In article t>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article t>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>You prefer my e-company to other masculine and/or heterosexual
> >>>>>endeavors.
> >>>>
> >>>>False dilemma.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>No dilemma.
> >>
> >>A false dilemma.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>>>Despite your claims of feeling insulted
> >>>>
> >>>>No. I never said I felt insulted.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Of course, you wouldn't feel insulted because you enjoy our
> >>>communication.
> >>
> >>Mild amusement counts for enjoyment.
> >
> >
> > And your interest to be close to me.
>
> No such interest, Ron. I'm not close to you, in any
> sense. You do provide a small amusement.

Then we can expect to see a decline in the attempts to secure personal
knowledge about me. I find that I reserve that familiarity with those
with whom I do share some intimacy on some level.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted
>>>>>it there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
>>>>
>>>>FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
>>>>have it within your power to do so. Why do you
>>>>deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
>>>>removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
>>>>
>>>>You're responsible, Ron.
>>>
>>>
>>>You Rudy are the one who crossposted this
>>>to the boats group.
>>
>>Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
>>polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
>>responsible.
>
>
> If the admiral would like the crosspost removed, I consider it his
> responsibility to remove it.

You are the one posting with rec.boats in your headers.
You are responsible for where your posts go.

Why are you trying to blame others for your actions, Ron?

> He's responsible for ****ing off those boat owners
> whenever he puts up a post that contains a crosspost to
> rec.boats. It's his action.

His is only a nonaction on something you did.
You started it. You crossposted there. You
are responsible for all subsequent cross
postings there. You should be doing the
clean up of your newsgroup droppings.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote:
> In article t>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>Despite your claims of feeling insulted
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No. I never said I felt insulted.

Why did you lie, Ron?

>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Of course, you wouldn't feel insulted because you enjoy our
>>>>>communication.
>>>>
>>>>Mild amusement counts for enjoyment.
>>>
>>>
>>>And your interest to be close to me.
>>
>>No such interest, Ron. I'm not close to you, in any
>>sense. You do provide a small amusement.
>
>
> Then we can expect to see a decline in the attempts to secure personal
> knowledge about me.

I haven't sought any personal knowledge of you, Ron.
I'd have to shower if you divulged any.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
>
> >>Why did you **** your grandfather in the ass for three
> >>days after he was dead, Ron? Did you have an illicit
> >>key to the funeral home?
> >
> >
> > Your fantasies
>
> No fantasy. Ron did it.
>
> He's one sick homo.

Wait a minute. I thought I was suffering because of some high school
teenage friend. Do make up your mind Rudy. Your fantasies and
projections are duly noted.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article t>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult engagement and
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I think it the responsibility of the person who places the crosspost
> >>>there to remove the cross post. That is the reason I don't trim headers.
> >>>They put it there, let them remove it. If they didn't want it there,
> >>>they wouldn't have placed it there.
> >>
> >>This is interesting, Ron. Someone in rec.boats asks to
> >>have his group removed. You COULD do it, easily, but
> >>you choose not to do it. You **** off someone you
> >>don't even know by refusing to acceded to his polite
> >>request. You are now in the position of DIRECTLY doing
> >>something that antagonizes someone, but you disclaim
> >>any responsibility for it.
> >
> >
> > Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted it
> > there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
>
> FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
> have it within your power to do so. Why do you
> deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
> removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
>
> You're responsible, Ron.

Why should I do for others what they can do for themselves? Anyone not
wanting the posts in rec.boat can easily trim the header and send it
back and avoid the continuation of the post being viewed in that
newsgroup.

Scented Nectar wrote:

>>He's responsible for ****ing off those boat owners
>>whenever he puts up a post that contains a crosspost to
>>rec.boats. It's his action.
>
>
> His is only a nonaction

He was politely asked to take an action to trim the
headers. He pointedly refuses.

He is responsible for the content of the headers of
where he posts. He's unnecessarily angering the
commodores and admirals, and he's responsible for it.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Why did you **** your grandfather in the ass for three
>>>>days after he was dead, Ron? Did you have an illicit
>>>>key to the funeral home?
>>>
>>>
>>>Your fantasies
>>
>>No fantasy. Ron did it.
>>
>>He's one sick homo.
>
>
> Wait a minute.

No. You're a sick homo who ****ed his dead grandfather
up the ass for three days solid, and has no remorse.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted it
>>>there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
>>
>>FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
>>have it within your power to do so. Why do you
>>deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
>>removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
>>
>>You're responsible, Ron.
>
>
> Why should I do for others what they can do for themselves?

He can't remove the crossposts from the headers of your
posts when you're composing the posts, Ron. You'd have
to do that.

You like to antagonize people.

> He is responsible for the content of the headers of
> where he posts. He's unnecessarily angering the
> commodores and admirals, and he's responsible for it.

Who did the misdeed of crossposting there
in the first place? You, Rudy. Clean up
your own mess.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button.

Scented Nectar wrote:

>>He is responsible for the content of the headers of
>>where he posts. He's unnecessarily angering the
>>commodores and admirals, and he's responsible for it.
>
>
> Who did the misdeed of crossposting

in Ron's posts? Ron did.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>>More manipulation.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>No manipulation, kid.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Hmmm. Okay. Please define manipulation and provide an example of
> >>>>>manipulation.
> >>>>
> >>>>No. YOU define it. It's your false claim, so get busy.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I defined manipulation
> >>
> >>You didn't.
> >
> >
> > Ah, you still want to communicate with me.
>
> Why did you **** your grandfather in the ass for three
> days after he was dead, Ron? Did you have an illicit
> key to the funeral home?

More preoccupation with *** sex. I must say that I find you highly
sexualized which is also indicative of the sexually abused and the
sexually repressed.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>>More manipulation.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>No manipulation, kid.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Hmmm. Okay. Please define manipulation and provide an example of
> >>>>>manipulation.
> >>>>
> >>>>No. YOU define it. It's your false claim, so get busy.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I defined manipulation
> >>
> >>You didn't.
> >
> >
> > Ah, you still want to communicate with me.
>
> Why did you **** your grandfather in the ass for three
> days after he was dead, Ron? Did you have an illicit
> key to the funeral home?

More preoccupation with *** sex. I must say that I find you highly
sexualized which is also indicative of the sexually abused and the
sexually repressed.

uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
engagement and wrote:

> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>
>>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>>engagement and wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>Hmmm. Okay. Please define manipulation and provide an example of
>>>>>>>manipulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No. YOU define it. It's your false claim, so get busy.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I defined manipulation
>>>>
>>>>You didn't.
>>>
>>>
>>>Ah, you still want to communicate with me.
>>
>>Why did you **** your grandfather in the ass for three
>>days after he was dead, Ron? Did you have an illicit
>>key to the funeral home?
>
>
> More preoccupation

No preoccupation.

Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>Who did the misdeed of crossposting
>>
>>in Ron's posts? Ron did.
>
>
> You started it.

Ron has it in his power to stop it as far as his posts go.

> > Who did the misdeed of crossposting
>
> in Ron's posts? Ron did.

You started it. You can't expect others
to clean up your mess.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button.

Scented Nectar wrote:

>>>You started it.
>>
>>Ron has it in his power to stop it as far as his posts go.
>
>
> And so do you with yours. Your's is where it
> first showed up.

Ron's is where it continues.

Ron is responsible for the headers of his posts.

Scented Nectar wrote:

>>>You started it.
>>
>>Ron has it in his power to stop it as far as his posts go.
>
>
> And so do you with yours. Your's

"YOURS", not "your's".

You ignorant whore.

> > You started it.
>
> Ron has it in his power to stop it as far as his posts go.

And so do you with yours. Your's is where it
first showed up.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
>
> >>>You Rudy are the one who crossposted this
> >>>to the boats group.
> >>
> >>Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
> >>polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
> >>responsible.
> >
> >
> > He's stated his reason
>
> It's bullshit.
>
> He's responsible for ****ing off those boat owners
> whenever he puts up a post that contains a crosspost to
> rec.boats. It's his action.

The action that I am responsible for is to click "post" from within my
newsreader. Admiral is responsible for his own feelings when he
experiences whatever he experiences. Admiral has the ability to delete
the crosspost and send it back, if he so chooses.

> > And so do you with yours. Your's
>
> "YOURS", not "your's".
>
> You ignorant whore.

Calm down boy! Do you have
a hate-on for older women? Do you
think of your mother as a whore?
Or do you just get obsessively
freaked out about grammar?
Loosen up. On the net typos
and grammatical omissions
happen all the time.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button.

In article >,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
>
> >>He is responsible for the content of the headers of
> >>where he posts. He's unnecessarily angering the
> >>commodores and admirals, and he's responsible for it.
> >
> >
> > Who did the misdeed of crossposting
>
> in Ron's posts? Ron did.

I open, select reply, and click "post" in all cases. I am not
responsible for the actions of another who placed the crossposting there.

Admiral is responsible for his own action. Asking me to do something
that he can do for himself is relinquishing his responsiblity to do
something about a thing which displeases him.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted it
> >>>there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
> >>
> >>FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
> >>have it within your power to do so. Why do you
> >>deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
> >>removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
> >>
> >>You're responsible, Ron.
> >
> >
> > Why should I do for others what they can do for themselves?
>
> He can't remove the crossposts from the headers of your
> posts when you're composing the posts, Ron. You'd have
> to do that.
>
> You like to antagonize people.

He can remove them from his end. He can also choose to killfile me. He
can also choose to ignore the posts from this newsgroup and automate
that task. If admiral doesn't like X then, I recommend admiral do
something about X. I am unwilling to take responsibility for him, or the
person who placed the cross post in the first place.

It's his problem, I let him deal with it.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
>
> >>>You Rudy are the one who crossposted this
> >>>to the boats group.
> >>
> >>Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
> >>polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
> >>responsible.
> >
> >
> > He's stated his reason
>
> It's bullshit.
>
> He's responsible for ****ing off those boat owners
> whenever he puts up a post that contains a crosspost to
> rec.boats. It's his action.

Boat owners are responsible for their own feelings and actions. If they
dislike cross posts they have a means to resolve _their_ problem.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
>
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Scented Nectar wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted
> >>>>>it there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
> >>>>
> >>>>FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
> >>>>have it within your power to do so. Why do you
> >>>>deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
> >>>>removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
> >>>>
> >>>>You're responsible, Ron.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>You Rudy are the one who crossposted this
> >>>to the boats group.
> >>
> >>Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
> >>polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
> >>responsible.
> >
> >
> > If the admiral would like the crosspost removed, I consider it his
> > responsibility to remove it.
>
> You are the one posting with rec.boats in your headers.
> You are responsible for where your posts go.
>
> Why are you trying to blame others for your actions, Ron?

Correction. My ISP is responsible for where they route the responses
that I post. The person receiving the posts is responsible for what they
see and don't want to see. When I see a post that disinterests me, I
ignore it.

My action is to respond to a post that I received in this usenet group.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> engagement and wrote:
> > In article t>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >>engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>>>Despite your claims of feeling insulted
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>No. I never said I felt insulted.
>
> Why did you lie, Ron?
>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Of course, you wouldn't feel insulted because you enjoy our
> >>>>>communication.
> >>>>
> >>>>Mild amusement counts for enjoyment.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>And your interest to be close to me.
> >>
> >>No such interest, Ron. I'm not close to you, in any
> >>sense. You do provide a small amusement.
> >
> >
> > Then we can expect to see a decline in the attempts to secure personal
> > knowledge about me.
>
> I haven't sought any personal knowledge of you, Ron.
> I'd have to shower if you divulged any.

I know. The sexually repressed often associate sex with being dirty and
even more obsessive behaviour.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
>
> >>He's responsible for ****ing off those boat owners
> >>whenever he puts up a post that contains a crosspost to
> >>rec.boats. It's his action.
> >
> >
> > His is only a nonaction
>
> He was politely asked to take an action to trim the
> headers. He pointedly refuses.
>
> He is responsible for the content of the headers of
> where he posts. He's unnecessarily angering the
> commodores and admirals, and he's responsible for it.

I am allowing them to find ways to deal with THEIR anger. It is THEIR
anger after all.

Who is angry?
The admiral.
Who is responsible for dealing with the anger:
The admiral.

In article >,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
> >>>Who did the misdeed of crossposting
> >>
> >>in Ron's posts? Ron did.
> >
> >
> > You started it.
>
> Ron has it in his power to stop it as far as his posts go.

Who is unhappy about the crosspost: admiral
Who bears the responsibility for dealing with their unhappines: admiral

When I dislike something, I do something about it. Expecting other
people to something because of my dislike is rather childish. But that
is the consistent pattern that we seem to be discussing.

In article et>,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Scented Nectar wrote:
>
> >>>You started it.
> >>
> >>Ron has it in his power to stop it as far as his posts go.
> >
> >
> > And so do you with yours. Your's is where it
> > first showed up.
>
> Ron's is where it continues.
>
> Ron is responsible for the headers of his posts.

Ron is responsible for clicking "post". Admiral is responsible for his
anger and bears the responsibility to do something about. Asking for
assistance is one means, but when told no, he must learn to find other
ways to deal with his anger.

I have the option of agreeing to a request and to decline it as well.

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:27:04 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
>"JohnH" > wrote
>
>> Rudy, could you be so kind as to remove rec.boats from the list of
>> sites you're cross posting this thread to?
>>
>> We'd appreciate it, for sure.
>>
>> John H
>
>John
>
>I understand your frustration, but can't you simply kill the thread in your
>newsreader?
>
>The problem with your suggestion is that you have presumed to speak for
>every single person reading rec.boats, and I am sure that some of them have
>a few interests other than boats.
>
>
Yes, of course you're probably right. I'm sure there is at least one
person in rec.boats who wants to know which of you, Rudy, and Ron are
queer for the other.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"Scented Nectar" > wrote

>> >>Fear.
>> >
>> >
>> > There's
>>
>> Your fear.
>
> You're getting too repetitive. No one's buying
> into your fear answer to everything.

He has a point. I asked you to agree to compare all available foods against
one another, regardless of food type or category, a very reasonable request,
and something one would think a person in your position would be anxious to
do. You refused. Your excuse was that it "isn't fair", but nobody is buying
that. Just as with this survey, you are afraid that you won't like the
results.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote

>> You are a boring person.
>
> Good, then stop fixating on me.

You love the attention, otherwise you would stop responding.

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>> Scented Nectar wrote:
>>
>> >>>Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted
>> >
>> > it
>> >
>> >>>there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
>> >>
>> >>FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
>> >>have it within your power to do so. Why do you
>> >>deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
>> >>removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
>> >>
>> >>You're responsible, Ron.
>> >
>> >
>> > You Rudy are the one who crossposted this
>> > to the boats group.
>>
>> Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
>> polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
>> responsible.
>
> If the admiral would like the crosspost removed, I consider it his
> responsibility to remove it.

You want him to remove crossposts from YOUR posts? How is he supposed to do
that?

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article et>,
> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
>> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
>> engagement and wrote:
>>
>> > In article t>,
>> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult engagement and
>> >>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>I think it the responsibility of the person who places the crosspost
>> >>>there to remove the cross post. That is the reason I don't trim
>> >>>headers.
>> >>>They put it there, let them remove it. If they didn't want it there,
>> >>>they wouldn't have placed it there.
>> >>
>> >>This is interesting, Ron. Someone in rec.boats asks to
>> >>have his group removed. You COULD do it, easily, but
>> >>you choose not to do it. You **** off someone you
>> >>don't even know by refusing to acceded to his polite
>> >>request. You are now in the position of DIRECTLY doing
>> >>something that antagonizes someone, but you disclaim
>> >>any responsibility for it.
>> >
>> >
>> > Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted it
>> > there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
>>
>> FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
>> have it within your power to do so. Why do you
>> deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
>> removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
>>
>> You're responsible, Ron.
>
> Why should I do for others what they can do for themselves? Anyone not
> wanting the posts in rec.boat can easily trim the header and send it
> back and avoid the continuation of the post being viewed in that
> newsgroup.

You have a knack for getting EVERYTHING wrong Ron. At least you're an expert
at something.

"JohnH" > wrote in message
news
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:27:04 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"JohnH" > wrote
>>
>>> Rudy, could you be so kind as to remove rec.boats from the list of
>>> sites you're cross posting this thread to?
>>>
>>> We'd appreciate it, for sure.
>>>
>>> John H
>>
>>John
>>
>>I understand your frustration, but can't you simply kill the thread in
>>your
>>newsreader?
>>
>>The problem with your suggestion is that you have presumed to speak for
>>every single person reading rec.boats, and I am sure that some of them
>>have
>>a few interests other than boats.
>>
>>
> Yes, of course you're probably right. I'm sure there is at least one
> person in rec.boats who wants to know which of you, Rudy, and Ron are
> queer for the other.

There you go...

> > Good, then stop fixating on me.
>
> You love the attention, otherwise you would stop responding.

My responding has nothing to do with
the fact he was fixated.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button.

> He has a point. I asked you to agree to compare all available foods
against
> one another, regardless of food type or category, a very reasonable
request,
> and something one would think a person in your position would be
anxious to
> do. You refused. Your excuse was that it "isn't fair", but nobody is
buying
> that. Just as with this survey, you are afraid that you won't like the
> results.

First of all, there's no data telling us
the death toll of individual foods. Next
you consistantly only want to compare
the 'best' of meats to the 'worst' of vegan.
When you want to compare like to like,
I'll play the game too.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button.

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >> Scented Nectar wrote:
> >>
> >> >>>Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted
> >> >
> >> > it
> >> >
> >> >>>there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
> >> >>
> >> >>FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
> >> >>have it within your power to do so. Why do you
> >> >>deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
> >> >>removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
> >> >>
> >> >>You're responsible, Ron.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > You Rudy are the one who crossposted this
> >> > to the boats group.
> >>
> >> Ron continues to leave the cross post in, despite the
> >> polite request of the admiral to take it out. He is
> >> responsible.
> >
> > If the admiral would like the crosspost removed, I consider it his
> > responsibility to remove it.
>
> You want him to remove crossposts from YOUR posts? How is he supposed to do
> that?

A nice alteration. He is the one experiencing the difficulty. It is up
to him to decide on how he proceeds or what his actions will be as a
result of his difficulty. Of course, he can end his experience of the
crossposting in several ways.

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article et>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >> uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult
> >> engagement and wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article t>,
> >> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>uncurious Ron AGAIN showed he doesn't really want adult engagement and
> >> >>wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>I think it the responsibility of the person who places the crosspost
> >> >>>there to remove the cross post. That is the reason I don't trim
> >> >>>headers.
> >> >>>They put it there, let them remove it. If they didn't want it there,
> >> >>>they wouldn't have placed it there.
> >> >>
> >> >>This is interesting, Ron. Someone in rec.boats asks to
> >> >>have his group removed. You COULD do it, easily, but
> >> >>you choose not to do it. You **** off someone you
> >> >>don't even know by refusing to acceded to his polite
> >> >>request. You are now in the position of DIRECTLY doing
> >> >>something that antagonizes someone, but you disclaim
> >> >>any responsibility for it.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Incorrect. The person who placed the crosspost is the one who wanted it
> >> > there and is the one who hoped to see some irritation in another.
> >>
> >> FOLLOWING the polite request to remove it, Ron, you
> >> have it within your power to do so. Why do you
> >> deliberately aggravate the rec.boat readers by not
> >> removing it, when you've been politely asked to remove it?
> >>
> >> You're responsible, Ron.
> >
> > Why should I do for others what they can do for themselves? Anyone not
> > wanting the posts in rec.boat can easily trim the header and send it
> > back and avoid the continuation of the post being viewed in that
> > newsgroup.
>
> You have a knack for getting EVERYTHING wrong Ron. At least you're an expert
> at something.

I'm human. What I do seem to have ability to get RIGHT is to assess
responsibility accurately. Admiral has many means at his disposal to
address his dislike. Which include but are not limited to, killing the
thread, the author, the newsgroup, not opening the thread, removing the
crosspost when he opens it, refraining from reading the newsgroup,
refraining from using all newsgroups, and so on.

In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "JohnH" > wrote in message
> news
> > On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:27:04 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>"JohnH" > wrote
> >>
> >>> Rudy, could you be so kind as to remove rec.boats from the list of
> >>> sites you're cross posting this thread to?
> >>>
> >>> We'd appreciate it, for sure.
> >>>
> >>> John H
> >>
> >>John
> >>
> >>I understand your frustration, but can't you simply kill the thread in
> >>your
> >>newsreader?
> >>
> >>The problem with your suggestion is that you have presumed to speak for
> >>every single person reading rec.boats, and I am sure that some of them
> >>have
> >>a few interests other than boats.
> >>
> >>
> > Yes, of course you're probably right. I'm sure there is at least one
> > person in rec.boats who wants to know which of you, Rudy, and Ron are
> > queer for the other.
>
> There you go...

Anything from the eating disordered is suspect. Denial is a terrible
symptom of any disorder. "Hi, I'm Dutch. I have an eating disorder."