From: wally@wally.world.net   
      
   On 7/4/05 5:15, in article BE799F75.102E2%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID, "Snit"   
    wrote:   
      
   > "Wally"  stated in post   
   > BE7A3383.5E94%wally@wally.world.net on 4/6/05 9:47 AM:   
   >   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> On 6/4/05 2:22, in article BE782558.10165%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID, "Snit"   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> "Wally"  stated in post   
   >>> BE78E22F.49C6%wally@wally.world.net on 4/5/05 9:45 AM:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> On 6/4/05 0:09, in article BE78064D.10137%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID,   
   "Snit"   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> "Wally"  stated in post   
   >>>>> BE78D81F.49B7%wally@wally.world.net on 4/5/05 9:02 AM:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 5/4/05 23:09, in article BE77F855.10113%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID,   
   >>>>>> "Snit"   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>    
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Snit..   
   >>>>>> Please, as agreed direct any further posts where you wish a reply to be   
   >>>>>> forthcoming to alt.flame.macintosh, unless of course it is of a topic   
   >>>>>> recognizable as Macintosh related in the strictest sense.   
   >>>>>> Many thanks.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>> Just to be clear, are you willing to do the same?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Of course.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> I am happy to move our   
   >>>>> conversations to AFM, but the last time I tried to do so you refused to   
   >>>>> continue conversations there   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You mean 'here'! And of course there is no guarantee that we will engage   
   in   
   >>>> any conversation here, my agreement is simply that 'if' I do converse with   
   >>>> you along previous lines it will not be in csma, that is after all the   
   >>>> point.   
   >>>   
   >>> Excellent then - we are in agreement.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> as your goal is to disrupt CSMA.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I have given Rick reason to believe that I will only make posts to you   
   >>>> along   
   >>>> the lines of our previous exchanges in alt.flame.macintosh, that is the   
   >>>> case, and I will abide by that wholeheartedly,   
   >>>   
   >>> Then it appears I was wrong about your goal - I am happy to see that.   
   >>> Thanks.   
   >>>   
   >>>> I will post to you in csma only if it is Mac related in the strictest   
   >>>> sense,   
   >>>> this condition will stand regardless of who besides you or I does or does   
   >>>> not   
   >>>> follow suit, but will be revoked the moment you take advantage of my   
   >>>> goodwill   
   >>>> in the form of any derogatory post in csma of what I consider a serious   
   >>>> nature, but fear not I have a thick skin so I would not take that decision   
   >>>> lightly.   
   >>>   
   >>> I shall respond likewise.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Well, I am posting this to AFM - we shall see if you are willing to   
   follow   
   >>>>> and be reasonable.  I will be no - as that would not match your real   
   goal.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Please note that my action is simply an attempt to clean up csma on Ricks   
   >>>> suggestion, as such, afm will take up very little of my time, and I will   
   >>>> check in infrequently if at all.   
   >>>   
   >>> If you will check it only infrequently, how can we have conversations here?   
   >>   
   >> We had conversations?.....my apologies I must have missed those, or simply   
   >> erased them from my memory. ;)   
   >   
   > Well, I speak intelligently and you either dishonestly snip and run or spew   
   > most meaningless BS... I can see why you would *choose* to forget these   
   > events.  No matter - they are recorded at Google for all to see.   
      
   meaningless BS, meaningless BS, meaningless BS...being spewed.   
   There at least you can now have one reference which you can point to   
   honestly in Google and be correct.....No Please!  Don't thank me, even the   
   likes of you should be able to experience it at least once!   
      
   >>> How can we continue our mocking and belittling of each other where you   
   >>> pretend to point out things you think are lies of mine,   
   >>> are proven wrong,   
   >>   
   >> Now that's not fair, I never intended to belittle you, not all the while you   
   >> was able to do such a good job of that yourself anyway.   
   >   
   > Says you...   
      
   Very astute of you.   
      
   >>> are proven wrong,   
   >>> and then refuse to comment on the real lies of yours I point out?   
   >>   
   >> I think you should keep your hallucinations private, either cherish or have   
   >> them treated, your choice.   
   >   
   > Why do you make references to that which does not exist?   
      
   So that's your choice?, I hope they have more luck that the other   
   professionals did.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)