularity. Traditionally, rec.food.cooking has been an amazingly
> civil,
> calm and flame-free newsgroup, so a split never seemed to be justified.
>
> However, in recent weeks the noise level and number of inappropriate posts
> has skyrocketed, and polite pointers to the FAQs (which usually did the
> trick before) now go ignored or become targets for flames. I feel that
> splitting rec.food.cooking will help bring back the focus that it once
> had.
>
>
> Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:
>
> rec.food.cooking.misc
> rec.food.cooking.cookware
> rec.food.cooking.recipes
> rec.food.cooking.books
> rec.food.cooking.discuss
>
> Charters:
>
> rec.food.cooking.misc (unmoderated)
> What rfc used to be and should be. For general cooking discussion. This
> newsgroup will replace rec.food.cooking.
>
> rec.food.cooking.cookware (unmoderated)
> Bread machines, microwaves, crockpots, knives, cutting boards, glass-top
> stoves, barbecues, cast iron, woks, Calphalon, aluminum, dehydrators,
> pasta makers, rice cookers, etc.
>
> rec.food.cooking.recipes (unmoderated)
> Recipes and requests. Before you say that this is redundant with
> rec.food.recipes, from moderating rec.food.recipes, I've discovered
> that crossposting between rec.food.cooking and rec.food.recipes is
> virtually non-existent. Recipe management software discussion should
> go in here as well.
>
> rec.food.cooking.books (unmoderated)
> Cookbooks, cookbook authors, tv shows.
>
> rec.food.cooking.discuss (unmoderated)
> For all the spam and tripe that currently plagues the group. For flames,
> rumors, controversial topics (such as food poisoning), the $250 cookie,
> and those threads that bear marginal relevance that seem to go on forever
> like, "What did you have for dinner last night?" "What is your favourite
> fast food restaurant?" "What is your least favourite fast food
> restaurant?" Etc, etc.
>
>
> Discussion will run for a minimum of 21 days. The newsgroups in this
> proposal are subject to change, and if major changes are necessary, the
> discussion period may be extended an additional 7 days.
>
> A Call for Votes (CFV) will be posted after the end of the discussion
> period. The vote will be run by a neutral third party.
>
> This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation
> guidelines
> set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
> document if you have questions about the process.

I vote "no".

On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 00:07:45 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:

> I vote "no".

Your right to vote has been revoked because:

1. The voting has not yet started
2. You quoted 70 lines to post 3 words

Further violations will result in the loss of your posting
privileges and your account will revert to read-only access.

On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 02:28:25 -0500, Usenet Support Personnel
> wrote:

>On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 00:07:45 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> I vote "no".
>
>Your right to vote has been revoked because:
>
>1. The voting has not yet started
>2. You quoted 70 lines to post 3 words
>
>Further violations will result in the loss of your posting
>privileges and your account will revert to read-only access.

Nice work

On Wed, 02 Sep 2020 18:39:57 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:

>On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 02:28:25 -0500, Usenet Support Personnel
> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 00:07:45 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>>> I vote "no".
>>
>>Your right to vote has been revoked because:
>>
>>1. The voting has not yet started
>>2. You quoted 70 lines to post 3 words
>>
>>Further violations will result in the loss of your posting
>>privileges and your account will revert to read-only access.
>
>Nice work

"work" lol

On 9/2/2020 12:21 AM, Usenet Support Personnel wrote:
> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
> the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
>

> Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:
>
> rec.food.cooking.misc
> rec.food.cooking.cookware
> rec.food.cooking.recipes
> rec.food.cooking.books
> rec.food.cooking.discuss
>

> This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines
> set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
> document if you have questions about the process.
>

Looks like someone found a post from 15 years ago. RFC used to be
popular way back when the major ISPs carried newsgroups. No one has
heard of them since. How many new people show up here every year?

On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 10:29:45 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 9/2/2020 12:21 AM, Usenet Support Personnel wrote:
>> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
>> the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
>>
>
>> Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:
>>
>> rec.food.cooking.misc
>> rec.food.cooking.cookware
>> rec.food.cooking.recipes
>> rec.food.cooking.books
>> rec.food.cooking.discuss
>>
>
>> This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines
>> set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
>> document if you have questions about the process.
>>
>
>Looks like someone found a post from 15 years ago. RFC used to be
>popular way back when the major ISPs carried newsgroups. No one has
>heard of them since. How many new people show up here every year?

A few lost spammers who may stay a few hours stirring the pot.
When Steve Case ran AOL they carried usenet and many of their own
discussion groups, and Slingo. Back then most everyone had to use
Dial-up. At that time an AOL membership included net access, which
was a big draw to use AOL, that's why I started. AOL is now nowhere
near as good as it was in their beginning... was worth it just for
their content.

On Tuesday, September 1, 2020 at 6:21:49 PM UTC-10, Usenet Support Personnel wrote:
> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
> the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
>
> This RFD is being posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups,
> rec.food.cooking, rec.food.drink, rec.food.historic, rec.food.recipes,
> rec.food.sourdough, rec.food.veg and rec.food.veg.cooking, with followups
> set to news.groups. All discussion regarding this proposal should take
> place in news.groups.
>
>
> Rationale: Rec.food.cooking has been a high-volume newsgroup for several
> years, and the subject of splitting has been brought up with a fair amount
> of regularity. Traditionally, rec.food.cooking has been an amazingly civil,
> calm and flame-free newsgroup, so a split never seemed to be justified.
>
> However, in recent weeks the noise level and number of inappropriate posts
> has skyrocketed, and polite pointers to the FAQs (which usually did the
> trick before) now go ignored or become targets for flames. I feel that
> splitting rec.food.cooking will help bring back the focus that it once had.
>
>
> Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:
>
> rec.food.cooking.misc
> rec.food.cooking.cookware
> rec.food.cooking.recipes
> rec.food.cooking.books
> rec.food.cooking.discuss
>
> Charters:
>
> rec.food.cooking.misc (unmoderated)
> What rfc used to be and should be. For general cooking discussion. This
> newsgroup will replace rec.food.cooking.
>
> rec.food.cooking.cookware (unmoderated)
> Bread machines, microwaves, crockpots, knives, cutting boards, glass-top
> stoves, barbecues, cast iron, woks, Calphalon, aluminum, dehydrators,
> pasta makers, rice cookers, etc.
>
> rec.food.cooking.recipes (unmoderated)
> Recipes and requests. Before you say that this is redundant with
> rec.food.recipes, from moderating rec.food.recipes, I've discovered
> that crossposting between rec.food.cooking and rec.food.recipes is
> virtually non-existent. Recipe management software discussion should
> go in here as well.
>
> rec.food.cooking.books (unmoderated)
> Cookbooks, cookbook authors, tv shows.
>
> rec.food.cooking.discuss (unmoderated)
> For all the spam and tripe that currently plagues the group. For flames,
> rumors, controversial topics (such as food poisoning), the $250 cookie,
> and those threads that bear marginal relevance that seem to go on forever
> like, "What did you have for dinner last night?" "What is your favourite
> fast food restaurant?" "What is your least favourite fast food
> restaurant?" Etc, etc.
>
>
> Discussion will run for a minimum of 21 days. The newsgroups in this
> proposal are subject to change, and if major changes are necessary, the
> discussion period may be extended an additional 7 days.
>
> A Call for Votes (CFV) will be posted after the end of the discussion
> period. The vote will be run by a neutral third party.
>
> This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines
> set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
> document if you have questions about the process.

What you guys have failed to realize is that in the old days, one could call for a Request For Discussion and people would discuss the topic. These days, no discussion is possible. All you're going to get is wolves tearing into a baby lambkin to get some blood and meat.

Google Groups didn't change Usenet. It was the availability of cheap and fast access to networks. These days, any clown with a chip on their shoulder and an ancient computer can post to Usenet. These days, talk is dirt cheap.

If you want to try to get back to the 1990's, start by restricting Usenet access to college grads affiliated with educational, governmental, and research institutions and kick out the eternal September rif-raf. Usenet didn't change, the people changed.

dsi1 wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 1, 2020 at 6:21:49 PM UTC-10, Usenet Support Personnel wrote:
> > This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
> > the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
> >
> > This RFD is being posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups,
> > rec.food.cooking, rec.food.drink, rec.food.historic, rec.food.recipes,
> > rec.food.sourdough, rec.food.veg and rec.food.veg.cooking, with followups
> > set to news.groups. All discussion regarding this proposal should take
> > place in news.groups.
> >
> >
> > Rationale: Rec.food.cooking has been a high-volume newsgroup for several
> > years, and the subject of splitting has been brought up with a fair amount
> > of regularity. Traditionally, rec.food.cooking has been an amazingly civil,
> > calm and flame-free newsgroup, so a split never seemed to be justified.
> >
> > However, in recent weeks the noise level and number of inappropriate posts
> > has skyrocketed, and polite pointers to the FAQs (which usually did the
> > trick before) now go ignored or become targets for flames. I feel that
> > splitting rec.food.cooking will help bring back the focus that it once had.
> >
> >
> > Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:
> >
> > rec.food.cooking.misc
> > rec.food.cooking.cookware
> > rec.food.cooking.recipes
> > rec.food.cooking.books
> > rec.food.cooking.discuss
> >
> > Charters:
> >
> > rec.food.cooking.misc (unmoderated)
> > What rfc used to be and should be. For general cooking discussion. This
> > newsgroup will replace rec.food.cooking.
> >
> > rec.food.cooking.cookware (unmoderated)
> > Bread machines, microwaves, crockpots, knives, cutting boards, glass-top
> > stoves, barbecues, cast iron, woks, Calphalon, aluminum, dehydrators,
> > pasta makers, rice cookers, etc.
> >
> > rec.food.cooking.recipes (unmoderated)
> > Recipes and requests. Before you say that this is redundant with
> > rec.food.recipes, from moderating rec.food.recipes, I've discovered
> > that crossposting between rec.food.cooking and rec.food.recipes is
> > virtually non-existent. Recipe management software discussion should
> > go in here as well.
> >
> > rec.food.cooking.books (unmoderated)
> > Cookbooks, cookbook authors, tv shows.
> >
> > rec.food.cooking.discuss (unmoderated)
> > For all the spam and tripe that currently plagues the group. For flames,
> > rumors, controversial topics (such as food poisoning), the $250 cookie,
> > and those threads that bear marginal relevance that seem to go on forever
> > like, "What did you have for dinner last night?" "What is your favourite
> > fast food restaurant?" "What is your least favourite fast food
> > restaurant?" Etc, etc.
> >
> >
> > Discussion will run for a minimum of 21 days. The newsgroups in this
> > proposal are subject to change, and if major changes are necessary, the
> > discussion period may be extended an additional 7 days.
> >
> > A Call for Votes (CFV) will be posted after the end of the discussion
> > period. The vote will be run by a neutral third party.
> >
> > This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines
> > set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
> > document if you have questions about the process.
>
> What you guys have failed to realize is that in the old days, one could call for a Request For Discussion and people would discuss the topic. These days, no discussion is possible. All you're going to get is wolves tearing into a baby lambkin to get some blood and meat.
>
> Google Groups didn't change Usenet. It was the availability of cheap and fast access to networks. These days, any clown with a chip on their shoulder and an ancient computer can post to Usenet. These days, talk is dirt cheap.
>
> If you want to try to get back to the 1990's, start by restricting Usenet access to college grads affiliated with educational, governmental, and research institutions and kick out the eternal September rif-raf. Usenet didn't change, the people changed.


Kinda reminds of peeps talking about how "exclusive" flying was back in the Good Olde Daze...they lament that air travel became cheap and any trashy person could afford to fly...

The days of 40 - inch seat pitch, fawning stewardesses, full hot meals and pax dressing their Sunday best to fly in coach is over, so is the "exclusivity" of Usenet...now any unwashed mope with a Goog account can access...

--
Best
Greg

On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 9:37:26 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, September 1, 2020 at 6:21:49 PM UTC-10, Usenet Support Personnel wrote:
> > > This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
> > > the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
> > >
> > > This RFD is being posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups,
> > > rec.food.cooking, rec.food.drink, rec.food.historic, rec.food.recipes,
> > > rec.food.sourdough, rec.food.veg and rec.food.veg.cooking, with followups
> > > set to news.groups. All discussion regarding this proposal should take
> > > place in news.groups.
> > >
> > >
> > > Rationale: Rec.food.cooking has been a high-volume newsgroup for several
> > > years, and the subject of splitting has been brought up with a fair amount
> > > of regularity. Traditionally, rec.food.cooking has been an amazingly civil,
> > > calm and flame-free newsgroup, so a split never seemed to be justified.
> > >
> > > However, in recent weeks the noise level and number of inappropriate posts
> > > has skyrocketed, and polite pointers to the FAQs (which usually did the
> > > trick before) now go ignored or become targets for flames. I feel that
> > > splitting rec.food.cooking will help bring back the focus that it once had.
> > >
> > >
> > > Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:
> > >
> > > rec.food.cooking.misc
> > > rec.food.cooking.cookware
> > > rec.food.cooking.recipes
> > > rec.food.cooking.books
> > > rec.food.cooking.discuss
> > >
> > > Charters:
> > >
> > > rec.food.cooking.misc (unmoderated)
> > > What rfc used to be and should be. For general cooking discussion. This
> > > newsgroup will replace rec.food.cooking.
> > >
> > > rec.food.cooking.cookware (unmoderated)
> > > Bread machines, microwaves, crockpots, knives, cutting boards, glass-top
> > > stoves, barbecues, cast iron, woks, Calphalon, aluminum, dehydrators,
> > > pasta makers, rice cookers, etc.
> > >
> > > rec.food.cooking.recipes (unmoderated)
> > > Recipes and requests. Before you say that this is redundant with
> > > rec.food.recipes, from moderating rec.food.recipes, I've discovered
> > > that crossposting between rec.food.cooking and rec.food.recipes is
> > > virtually non-existent. Recipe management software discussion should
> > > go in here as well.
> > >
> > > rec.food.cooking.books (unmoderated)
> > > Cookbooks, cookbook authors, tv shows.
> > >
> > > rec.food.cooking.discuss (unmoderated)
> > > For all the spam and tripe that currently plagues the group. For flames,
> > > rumors, controversial topics (such as food poisoning), the $250 cookie,
> > > and those threads that bear marginal relevance that seem to go on forever
> > > like, "What did you have for dinner last night?" "What is your favourite
> > > fast food restaurant?" "What is your least favourite fast food
> > > restaurant?" Etc, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > > Discussion will run for a minimum of 21 days. The newsgroups in this
> > > proposal are subject to change, and if major changes are necessary, the
> > > discussion period may be extended an additional 7 days.
> > >
> > > A Call for Votes (CFV) will be posted after the end of the discussion
> > > period. The vote will be run by a neutral third party.
> > >
> > > This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines
> > > set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
> > > document if you have questions about the process.
> >
> > What you guys have failed to realize is that in the old days, one could call for a Request For Discussion and people would discuss the topic. These days, no discussion is possible. All you're going to get is wolves tearing into a baby lambkin to get some blood and meat.
> >
> > Google Groups didn't change Usenet. It was the availability of cheap and fast access to networks. These days, any clown with a chip on their shoulder and an ancient computer can post to Usenet. These days, talk is dirt cheap.
> >
> > If you want to try to get back to the 1990's, start by restricting Usenet access to college grads affiliated with educational, governmental, and research institutions and kick out the eternal September rif-raf. Usenet didn't change, the people changed.
>
>
> Kinda reminds of peeps talking about how "exclusive" flying was back in the Good Olde Daze...they lament that air travel became cheap and any trashy person could afford to fly...
>
> The days of 40 - inch seat pitch, fawning stewardesses, full hot meals and pax dressing their Sunday best to fly in coach is over, so is the "exclusivity" of Usenet...now any unwashed mope with a Goog account can access...
>
> --
> Best
> Greg

Today's Usenet of flame wars, race-baiting, hate-mongering, commie trolling, and good old fashioned playground gossip, is perfectly suited for Google Groups. Using an archaic newsreader ain't gonna save nothing.

On 9/2/2020 3:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 9:37:26 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, September 1, 2020 at 6:21:49 PM UTC-10, Usenet Support Personnel wrote:
>>>> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
>>>> the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
>>>>
>>>> This RFD is being posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups,
>>>> rec.food.cooking, rec.food.drink, rec.food.historic, rec.food.recipes,
>>>> rec.food.sourdough, rec.food.veg and rec.food.veg.cooking, with followups
>>>> set to news.groups. All discussion regarding this proposal should take
>>>> place in news.groups.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rationale: Rec.food.cooking has been a high-volume newsgroup for several
>>>> years, and the subject of splitting has been brought up with a fair amount
>>>> of regularity. Traditionally, rec.food.cooking has been an amazingly civil,
>>>> calm and flame-free newsgroup, so a split never seemed to be justified.
>>>>
>>>> However, in recent weeks the noise level and number of inappropriate posts
>>>> has skyrocketed, and polite pointers to the FAQs (which usually did the
>>>> trick before) now go ignored or become targets for flames. I feel that
>>>> splitting rec.food.cooking will help bring back the focus that it once had.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:
>>>>
>>>> rec.food.cooking.misc
>>>> rec.food.cooking.cookware
>>>> rec.food.cooking.recipes
>>>> rec.food.cooking.books
>>>> rec.food.cooking.discuss
>>>>
>>>> Charters:
>>>>
>>>> rec.food.cooking.misc (unmoderated)
>>>> What rfc used to be and should be. For general cooking discussion. This
>>>> newsgroup will replace rec.food.cooking.
>>>>
>>>> rec.food.cooking.cookware (unmoderated)
>>>> Bread machines, microwaves, crockpots, knives, cutting boards, glass-top
>>>> stoves, barbecues, cast iron, woks, Calphalon, aluminum, dehydrators,
>>>> pasta makers, rice cookers, etc.
>>>>
>>>> rec.food.cooking.recipes (unmoderated)
>>>> Recipes and requests. Before you say that this is redundant with
>>>> rec.food.recipes, from moderating rec.food.recipes, I've discovered
>>>> that crossposting between rec.food.cooking and rec.food.recipes is
>>>> virtually non-existent. Recipe management software discussion should
>>>> go in here as well.
>>>>
>>>> rec.food.cooking.books (unmoderated)
>>>> Cookbooks, cookbook authors, tv shows.
>>>>
>>>> rec.food.cooking.discuss (unmoderated)
>>>> For all the spam and tripe that currently plagues the group. For flames,
>>>> rumors, controversial topics (such as food poisoning), the $250 cookie,
>>>> and those threads that bear marginal relevance that seem to go on forever
>>>> like, "What did you have for dinner last night?" "What is your favourite
>>>> fast food restaurant?" "What is your least favourite fast food
>>>> restaurant?" Etc, etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Discussion will run for a minimum of 21 days. The newsgroups in this
>>>> proposal are subject to change, and if major changes are necessary, the
>>>> discussion period may be extended an additional 7 days.
>>>>
>>>> A Call for Votes (CFV) will be posted after the end of the discussion
>>>> period. The vote will be run by a neutral third party.
>>>>
>>>> This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines
>>>> set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
>>>> document if you have questions about the process.
>>>
>>> What you guys have failed to realize is that in the old days, one could call for a Request For Discussion and people would discuss the topic. These days, no discussion is possible. All you're going to get is wolves tearing into a baby lambkin to get some blood and meat.
>>>
>>> Google Groups didn't change Usenet. It was the availability of cheap and fast access to networks. These days, any clown with a chip on their shoulder and an ancient computer can post to Usenet. These days, talk is dirt cheap.
>>>
>>> If you want to try to get back to the 1990's, start by restricting Usenet access to college grads affiliated with educational, governmental, and research institutions and kick out the eternal September rif-raf. Usenet didn't change, the people changed.
>>
>>
>> Kinda reminds of peeps talking about how "exclusive" flying was back in the Good Olde Daze...they lament that air travel became cheap and any trashy person could afford to fly...
>>
>> The days of 40 - inch seat pitch, fawning stewardesses, full hot meals and pax dressing their Sunday best to fly in coach is over, so is the "exclusivity" of Usenet...now any unwashed mope with a Goog account can access...
>>
>> --
>> Best
>> Greg
>
> Today's Usenet of flame wars, race-baiting, hate-mongering, commie trolling, and good old fashioned playground gossip, is perfectly suited for Google Groups. Using an archaic newsreader ain't gonna save nothing.
>

So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
doing to the USA . And you GG'ers are the doing the tearing down - for
the most part . I filter most of the trash , can't figure out why you're
not in my bitbucket yet .
--
Snag
Illegitimi non
carborundum

On 05:21 2 Sep 2020, Usenet Support Personnel said:
>
> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
> the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
>
> This RFD is being posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups,
> rec.food.cooking, rec.food.drink, rec.food.historic, rec.food.recipes,
> rec.food.sourdough, rec.food.veg and rec.food.veg.cooking, with
> followups set to news.groups. All discussion regarding this proposal
> should take place in news.groups.

Squirt, are you going to be the moderator? That would be something
special.

On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 17:06:08 -0500, Snag > wrote:

>On 9/2/2020 3:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:

>> Today's Usenet of flame wars, race-baiting, hate-mongering, commie trolling, and good old fashioned playground gossip, is perfectly suited for Google Groups. Using an archaic newsreader ain't gonna save nothing.
>>
>
> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>doing to the USA . And you GG'ers are the doing the tearing down - for
>the most part . I filter most of the trash , can't figure out why you're
>not in my bitbucket yet .

Your killfile is malfunctioning. This is proven by the fact that I'm
in it.

On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:06:11 PM UTC-10, Snag wrote:
> On 9/2/2020 3:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 9:37:26 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
> >> dsi1 wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tuesday, September 1, 2020 at 6:21:49 PM UTC-10, Usenet Support Personnel wrote:
> >>>> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization of
> >>>> the unmoderated newsgroup, rec.food.cooking.
> >>>>
> >>>> This RFD is being posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups,
> >>>> rec.food.cooking, rec.food.drink, rec.food.historic, rec.food.recipes,
> >>>> rec.food.sourdough, rec.food.veg and rec.food.veg.cooking, with followups
> >>>> set to news.groups. All discussion regarding this proposal should take
> >>>> place in news.groups.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Rationale: Rec.food.cooking has been a high-volume newsgroup for several
> >>>> years, and the subject of splitting has been brought up with a fair amount
> >>>> of regularity. Traditionally, rec.food.cooking has been an amazingly civil,
> >>>> calm and flame-free newsgroup, so a split never seemed to be justified.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, in recent weeks the noise level and number of inappropriate posts
> >>>> has skyrocketed, and polite pointers to the FAQs (which usually did the
> >>>> trick before) now go ignored or become targets for flames. I feel that
> >>>> splitting rec.food.cooking will help bring back the focus that it once had.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Proposal: rec.food.cooking be split into 5 unmoderated groups:
> >>>>
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.misc
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.cookware
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.recipes
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.books
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.discuss
> >>>>
> >>>> Charters:
> >>>>
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.misc (unmoderated)
> >>>> What rfc used to be and should be. For general cooking discussion. This
> >>>> newsgroup will replace rec.food.cooking.
> >>>>
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.cookware (unmoderated)
> >>>> Bread machines, microwaves, crockpots, knives, cutting boards, glass-top
> >>>> stoves, barbecues, cast iron, woks, Calphalon, aluminum, dehydrators,
> >>>> pasta makers, rice cookers, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.recipes (unmoderated)
> >>>> Recipes and requests. Before you say that this is redundant with
> >>>> rec.food.recipes, from moderating rec.food.recipes, I've discovered
> >>>> that crossposting between rec.food.cooking and rec.food.recipes is
> >>>> virtually non-existent. Recipe management software discussion should
> >>>> go in here as well.
> >>>>
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.books (unmoderated)
> >>>> Cookbooks, cookbook authors, tv shows.
> >>>>
> >>>> rec.food.cooking.discuss (unmoderated)
> >>>> For all the spam and tripe that currently plagues the group. For flames,
> >>>> rumors, controversial topics (such as food poisoning), the $250 cookie,
> >>>> and those threads that bear marginal relevance that seem to go on forever
> >>>> like, "What did you have for dinner last night?" "What is your favourite
> >>>> fast food restaurant?" "What is your least favourite fast food
> >>>> restaurant?" Etc, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Discussion will run for a minimum of 21 days. The newsgroups in this
> >>>> proposal are subject to change, and if major changes are necessary, the
> >>>> discussion period may be extended an additional 7 days.
> >>>>
> >>>> A Call for Votes (CFV) will be posted after the end of the discussion
> >>>> period. The vote will be run by a neutral third party.
> >>>>
> >>>> This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines
> >>>> set in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup". Please refer to this
> >>>> document if you have questions about the process.
> >>>
> >>> What you guys have failed to realize is that in the old days, one could call for a Request For Discussion and people would discuss the topic. These days, no discussion is possible. All you're going to get is wolves tearing into a baby lambkin to get some blood and meat.
> >>>
> >>> Google Groups didn't change Usenet. It was the availability of cheap and fast access to networks. These days, any clown with a chip on their shoulder and an ancient computer can post to Usenet. These days, talk is dirt cheap.
> >>>
> >>> If you want to try to get back to the 1990's, start by restricting Usenet access to college grads affiliated with educational, governmental, and research institutions and kick out the eternal September rif-raf. Usenet didn't change, the people changed.
> >>
> >>
> >> Kinda reminds of peeps talking about how "exclusive" flying was back in the Good Olde Daze...they lament that air travel became cheap and any trashy person could afford to fly...
> >>
> >> The days of 40 - inch seat pitch, fawning stewardesses, full hot meals and pax dressing their Sunday best to fly in coach is over, so is the "exclusivity" of Usenet...now any unwashed mope with a Goog account can access....
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best
> >> Greg
> >
> > Today's Usenet of flame wars, race-baiting, hate-mongering, commie trolling, and good old fashioned playground gossip, is perfectly suited for Google Groups. Using an archaic newsreader ain't gonna save nothing.
> >
>
> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> doing to the USA . And you GG'ers are the doing the tearing down - for
> the most part . I filter most of the trash , can't figure out why you're
> not in my bitbucket yet .
> --
> Snag
> Illegitimi non
> carborundum

With you people, anybody that doesn't follow your line is BLM or antifa. I won't make a comment about your silly comment because I don't give out info on my beliefs. As far as your bitbucket goes, don't threaten - do. And yes, I won't let yoose *******s get me down.

On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 15:45:23 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:06:11 PM UTC-10, Snag wrote:

>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>> doing to the USA . And you GG'ers are the doing the tearing down - for
>> the most part . I filter most of the trash , can't figure out why you're
>> not in my bitbucket yet .
>> --
>> Snag
>> Illegitimi non
>> carborundum
>
>With you people, anybody that doesn't follow your line is BLM or antifa. I won't make a comment about your silly comment because I don't give out info on my beliefs.

There are 2 things you do often:
1. Give out info on your beliefs.
2. Say that you don't give out info on your beliefs.

Is that funny and poignant? Yes, that is funny and poignant. But, at
least, you don't use spaces after your periods and commas.

On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:50:02 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 15:45:23 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:06:11 PM UTC-10, Snag wrote:
>
> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> >> doing to the USA . And you GG'ers are the doing the tearing down - for
> >> the most part . I filter most of the trash , can't figure out why you're
> >> not in my bitbucket yet .
> >> --
> >> Snag
> >> Illegitimi non
> >> carborundum
> >
> >With you people, anybody that doesn't follow your line is BLM or antifa. I won't make a comment about your silly comment because I don't give out info on my beliefs.
>
> There are 2 things you do often:
> 1. Give out info on your beliefs.
> 2. Say that you don't give out info on your beliefs.
>
> Is that funny and poignant? Yes, that is funny and poignant. But, at
> least, you don't use spaces after your periods and commas.

Just another one of your lame mind games. That shit don't work on me. Why would you care about my beliefs anyway? Get a life of your own, man!

On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 15:58:15 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:50:02 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 15:45:23 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:06:11 PM UTC-10, Snag wrote:
>>
>> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>> >> doing to the USA . And you GG'ers are the doing the tearing down - for
>> >> the most part . I filter most of the trash , can't figure out why you're
>> >> not in my bitbucket yet .
>> >> --
>> >> Snag
>> >> Illegitimi non
>> >> carborundum
>> >
>> >With you people, anybody that doesn't follow your line is BLM or antifa. I won't make a comment about your silly comment because I don't give out info on my beliefs.
>>
>> There are 2 things you do often:
>> 1. Give out info on your beliefs.
>> 2. Say that you don't give out info on your beliefs.
>>
>> Is that funny and poignant? Yes, that is funny and poignant. But, at
>> least, you don't use spaces after your periods and commas.
>
>Just another one of your lame mind games. That shit don't work on me. Why would you care about my beliefs anyway? Get a life of your own, man!

Why do you tell us about your beliefs? Don't you know we don't care?
We have our own lives!

On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:59:18 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 15:58:15 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:50:02 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 15:45:23 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 12:06:11 PM UTC-10, Snag wrote:
> >>
> >> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> >> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> >> >> doing to the USA . And you GG'ers are the doing the tearing down - for
> >> >> the most part . I filter most of the trash , can't figure out why you're
> >> >> not in my bitbucket yet .
> >> >> --
> >> >> Snag
> >> >> Illegitimi non
> >> >> carborundum
> >> >
> >> >With you people, anybody that doesn't follow your line is BLM or antifa. I won't make a comment about your silly comment because I don't give out info on my beliefs.
> >>
> >> There are 2 things you do often:
> >> 1. Give out info on your beliefs.
> >> 2. Say that you don't give out info on your beliefs.
> >>
> >> Is that funny and poignant? Yes, that is funny and poignant. But, at
> >> least, you don't use spaces after your periods and commas.
> >
> >Just another one of your lame mind games. That shit don't work on me. Why would you care about my beliefs anyway? Get a life of your own, man!
>
> Why do you tell us about your beliefs? Don't you know we don't care?
> We have our own lives!

So what the heck do you know about my beliefs? Mostly I stick with facts. Let me know if any of my facts are wrong. If they are not, then what we gots to talk about? Yoose gets the last word - unless yoose comes up with something substantial.

On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:

> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> doing to the USA .

What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.

Oh, the horror!

Cindy Hamilton

On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>
>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>> doing to the USA .
>
> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>
> Oh, the horror!
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>

If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
- and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
out lying about all of this .
--
Snag
Illegitimi non
carborundum

Snag wrote:

> On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
> >
> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> >> doing to the USA .
> >
> > What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
> > saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
> > City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
> >
> > Oh, the horror!
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
> >
>
> If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
> about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
> out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
> shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
> - and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
> not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
> watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
> out lying about all of this .
> --
> Snag
> Illegitimi non
> carborundum


This is their website, very slick, they are founded on Marxist principles - as one of their founders says in the vid below "We are trained Marxists..." To recap some history, 100+ million since 1917 have been slaughtered in the name of Marx:

https://blacklivesmatter.com/

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and €œvillages€� that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable..."


Goog "Black Lives Matter Marxist", tons of hits from many viewpoints, here is one:

https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co...ained-marxist/


Black Lives Matter co-founder describes herself as "trained Marxist

By Yaron SteinbuchJune 25, 2020

"Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors said in a newly surfaced video from 2015 that she and her fellow organizers are €œtrained Marxists€� €“ making clear their movements ideological foundation, according to a report.

"A Short History of Black Lives Matters" [10 minutes]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCgh...ature=youtu.be

Cullors, 36, was the protégé of Eric Mann, former agitator of the Weather Underground domestic terror organization, and spent years absorbing the Marxist-Leninist ideology that shaped her worldview, Breitbart News reported.

€œThe first thing, I think, is that we actually do have an ideological frame. Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers,€� she said, referring to BLM co-founder Alicia Garza.

€œWe are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories. And I think that what we really tried to do is build a movement that could be utilized by many, many black folk,€� Cullors added in the interview with Jared Ball of The Real News Network.

While promoting her book €œWhen They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir€� in 2018, Cullors described her introduction to and support for Marxist ideology.

She described to Democracy Now! how she became a trained organizer with the Labor/Community Strategy Center, which she called her €œfirst political home€� under the mentorship of Mann, its director, Breitbart reported.

The center, which describes its philosophy as €œan urban experiment,€� uses grassroots organization to €œfocus on Black and Latino communities with deep historical ties to the long history of anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, pro-communist resistance to the US empire,€� according to the outlet.

It also expresses its appreciation for the work of the US Communist Party, €œespecially Black communists,€� as well as its support for €œthe great work of the Black Panther Party, the American Indian Movement, Young Lords, Brown Berets, and the great revolutionary rainbow experiments of the 1970s,€� Breitbart reported.

In 1968, Mann was a coordinator for Students for a Democratic Society, from which a more radical wing €“- the Weather Underground €” was splintered the following year.

It was led by Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who called for €œdirect action€� over civil disobedience, seeking the overthrow of the US government. In 1969, the FBI classified the group as a domestic terror organization.

Mann was eventually charged with assault and battery, disturbing the peace, damaging property, defacing a building and disturbing a public assembly, for which he spent 18 months behind bars..."

</>

On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 9:22:28 AM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
> On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
> >
> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> >> doing to the USA .
> >
> > What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
> > saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
> > City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
> >
> > Oh, the horror!
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
> >
> If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
> about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
> out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
> shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
> - and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
> not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
> watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
> out lying about all of this .

None of that is happening here. There are plenty of places where none of that
is happening. You just _want_ it to be bad in cities run by Democrats.

Even Detroit is pretty quiet.

Cindy Hamilton

On 9/3/2020 11:12 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 9:22:28 AM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>> On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>>
>>>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>>>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>>>> doing to the USA .
>>>
>>> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>>> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>>> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>>
>>> Oh, the horror!
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>> If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
>> about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
>> out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
>> shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
>> - and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
>> not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
>> watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
>> out lying about all of this .
>
> None of that is happening here. There are plenty of places where none of that
> is happening. You just _want_ it to be bad in cities run by Democrats.
>
> Even Detroit is pretty quiet.
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>

SMH but it IS happening in some places . And every single one of those
places is governed by democrats . I know I will never change your
ideology Cindy , but I was hoping to open your eyes to the fact that
there are 2 sides to every story . And it appears you are only seeing
one side .
--
Snag
Illegitimi non
carborundum

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>
>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>> doing to the USA .
>
>What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>
>Oh, the horror!

LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
your information.

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 08:22:24 -0500, Snag > wrote:

>On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>
>>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>>> doing to the USA .
>>
>> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>
>> Oh, the horror!
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>
> If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
>about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
>out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
>shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
>- and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
>not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
>watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
>out lying about all of this .


Exactly right.

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 12:41:02 -0500, Snag > wrote:

>On 9/3/2020 11:12 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 9:22:28 AM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>>>>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>>>>> doing to the USA .
>>>>
>>>> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>>>> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>>>> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, the horror!
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>
>>> If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
>>> about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
>>> out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
>>> shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
>>> - and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
>>> not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
>>> watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
>>> out lying about all of this .
>>
>> None of that is happening here. There are plenty of places where none of that
>> is happening. You just _want_ it to be bad in cities run by Democrats.
>>
>> Even Detroit is pretty quiet.
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>
>SMH but it IS happening in some places . And every single one of those
>places is governed by democrats . I know I will never change your
>ideology Cindy , but I was hoping to open your eyes to the fact that
>there are 2 sides to every story . And it appears you are only seeing
>one side .

And again, exactly right. Some people just refuse to look at political
matters in an dispassionate way. If one investigates this particular
issue, the indisputable facts are there to see. What you say is
accurate.

On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 1:41:07 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
> On 9/3/2020 11:12 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 9:22:28 AM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
> >> On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> >>>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> >>>> doing to the USA .
> >>>
> >>> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
> >>> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
> >>> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
> >>>
> >>> Oh, the horror!
> >>>
> >>> Cindy Hamilton
> >>>
> >> If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
> >> about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
> >> out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
> >> shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
> >> - and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
> >> not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
> >> watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
> >> out lying about all of this .
> >
> > None of that is happening here. There are plenty of places where none of that
> > is happening. You just _want_ it to be bad in cities run by Democrats.
> >
> > Even Detroit is pretty quiet.
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
> >
> SMH but it IS happening in some places . And every single one of those
> places is governed by democrats . I know I will never change your
> ideology Cindy , but I was hoping to open your eyes to the fact that
> there are 2 sides to every story . And it appears you are only seeing
> one side .

I know there are places where looting, rioting and burning are happening.
The right-wing media never talk about the places where it is not happening,
as far as I can tell. Of course, a bunch of people quietly marching along
in Ann Arbor isn't very newsworthy, except to the local newspaper.

Don't forget that most large cities are run by Democrats. But San Diego,
Jacksonville, Fort Worth, and Oklahoma City have Republican mayors (and
had rioting).

Cindy Hamilton

On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, Jeßus wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> > wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
> >
> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> >> doing to the USA .
> >
> >What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
> >saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
> >City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
> >
> >Oh, the horror!
> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
> your information.

I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.

Cindy Hamilton

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:25:12 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 1:41:07 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>> On 9/3/2020 11:12 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> > On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 9:22:28 AM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>> >> On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> >>> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>> >>>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>> >>>> doing to the USA .
>> >>>
>> >>> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>> >>> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>> >>> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>> >>>
>> >>> Oh, the horror!
>> >>>
>> >>> Cindy Hamilton
>> >>>
>> >> If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
>> >> about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
>> >> out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
>> >> shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
>> >> - and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
>> >> not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
>> >> watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
>> >> out lying about all of this .
>> >
>> > None of that is happening here. There are plenty of places where none of that
>> > is happening. You just _want_ it to be bad in cities run by Democrats.
>> >
>> > Even Detroit is pretty quiet.
>> >
>> > Cindy Hamilton
>> >
>> SMH but it IS happening in some places . And every single one of those
>> places is governed by democrats . I know I will never change your
>> ideology Cindy , but I was hoping to open your eyes to the fact that
>> there are 2 sides to every story . And it appears you are only seeing
>> one side .
>
>I know there are places where looting, rioting and burning are happening.
>The right-wing media never talk about the places where it is not happening,
>as far as I can tell. Of course, a bunch of people quietly marching along
>in Ann Arbor isn't very newsworthy, except to the local newspaper.
>
>Don't forget that most large cities are run by Democrats. But San Diego,
>Jacksonville, Fort Worth, and Oklahoma City have Republican mayors (and
>had rioting).

You're spoiling the fun of the right wingers and the shock jock fans.

writes:
>On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, JeA us wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>> >
>> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>> >> doing to the USA .
>> >
>> >What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>> >saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>> >City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>> >
>> >Oh, the horror!
>> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
>> your information.
>
>I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
>If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.
>
>Cindy Hamilton

Back in the days of CHAZ/CHOP one of my cousins from Iowa called me to
check and make sure I was okay because she heard on Fox news or wherever
that Seattle had been taken over by antifa. Fortunately she believed me
when I told her everything was fine. If Snag and Co are so far gone
they're not going to believe eyewitness accounts contrary to the
propaganda they're being fed by rightwing blowhards, why bother trying?

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 20:37:16 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle
> wrote:

writes:
>>On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, JeA us wrote:
>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>>> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>>> >> doing to the USA .
>>> >
>>> >What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>>> >saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>>> >City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>> >
>>> >Oh, the horror!
>>> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
>>> your information.
>>
>>I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
>>If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.
>>
>>Cindy Hamilton
>
>Back in the days of CHAZ/CHOP one of my cousins from Iowa called me to
>check and make sure I was okay because she heard on Fox news or wherever
>that Seattle had been taken over by antifa. Fortunately she believed me
>when I told her everything was fine. If Snag and Co are so far gone
>they're not going to believe eyewitness accounts contrary to the
>propaganda they're being fed by rightwing blowhards, why bother trying?

It's his agenda talking. <spit>

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:26:03 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, Jeßus wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>> >
>> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>> >> doing to the USA .
>> >
>> >What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>> >saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>> >City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>> >
>> >Oh, the horror!
>> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
>> your information.
>
>I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
>If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.

How obtuse.

On Fri, 04 Sep 2020 08:29:27 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:

>On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 11:26:03 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:
>
>>On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, Jeßus wrote:
>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>>> >saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>>> >City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>> >
>>> >Oh, the horror!
>>> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
>>> your information.
>>
>>I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
>>If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.
>
> How obtuse.

Jebus, in Tasmania, knows better what's going on in Ann-Arbor than
Cindy, in Ann-Arbor

Bruce wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 20:37:16 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle
> > wrote:
>
>> writes:
>>> On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, JeA us wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>>>>>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>>>>>> doing to the USA .
>>>>>
>>>>> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>>>>> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>>>>> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, the horror!
>>>> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
>>>> your information.
>>>
>>> I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
>>> If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> Back in the days of CHAZ/CHOP one of my cousins from Iowa called me to
>> check and make sure I was okay because she heard on Fox news or wherever
>> that Seattle had been taken over by antifa. Fortunately she believed me
>> when I told her everything was fine. If Snag and Co are so far gone
>> they're not going to believe eyewitness accounts contrary to the
>> propaganda they're being fed by rightwing blowhards, why bother trying?
>
> It's his agenda talking. <spit>
>

<*SNIFF*>

Druce, in any american city, you can sniff at any window.

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 20:37:16 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle
> wrote:

writes:
>>On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, JeA us wrote:
>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>>> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>>> >> doing to the USA .
>>> >
>>> >What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>>> >saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>>> >City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>> >
>>> >Oh, the horror!
>>> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
>>> your information.
>>
>>I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
>>If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.
>>
>>Cindy Hamilton
>
>Back in the days of CHAZ/CHOP one of my cousins from Iowa called me to
>check and make sure I was okay because she heard on Fox news or wherever
>that Seattle had been taken over by antifa. Fortunately she believed me
>when I told her everything was fine. If Snag and Co are so far gone
>they're not going to believe eyewitness accounts contrary to the
>propaganda they're being fed by rightwing blowhards, why bother trying?

Indeed. I've started reporting all the fake videos on Youtube, like
these ones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNlm2sWQsh0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jE_sPSVxhk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkHEAI75rfE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8z0jFxOmFo

etc.

On 9/3/2020 5:35 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 20:37:16 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle
> > wrote:
>
>> writes:
>>> On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, JeA us wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>>>>>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>>>>>> doing to the USA .
>>>>>
>>>>> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>>>>> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>>>>> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, the horror!
>>>> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
>>>> your information.
>>>
>>> I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
>>> If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> Back in the days of CHAZ/CHOP one of my cousins from Iowa called me to
>> check and make sure I was okay because she heard on Fox news or wherever
>> that Seattle had been taken over by antifa. Fortunately she believed me
>> when I told her everything was fine. If Snag and Co are so far gone
>> they're not going to believe eyewitness accounts contrary to the
>> propaganda they're being fed by rightwing blowhards, why bother trying?
>
> Indeed. I've started reporting all the fake videos on Youtube, like
> these ones:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNlm2sWQsh0
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jE_sPSVxhk
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkHEAI75rfE
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8z0jFxOmFo
>
> etc.
>

Those damn lyin' hard-core right-wing blowhards ! Oh wait - CBS/NBC
affiliates and Bloomberg ... never mind . So much for tert's bullshit
narrative . Betcha a nickel he votes Democrat .
--
Snag
Illegitimi non
carborundum

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 19:17:31 -0500, Snag > wrote:

>On 9/3/2020 5:35 PM, Je?us wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 20:37:16 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Back in the days of CHAZ/CHOP one of my cousins from Iowa called me to
>>> check and make sure I was okay because she heard on Fox news or wherever
>>> that Seattle had been taken over by antifa. Fortunately she believed me
>>> when I told her everything was fine. If Snag and Co are so far gone
>>> they're not going to believe eyewitness accounts contrary to the
>>> propaganda they're being fed by rightwing blowhards, why bother trying?
>>
>> Indeed. I've started reporting all the fake videos on Youtube, like
>> these ones:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNlm2sWQsh0
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jE_sPSVxhk
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkHEAI75rfE
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8z0jFxOmFo
>>
>> etc.
>>
>
> Those damn lyin' hard-core right-wing blowhards ! Oh wait - CBS/NBC
>affiliates and Bloomberg ... never mind . So much for tert's bullshit
>narrative . Betcha a nickel he votes Democrat .

Ha, I bet he doesn't even <spit>!

On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 19:17:31 -0500, Snag > wrote:

>On 9/3/2020 5:35 PM, Je?us wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 20:37:16 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> writes:
>>>> On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:02:56 PM UTC-4, JeA us wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 03:13:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
>>>>>>> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
>>>>>>> doing to the USA .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
>>>>>> saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
>>>>>> City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, the horror!
>>>>> LOL. You have selective vision, or poor choices in where you source
>>>>> your information.
>>>>
>>>> I saw the photograph of Ann Arbor BLM protesters in the local newspaper.
>>>> If I wanted to verify it, I could drive down there and look.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>> Back in the days of CHAZ/CHOP one of my cousins from Iowa called me to
>>> check and make sure I was okay because she heard on Fox news or wherever
>>> that Seattle had been taken over by antifa. Fortunately she believed me
>>> when I told her everything was fine. If Snag and Co are so far gone
>>> they're not going to believe eyewitness accounts contrary to the
>>> propaganda they're being fed by rightwing blowhards, why bother trying?
>>
>> Indeed. I've started reporting all the fake videos on Youtube, like
>> these ones:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNlm2sWQsh0
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jE_sPSVxhk
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkHEAI75rfE
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8z0jFxOmFo
>>
>> etc.
>>
>
> Those damn lyin' hard-core right-wing blowhards ! Oh wait - CBS/NBC
>affiliates and Bloomberg ... never mind . So much for tert's bullshit
>narrative .

<G>. Indeed.

>Betcha a nickel he votes Democrat .

Some people just aren't comfortable unless they belong to a tribe or
have a rigid belief system <shrug>.

On Fri, 04 Sep 2020 10:23:55 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:

>On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 19:17:31 -0500, Snag > wrote:
>
>>On 9/3/2020 5:35 PM, Je?us wrote:

>>> Indeed. I've started reporting all the fake videos on Youtube, like
>>> these ones:
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNlm2sWQsh0
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jE_sPSVxhk
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkHEAI75rfE
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8z0jFxOmFo
>>>
>>> etc.
>>>
>>
>> Those damn lyin' hard-core right-wing blowhards ! Oh wait - CBS/NBC
>>affiliates and Bloomberg ... never mind . So much for tert's bullshit
>>narrative .
>
><G>. Indeed.

Jebus has now sunk to the level of a moonshine abusing mountain cabin
dweller with one tooth. I don't think Thailand had a good influence on
the diminutive Tasmanian hobby farmer.

On Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 3:22:28 AM UTC-10, Snag wrote:
> On 9/3/2020 5:13 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:06:11 PM UTC-4, Snag wrote:
> >
> >> So which are you affiliated with , BLM or antifa ? Because what
> >> you're suggesting for newsgroups is EXACTLY what those 2 groups are
> >> doing to the USA .
> >
> > What, precisely, is BLM doing to the U.S.? In this morning's paper I
> > saw a photo of a BLM protest in AnnArbor. The people were sitting outside
> > City Hall, masked and distanced, holding signs.
> >
> > Oh, the horror!
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
> >
>
> If you'd look at anything besides MSM , you'd be much better informed
> about what's really going on . "Mostly peaceful" my dyin' ass . Burning
> out innocent businesses , smacking people over the head with bricks ,
> shooting and killing a man just because he's wearing a MAGA hat , trying
> - and in some cases succeeding - to blind LEO's with lasers , have you
> not seen any of this ? Or do you condone all the violence ? I've been
> watching BOTH sides , and IMO the mainstream media outlets are just flat
> out lying about all of this .
> --
> Snag
> Illegitimi non
> carborundum

The reality is that this is the America of 2020. It is the America created by DJ Trump. If you don't like what you see, you better think hard about the kind of America you want and vote accordingly. If everything is fine and dandy, then you know what to do. Just don't do anything stupid - like voting twice. That's a felony.