From: thomas.e.elam@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/1/2025 11:59 AM, -hh wrote:   
   > On 12/1/25 09:22, Tom Elam wrote:   
   >> On 11/30/2025 4:33 PM, -hh wrote:   
   >>> On 11/30/25 12:55, Tom Elam wrote:   
   >>>> On 11/30/2025 10:20 AM, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>> On 11/29/25 16:41, Tom Elam wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 11/29/2025 4:20 PM, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 11/28/25 17:49, Alan wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 2025-11-28 13:40, Tom Elam wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 11/28/2025 3:38 PM, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> BTW, Ubiquti is having a pretty good Black Friday sale going   
   >>>>>>>>>> on right now if you need anything; I'm picking up their Dream   
   >>>>>>>>>> Router 7; you may recall that I had been looking at it (well,   
   >>>>>>>>>> the prior version) back during CoVid, but it was constantly   
   >>>>>>>>>> out of stock. Figured I'd try it out, along with their G5 Pro   
   >>>>>>>>>> 4K UHD webcam.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Hmmm, I looked up those 2 items on Amazon and they don't seem   
   >>>>>>>>> to be on sale there.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Because if it's not on sale at Amazon, it can't be on sale,   
   >>>>>>>> Asshole?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> For a guy who claims (implicitly) to be capable of doing   
   >>>>>>>> research...   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> ...you seem to be utterly clueless.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>    
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Took me 30 seconds to find.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Or is it that you're more interested in trying to create a   
   >>>>>>>> "gotcha" moment, Asshole?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Ding, ding, ding!   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> But since you seem to need $120 SO badly you had to wait for   
   >>>>>>>>> Black Friday...   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Something you just made up, you mean, Asshole.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Yeah, we've seen this pattern before.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Pretty much, despite Tommy guessing correctly that Black Friday   
   >>>>>>> sale advertisements were involved.  The problem with his   
   >>>>>>> narrative attempt is that I wasn't the one reading the ads: they   
   >>>>>>> were mentioned to me. These were a Wirecutter article for a $80   
   >>>>>>> TP-Link which prompted a "do you need a new router?" question.   
   >>>>>>> Similarly, a Wyze BF email for a <$20 security cam was: "need   
   >>>>>>> more cameras?" question.  Even though everything's been okay, I   
   >>>>>>> took a look for opportunity's sake.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> You assume something (incorrectly) and then treat your own   
   >>>>>>>> assumption as "proof" that it's correct.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Well noted, for if there were money concerns like what Tommy   
   >>>>>>> always tries to allude, the problem with that narrative attempt   
   >>>>>>> is why weren't the above TP-Link & Wyze gear selected, since   
   >>>>>>> their cost is ~$400 less than the UI stuff?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> BTW, card inbound ..   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> -hh   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Hugh, I'm pretty sure you do not have money issues.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Right side of Tommy's piehole, on 11/28/25 16:40:  "But since you   
   >>>>> seem to need $120 SO badly you had to wait for Black Friday..."   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Likewise, same piehole, on 11/28/25 10:58:  "Followup #2 ... My   
   >>>>> take is that in actual reality that $120 seems to be very important   
   >>>>> to YOU. Needing that for groceries or utility bills, are you?"   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> But I am sick and tired of you implying I do.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> If you're so sick & tired of discussing wealth, why is it that   
   >>>>> you're invariably who brings it up?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You're always desperately trying to make you look good, and often   
   >>>>> in comparison to Alan, who's ~2 decades younger than you and has   
   >>>>> had ~half as many years of wealth accumulation.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> Tit-for-tat that was.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Except that your 'revenge' is invalid.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> When you've pulled these dick-measuring brag attempts before, I've   
   >>>>> specifically noted that your comparisons were invalid because of   
   >>>>> your age difference.  You've been asked for what level of net worth   
   >>>>> would be appropriate for someone who's a fraction of your age.  Did   
   >>>>> you ever answer to that?  Nope.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> So until you do, you're at risk of being reminded of your   
   >>>>> systematic dishonesty whenever you start to try to brag about money.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> -hh   
   >>>>   
   >>>> LOL. Wow, your numbers are SO wrong.   
   >>>   
   >>> Nope, just dated to when your trolling started which was years ago.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Alan's ... [all snipped due to invalid termination date]   
   >>>   
   >>> Go back to the year when you first started your trolling and see how   
   >>> those numbers work out to then, not 2025.   
   >>>   
   >>> For as I said, you never answered the question back then.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> -hh   
   >>   
   >> Total BS excuse. Read your own post.   
   >>   
   >> No brag here, only facts.   
   >>   
   >> "You're always desperately trying to make you look good, and often in   
   >>  >>> comparison to Alan, who's ~2 decades younger than you and has had   
   >>  >>> ~half as many years of wealth accumulation."   
   >>   
   >> Back then? That is all PRESENT tense, not PAST tense. But it does not   
   >> matter. You are still VERY wrong.   
   >   
   > No, it was your clue to check your math.:   
   >   
   > "Alan's LinkedIn profile says he started high school in 1975. If 18   
   > then, he was born in 1957, ..."   
   >   
   > Oh, so how many people **START** high school at age 18, hmmmm?   
   >   
   > In the US, a freshman starting 9th grade is typically age 14 or 15, and   
   > gradates 4.5 years later, usually at age 18.   
   >   
   > As such, a 1975 start nominally means born in 1960-61, not your 1957.   
   >   
   > Plus this assumes similarity to US education, which isn't necessarily   
   > so:  in Canada, most Provinces consider secondary education to start in   
   > 8th (some, 7th) grade: so it nominally means born in 1961-63.  Not 1957.   
   >   
   >   
   >> Alan has NEVER been 20 years younger, more like 10 or 11.   
   >   
   > More like 1946 to 1962 = 16 years.   
   >   
   >   
   >> The difference in workforce entry is only 9 years. In 1992 Alan had 11   
   >> years of work to my 20.   
   >   
   > Only if you totally ignore your pre-PhD jobs...right?   
   >   
   > [quote]   
   > 1960-64 - delivered newspapers, Junior High and High School   
   >   
   > 1965-1966 - Part time grocery store clerk during undergrad school, left   
   > for better pay and better job   
   >   
   > 1966-1969 - Part time technician, City Planning Department (and   
   > undergrad school) left to go to grad school. This was a GREAT job, loved   
   > the work and it paid 4x minimum wage.   
   >   
   > 1969-1972 - Grad school on NSF Fellowship, UT Knoxville, MS/PhD Ag   
   > Economics.   
   >   
   > 1972-1975 - Assistant Prof Economics, No. KY State U, left due to   
   > contract termination...   
   > [/quote]   
   >   
   >  m/2qp5Ptgap1gJ>   
   >   
   > So by your above 1992 benchmark date, you'd already had various jobs for   
   > a period of 32 years (vs allegedly 11): a 21 year delta & a ~3:1 ratio.   
   >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)