Ed Dolan Protests

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 09 Sep 2005 15:14:58
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Ed Dolan Protests

I believe it is highly inappropriate to have a thread about a person. A
thread should always be about a subject. I am able and willing to discuss
any subject under the sun, but I do to like to be put in the position of
having to defend myself as a person all the time. Ask yourself how you would
like it.

When you post a message which has a person as the subject, you are doing
nothing but reducing ARBR to a gossip column. We do not want that. Just post
your message on a subject without any name and this newsgroup will thrive.

--
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 10 Sep 2005 02:57:34
From:
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

Date: 10 Sep 2005 01:25:25
From: LoGo USA
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

Hey guys -

More TROLL-related errata, wrongheaded rationalizations
and rabid rambling:

>Just post your message on a subject without any name...

I rarely call the TROLL by name.
Ironic'ly my stated aim
Was to extinguish that strange thrill
He seems to get when someone will.
The TROLL, who thinks he's pretty slick,
Has stooped to old Brer Rabbit's trick.
But I suspect that there's a catch;
Did he say, "Not the briar patch!"?

>I do not like words run together... Using separate
>words is always a superior way of writing whether
>technically correct or not.

Car rot is rust and crumbling plastic,
And though the TROLL may wax bombastic
With weasel words more trite than cute,
It's not a crunchy orange root.

>If we wanted to, Tom Sherman and I could completely
>dominate this newsgroup and in effect destroy it.

The TROLL (who never will retire)
Now threatens he could set a fire,
While stomping through this blackened site
That he burned down with smug delight.

At least old Nero played a tune,
But all we got from this buffoon
Was repetitious, raunchy rants
On women, New York Jews and France.

If this TROLL wants his threat to scare,
He really ought to be aware:
It's hard to frighten anyone
About what you've already done.

>Women have very many virtues, but... I like purple...
>Look for hidden meanings and mysterious allusions.

That meaning isn't hidden well;
I think it's clear as any bell.
Old TROLLs that don't like girls, but do
Feel drawn to mingled red and blue,
Roll out their bikes for big parades,
Collecting funds to combat AIDS[1].

[1] Please note: AIDS is an acronym,
But 'PC' isn't. On a whim,
Another prim pedantic putz
Mislabeled that term (Such a klutz!)

>... we do not allow our egos to run amuck...

By that last word the TROLL might mean
'Amok' (a variant I've seen),
Or maybe meaning 'through the muck',
A quite specific kind of yuck,
"Soft moist farmyard manure" in fact
Says one website, to be exact.
"Mysterious allusions" seem
To echo his priy theme...

>I spent 4 years in the US Navy... I think it is almost
>impossible for the highly educated like myself to ever
>communicate with the high school crowd who thought that
>college was only for snobs.

That high school crowd and college snobs,
And those of us who've worked at jobs
Are very different, it's true,
>From learned TROLLS, who learned to do
Without the joys and thrills of sex
At sea, except on lower decks
With coxswains, seamen and the like.
I think I'd rather ride my trike.

>My post was all about Tom Sherman and is
>directed to him, not to you. [Who? Us?]

If some TROLL wants to talk to Tom,
His Bosun's Mate or either's mom,
Why not use email, sparing us
The rantings of a grizzled cuss
Who can't remember what he typed
Last Tuesday, or if he has wiped
Upon completion of a post
Which leaves us ARBR readers grossed?

>Think of me as you would think of Shakespeare
>and you will began [sic] to glean my profundity.

Was that a mistype of "be Gin"?
"Mysterious allusion"? [GRIN]
This TROLL's pro-fun-dity's been gleaned;
No fun was found as it was screened,
But this conclusion has been drawn:
Begin, began, begun - begone!

Regards,
Wayne

Date: 10 Sep 2005 12:22:38
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

"LoGo USA" <wayne@logo-us.com > wrote in message
news:1126340725.514417.163800@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hey guys -
>
> More TROLL-related errata, wrongheaded rationalizations
> and rabid rambling:
>
>>Just post your message on a subject without any name...
>
> I rarely call the TROLL by name.
> Ironic'ly my stated aim
> Was to extinguish that strange thrill
> He seems to get when someone will.
> The TROLL, who thinks he's pretty slick,
> Has stooped to old Brer Rabbit's trick.
> But I suspect that there's a catch;
> Did he say, "Not the briar patch!"?

I am not interested in any kind of discussion about me. What I throw out
always is a subject which others can take or leave.

>>I do not like words run together... Using separate
>>words is always a superior way of writing whether
>>technically correct or not.
>
> Car rot is rust and crumbling plastic,
> And though the TROLL may wax bombastic
> With weasel words more trite than cute,
> It's not a crunchy orange root.
>
>>If we wanted to, Tom Sherman and I could completely
>>dominate this newsgroup and in effect destroy it.
>
> The TROLL (who never will retire)
> Now threatens he could set a fire,
> While stomping through this blackened site
> That he burned down with smug delight.
>
> At least old Nero played a tune,
> But all we got from this buffoon
> Was repetitious, raunchy rants
> On women, New York Jews and France.
>
> If this TROLL wants his threat to scare,
> He really ought to be aware:
> It's hard to frighten anyone
> About what you've already done.

You need to compare my posts over the years with those of a true troll. A
true troll will NEVER be responsive whereas I am ALWAYS responsive. Big
difference!

>>Women have very many virtues, but... I like purple...
>>Look for hidden meanings and mysterious allusions.
>
> That meaning isn't hidden well;
> I think it's clear as any bell.
> Old TROLLs that don't like girls, but do
> Feel drawn to mingled red and blue,
> Roll out their bikes for big parades,
> Collecting funds to combat AIDS[1].

Women are not worth discussing on this newsgroup since there aren't any
here.

> [1] Please note: AIDS is an acronym,
> But 'PC' isn't. On a whim,
> Another prim pedantic putz
> Mislabeled that term (Such a klutz!)

I will always defer to Tom Sherman when it come to peccadilloes. However,
you are right there along side him. I am in the business of thinking big
thoughts. The both of you are in the business of thinking little thoughts.
Big difference!

>>... we do not allow our egos to run amuck...
>
> By that last word the TROLL might mean
> 'Amok' (a variant I've seen),
> Or maybe meaning 'through the muck',
> A quite specific kind of yuck,
> "Soft moist farmyard manure" in fact
> Says one website, to be exact.
> "Mysterious allusions" seem
> To echo his priy theme...
>
>>I spent 4 years in the US Navy... I think it is almost
>>impossible for the highly educated like myself to ever
>>communicate with the high school crowd who thought that
>>college was only for snobs.
>
> That high school crowd and college snobs,
> And those of us who've worked at jobs
> Are very different, it's true,
>>From learned TROLLS, who learned to do
> Without the joys and thrills of sex
> At sea, except on lower decks
> With coxswains, seamen and the like.
> I think I'd rather ride my trike.

Those who work hard also play hard. Their idea of play is to get drunk, get
in a fight and get screwed - not necessarily in that order. You are welcome
to that crew of morons.

>>My post was all about Tom Sherman and is
>>directed to him, not to you. [Who? Us?]
>
> If some TROLL wants to talk to Tom,
> His Bosun's Mate or either's mom,
> Why not use email, sparing us
> The rantings of a grizzled cuss
> Who can't remember what he typed
> Last Tuesday, or if he has wiped
> Upon completion of a post
> Which leaves us ARBR readers grossed?

Although directed to Tom Sherman, there was enough fodder there to interest
any others who have the necessary brains to pick up on it. I steer clear of
banter on Usenet except on the rarest of occasions.

>>Think of me as you would think of Shakespeare
>>and you will began [sic] to glean my profundity.
>
> Was that a mistype of "be Gin"?
> "Mysterious allusion"? [GRIN]
> This TROLL's pro-fun-dity's been gleaned;
> No fun was found as it was screened,
> But this conclusion has been drawn:
> Begin, began, begun - begone!

Excellent last stanza!

Regards,

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Date: 10 Sep 2005 20:40:01
From: Slugger
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

In article <ZPadncWpodf3i77eRVn-jg@prairiewave.com >, Edward Dolan
<edolan@iw.net > wrote:

> "LoGo USA" <wayne@logo-us.com> wrote in message
> news:1126340725.514417.163800@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Hey guys -
> >
> > More TROLL-related errata, wrongheaded rationalizations
> > and rabid rambling:
> >
> >>Just post your message on a subject without any name...
> >
> > I rarely call the TROLL by name.
> > Ironic'ly my stated aim
> > Was to extinguish that strange thrill
> > He seems to get when someone will.
> > The TROLL, who thinks he's pretty slick,
> > Has stooped to old Brer Rabbit's trick.
> > But I suspect that there's a catch;
> > Did he say, "Not the briar patch!"?
>
> I am not interested in any kind of discussion about me. What I throw out
> always is a subject which others can take or leave.

Thats Laughable.

> >>I do not like words run together... Using separate
> >>words is always a superior way of writing whether
> >>technically correct or not.
> >
> > Car rot is rust and crumbling plastic,
> > And though the TROLL may wax bombastic
> > With weasel words more trite than cute,
> > It's not a crunchy orange root.
> >
> >>If we wanted to, Tom Sherman and I could completely
> >>dominate this newsgroup and in effect destroy it.
> >
> > The TROLL (who never will retire)
> > Now threatens he could set a fire,
> > While stomping through this blackened site
> > That he burned down with smug delight.
> >
> > At least old Nero played a tune,
> > But all we got from this buffoon
> > Was repetitious, raunchy rants
> > On women, New York Jews and France.
> >
> > If this TROLL wants his threat to scare,
> > He really ought to be aware:
> > It's hard to frighten anyone
> > About what you've already done.
>
> You need to compare my posts over the years with those of a true troll. A
> true troll will NEVER be responsive whereas I am ALWAYS responsive. Big
> difference!

You are a true troll and you do respond to almost any post as long as
it will keep you here longer.

> >>Women have very many virtues, but... I like purple...
> >>Look for hidden meanings and mysterious allusions.
> >
> > That meaning isn't hidden well;
> > I think it's clear as any bell.
> > Old TROLLs that don't like girls, but do
> > Feel drawn to mingled red and blue,
> > Roll out their bikes for big parades,
> > Collecting funds to combat AIDS[1].
>
> Women are not worth discussing on this newsgroup since there aren't any
> here.

If that is the case then why do you persist on making stupid, ignorant
comments about women?

> > [1] Please note: AIDS is an acronym,
> > But 'PC' isn't. On a whim,
> > Another prim pedantic putz
> > Mislabeled that term (Such a klutz!)
>
> I will always defer to Tom Sherman when it come to peccadilloes. However,
> you are right there along side him. I am in the business of thinking big
> thoughts. The both of you are in the business of thinking little thoughts.
> Big difference!

I've always thought of you as provincial.

> >>... we do not allow our egos to run amuck...
> >
> > By that last word the TROLL might mean
> > 'Amok' (a variant I've seen),
> > Or maybe meaning 'through the muck',
> > A quite specific kind of yuck,
> > "Soft moist farmyard manure" in fact
> > Says one website, to be exact.
> > "Mysterious allusions" seem
> > To echo his priy theme...
> >
> >>I spent 4 years in the US Navy... I think it is almost
> >>impossible for the highly educated like myself to ever
> >>communicate with the high school crowd who thought that
> >>college was only for snobs.
> >
> > That high school crowd and college snobs,
> > And those of us who've worked at jobs
> > Are very different, it's true,
> >>From learned TROLLS, who learned to do
> > Without the joys and thrills of sex
> > At sea, except on lower decks
> > With coxswains, seamen and the like.
> > I think I'd rather ride my trike.
>
> Those who work hard also play hard. Their idea of play is to get drunk, get
> in a fight and get screwed - not necessarily in that order. You are welcome
> to that crew of morons.

Well you got the first two down pat.

> >>My post was all about Tom Sherman and is
> >>directed to him, not to you. [Who? Us?]
> >
> > If some TROLL wants to talk to Tom,
> > His Bosun's Mate or either's mom,
> > Why not use email, sparing us
> > The rantings of a grizzled cuss
> > Who can't remember what he typed
> > Last Tuesday, or if he has wiped
> > Upon completion of a post
> > Which leaves us ARBR readers grossed?
>
> Although directed to Tom Sherman, there was enough fodder there to interest
> any others who have the necessary brains to pick up on it. I steer clear of
> banter on Usenet except on the rarest of occasions.

This is Ed Dolan trying to make a funny.

> >>Think of me as you would think of Shakespeare
> >>and you will began [sic] to glean my profundity.
> >
> > Was that a mistype of "be Gin"?
> > "Mysterious allusion"? [GRIN]
> > This TROLL's pro-fun-dity's been gleaned;
> > No fun was found as it was screened,
> > But this conclusion has been drawn:
> > Begin, began, begun - begone!
>
> Excellent last stanza!
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Still here I see.

Date: 11 Sep 2005 01:53:30
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

"Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com > wrote in message
news:100920051338452430%upyer@bumbum.com...
> In article <ZPadncWpodf3i77eRVn-jg@prairiewave.com>, Edward Dolan
> <edolan@iw.net> wrote:
[...]
>> Women are not worth discussing on this newsgroup since there aren't any
>> here.
>
> If that is the case then why do you persist on making stupid, ignorant
> comments about women?

I could go on a great length about women and their many deficiencies, but I
only mention them in passing when the occasion presents itself.

The only men who are fit to comment on women are Catholic priests and Great
Saints like myself. Anyone who is personally involved with women on an
intimate basis is automatically disqualified from ever saying anything
intelligent about them. They have been corrupted and compromised beyond
repair. That is what comes of too close association with women.

Maybe Slugger could tell us what he thinks of women so we could all have a
good laugh.

--
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 12 Sep 2005 01:30:05
From:
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 01:53:30 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net >
wrote:

>I could go on a great length about women and their many deficiencies, but I
>only mention them in passing when the occasion presents itself.

Which is everytime you are feeling insecure.

>The only men who are fit to comment on women are Catholic priests and Great
>Saints like myself. Anyone who is personally involved with women on an
>intimate basis is automatically disqualified from ever saying anything
>intelligent about them.

Is that code for no woman would ever want to have anything to do with
you? Seems like it. Can't blame them either.

jim

Date: 17 Sep 2005 18:17:18
From: Johnny ReBike
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

On 12-Sep-2005, ensenadaXXXjim@yahoo.com wrote:

> >The only men who are fit to comment on women are Catholic priests and
> >Great
> >Saints like myself. Anyone who is personally involved with women on an
> >intimate basis is automatically disqualified from ever saying anything
> >intelligent about them.
>
>
> Is that code for no woman would ever want to have anything to do with
> you? Seems like it. Can't blame them either.

Johnny ReBike sez - eddie boy needs to shower and do laundry, or he scares
aways women faster than NoCom goes downhill.

--
Johnny ReBike
ReBike - Slowest Bike in the Known Universe

Date: 09 Sep 2005 16:46:33
From: Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

Edward Dolan wrote:
> I believe it is highly inappropriate to have a thread about a person. A
> thread should always be about a subject...
> When you post a message which has a person as the subject, you are doing
> nothing but reducing ARBR to a gossip column....

Certain post/threads about people have been perfectly valid for
alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent. For example, there has been discussion
about John Schlitter leaving RANS, Rich Pinto joining X-Eyed/Bacchetta
and Gardner tin's death.
--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Date: 09 Sep 2005 19:02:55
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

"Sunset Lowracer [TM] Fanatic" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1126309593.075480.122960@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> I believe it is highly inappropriate to have a thread about a person. A
>> thread should always be about a subject...
>> When you post a message which has a person as the subject, you are doing
>> nothing but reducing ARBR to a gossip column....
>
> Certain post/threads about people have been perfectly valid for
> alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent. For example, there has been discussion
> about John Schlitter leaving RANS, Rich Pinto joining X-Eyed/Bacchetta
> and Gardner tin's death.
> --
> Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

Agreed!

--
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 09 Sep 2005 22:59:02
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 15:14:58 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net >
wrote:

>I believe it is highly inappropriate to have a thread about a person. A
>thread should always be about a subject. I am able and willing to discuss
>any subject under the sun, but I do to like to be put in the position of
>having to defend myself as a person all the time. Ask yourself how you would
>like it.
>
>When you post a message which has a person as the subject, you are doing
>nothing but reducing ARBR to a gossip column. We do not want that. Just post
>your message on a subject without any name and this newsgroup will thrive.

Ed didn't you start the 'Milestone day for Ed Dolan' thread? And now
you don't like your name in the topic?

Give me a break.

I can't believe your really bothered when your favorite subject comes
up so visibly. After all, you are the one trying to change this group
from being about recumbents (remember those?) to Mr. Ed's playhouse.

Indiana Mike

Date: 09 Sep 2005 18:52:02
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:9o44i1tccgau66amtktmbll5tipmccgmqp@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 15:14:58 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net>
> wrote:
>
>>I believe it is highly inappropriate to have a thread about a person. A
>>thread should always be about a subject. I am able and willing to discuss
>>any subject under the sun, but I do not like to be put in the position of
>>having to defend myself as a person all the time. Ask yourself how you
>>would
>>like it.
>>
>>When you post a message which has a person as the subject, you are doing
>>nothing but reducing ARBR to a gossip column. We do not want that. Just
>>post
>>your message on a subject without any name and this newsgroup will thrive.
>
> Ed didn't you start the 'Milestone day for Ed Dolan' thread? And now
> you don't like your name in the topic?

Well, that was a very special occasion. Anytime anyone can top Tom Sherman
is a day to note. Please note now that he has returned to ARBR how he posts
one liners. I never do that because I always have many things to say to all
the idiots that infest this newsgroup. I am prolix if nothing else.

If you will examine my posts overall, you will discover that I am priily
a responder. I almost never initiate a subject thread. Tom Sherman is like
this too and I like him for this. If we wanted to, Tom Sherman and I could
completely dominate this newsgroup and in effect destroy it. But we both
have regard for our fellow recumbent cyclists and so we do not allow our
egos to run amuck. We both want ARBR to prosper. I assume you want that too.

> Give me a break.
>
> I can't believe your really bothered when your favorite subject comes
> up so visibly. After all, you are the one trying to change this group
> from being about recumbents (remember those?) to Mr. Ed's playhouse.

No, I do not want that at all. I want to discuss serious subjects seriously.
It can either be on topic or off topic. That is why I throw out so many
outrageous statements. I am a Great Fisherman but there are no fish here on
ARBR at the present moment except for the likes of JimXXX and Jeff Grippe,
both of whom are not worthy of me. It is a burden that I have to bear for
being so Great.

I will say this much. I am priily involved with housekeeping duties here
on ARBR. I think that may come from my background as a college librarian.
Every newsgroup needs someone like me who will keep an eagle eye on things
and not let the group degenerate into mindless banter and terminal boredom.
I am death on mindless banter. If you want to chit-chat with someone, then
go to email and spare the rest of us your idiocies.

--
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 09 Sep 2005 18:33:49
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

Don't make me laugh! Ed Dolan's favorite topic is Ed Dolan. Do you realize
the hypocracy of starting a thread about yourself whose supposed subject is
that you don't want a thread about yourself?

You go out of your way to turn the threads into the topic of Ed Dolan. Take
for example your rant in the thread on differentials: You weren't asked your
opinion about quads. The thread had nothing to do with your opinion about
motor vehicles and the price of gas either. But you decided to insert your
idiotic opinions someplace where they didn't belong.

I thought you conservative types were men of your word. If you are a man of
your word then leave like you said you would. Otherwise stop pretending to
have any character at all.

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:t5-dnVQWhYfXcLzeRVn-jQ@prairiewave.com...
>I believe it is highly inappropriate to have a thread about a person. A
>thread should always be about a subject. I am able and willing to discuss
>any subject under the sun, but I do to like to be put in the position of
>having to defend myself as a person all the time. Ask yourself how you
>would like it.
>
> When you post a message which has a person as the subject, you are doing
> nothing but reducing ARBR to a gossip column. We do not want that. Just
> post your message on a subject without any name and this newsgroup will
> thrive.
>
> --
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>

Date: 10 Sep 2005 02:58:56
From:
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 18:33:49 -0400, "Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote:

>Don't make me laugh! Ed Dolan's favorite topic is Ed Dolan. Do you realize
>the hypocracy of starting a thread about yourself whose supposed subject is
>that you don't want a thread about yourself?
>
>You go out of your way to turn the threads into the topic of Ed Dolan.

And that is a mere manifestation of his insecurity at that.

jim

Date: 09 Sep 2005 18:11:18
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote in message
news:11i43ec34u0t0a9@news.supernews.com...
> Don't make me laugh! Ed Dolan's favorite topic is Ed Dolan. Do you realize
> the hypocracy of starting a thread about yourself whose supposed subject
> is that you don't want a thread about yourself?

I do not start threads about myself. Others do that. I am protesting this.

> You go out of your way to turn the threads into the topic of Ed Dolan.
> Take for example your rant in the thread on differentials: You weren't
> asked your opinion about quads. The thread had nothing to do with your
> opinion about motor vehicles and the price of gas either. But you decided
> to insert your idiotic opinions someplace where they didn't belong.

Anyone who is interested in quads on ARBR is an idiot. I am only trying to
save him from his own idiocy. My opinion about the price of gas and motor
vehicles is a freebie which I offer to the group out of the brilliance of my
mind. I ought to be charging for the service that I am providing to this
group of morons known as ARBR of which you are a charter member.

> I thought you conservative types were men of your word. If you are a man
> of your word then leave like you said you would. Otherwise stop pretending
> to have any character at all.

I will leave this group when it stops talking about me. Do you think that
day will ever arrive?

--
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 10 Sep 2005 03:01:31
From:
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 18:11:18 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net >
wrote:

>
>"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7> wrote in message
>news:11i43ec34u0t0a9@news.supernews.com...
>> Don't make me laugh! Ed Dolan's favorite topic is Ed Dolan. Do you realize
>> the hypocracy of starting a thread about yourself whose supposed subject
>> is that you don't want a thread about yourself?
>
>I do not start threads about myself. Others do that. I am protesting this.

This thread makes a liar out of you. So now we can call you a liar and
not be calling you names, merely stating a fact.

>I will leave this group when it stops talking about me. Do you think that
>day will ever arrive?

About a soon as you can stop talking about yourself (that should be
sometims about the twelfth of never as best I can judge). But hey, if
you hold your breath, it might happen then.

jim

Date: 09 Sep 2005 15:46:28
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Ed Dolan Protests

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:t5-dnVQWhYfXcLzeRVn-jQ@prairiewave.com...

Here is my message corrected:

> I believe it is highly inappropriate to have a thread about a person. A
> thread should always be about a subject. I am able and willing to discuss
> any subject under the sun, but I do NOT like to be put in the position of
> having to defend myself as a person all the time. Ask yourself how you
> would like it.
>
> When you post a message which has a person as the subject, you are doing
> nothing but reducing ARBR to a gossip column. We do not want that. Just
> post your message on a subject without any name and this newsgroup will
> thrive.

It never ceases to amaze me how these little glitches get by me. I want my
posts to be at least as letter perfect as Tom Sherman's. I think my main
problem is that I am in a rage most of the time when I am posting to ARBR. I
will have to up my vino intake to mellow me out.

>I believe it is highly inappropriate to have a thread about a person. A
>thread should always be about a subject. I am able and willing to discuss
>any subject under the sun, but I do to like to be put in the position of
>having to defend myself as a person all the time. Ask yourself how you
>would like it.
>
> When you post a message which has a person as the subject, you are doing
> nothing but reducing ARBR to a gossip column. We do not want that. Just
> post your message on a subject without any name and this newsgroup will
> thrive.
>
> --
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>