True to life still?
neitzch...@my-deja.com
idea that it's not commercial anymore. She is putting it out there that
it's all about the money now. Ads, quadrupling her membership fee, what
is next??? Or will the new increase pay for the streaming OozeCam?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jeff
bullshit when corporations fuckover consumers.
William Crow Feather Burke
>Jenni's new site design has a space for advertisments. This nixes the
>idea that it's not commercial anymore. She is putting it out there that
>it's all about the money now. Ads, quadrupling her membership fee, what
>is next??? Or will the new increase pay for the streaming OozeCam?
QUADRUPLING? Are you serious? SIXTY hamskins for... well, no need to go
over it again.
She's just DOOMED herself! DOOMED!! This is great... if she has a 75%
degradation of her subscriber base, which she easily will, she breaks
even. BREAKS EVEN.
jenii: "D'ex... is there any more tomato paste for this cardboard?"
D'EX: "jeniidude, remember we like, licked the can clean last night?"
jenii: "D'ex, what happened to the cats?"
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
"Always remember, there's no place in vulgarity for bluegrass."
-- Steve Earle
Mr. Sniffalottapuss
>Jenni's new site design has a space for advertisments. This nixes the
>idea that it's not commercial anymore. She is putting it out there that
>it's all about the money now. Ads, quadrupling her membership fee, what
>is next??? Or will the new increase pay for the streaming OozeCam?
>
>
umm--what happened to the 30,000 subscribers that Jenni has? (30,000
x $15 == $450,000 a year)
yack
<halfmute-180...@1cust189.tnt2.warrenton.va.da.uu.net>,
half...@earthlink.net (William Crow Feather Burke) wrote:
> In article <8q5ka8$unj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, neitzch...@my-deja.com
> wrote:
>
> >Jenni's new site design has a space for advertisments. This nixes the
> >idea that it's not commercial anymore. She is putting it out there that
> >it's all about the money now. Ads, quadrupling her membership fee, what
> >is next??? Or will the new increase pay for the streaming OozeCam?
>
> QUADRUPLING? Are you serious? SIXTY hamskins for... well, no need to go
> over it again.
>
> She's just DOOMED herself! DOOMED!! This is great... if she has a 75%
> degradation of her subscriber base, which she easily will, she breaks
> even. BREAKS EVEN.
>
> jenii: "D'ex... is there any more tomato paste for this cardboard?"
> D'EX: "jeniidude, remember we like, licked the can clean last night?"
> jenii: "D'ex, what happened to the cats?"
>
LOL!
I'm a little disappointed in myself for enjoy that fact she just blew it.
I know what she should have done, but I'm not going to say it here. If
she really wants to know, she'll pay me for information.
I'm not convinced that she did this out of necessity. I think it might
have even been d'ex putting ideas into her head. Regardless of how she
came up with these ideas, I honestly think she figured she could
increase her profit this way. But she's soooo wrong.
I am now amoung the many who are saying she is doomed.
Randall Flagg
> >
> umm--what happened to the 30,000 subscribers that Jenni has? (30,000
> x $15 == $450,000 a year)
lets say she looses half of them
15,000 * $60.00 - $900,000.00
plus banner ads
i hear the floor sander people are going to pay large for product
placement
anonymous
Too big a jump in the payment. She should have kept the payment at
$15 and changed the time period to three months. Much better shot at
keeping existing customers and getting renewals.
Jenni is also going to find out about chargebacks- People are fairly
forgiving when they only have $15 into a years entertainment- if a
few months go by they don't care.
Pop $60 into a site and a few days or weeks go by without anything
exciting, and people start cancelling and asking for their money back.
And people can dispute a charge for up to 6 months after incurring it
and they always get their money back.
Jenni- on my site on a chargeback, I not only had to refund the
membership fee, I got stuck with an additional $15.00 chargeback
fee, That hurts.
In article <8q6pcr$b71$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, narcis...@excite.com says...
A Frayed Knot
yack <forn...@jennicam.i-p.com> wrote:
> I'm a little disappointed in myself for enjoy that fact she just blew
it.
Is there anyone else who thinks there's a subtle irony in the fact that
that on her "new, improved site" the splash screen is an image of a
bomb?
-----
"Unix-to-Unix Copy Program," said PDP-1. "You will never find a more
wretched hive of bugs and flamers. We must be cautious" -- DEC Wars
Mr. Sniffalottapuss
wrote:
>Jenni is also going to find out about chargebacks- People are fairly
>forgiving when they only have $15 into a years entertainment- if a
>few months go by they don't care.
>
>Pop $60 into a site and a few days or weeks go by without anything
>exciting, and people start cancelling and asking for their money back.
>
>And people can dispute a charge for up to 6 months after incurring it
>and they always get their money back.
>
>Jenni- on my site on a chargeback, I not only had to refund the
>membership fee, I got stuck with an additional $15.00 chargeback
>fee, That hurts.
>
As I recall. the setup on her site is you pay for one month and the
next 11 are "free". This eliminates the need for refunds after a
month. And she can close down anytime, with minimal refunds.
Check it out --- it's in there somewhere.
Not that she couldn't still get hit with some chargebacks, but I'm
wondering if she's actually going to tell people that you're paying
$60 for the first month.
anonymous
sniffal...@jennicam.i-p.com says...
>>forgiving when they only have $15 into a years entertainment- if a
>>few months go by they don't care.
>>
>>Pop $60 into a site and a few days or weeks go by without anything
>>exciting, and people start cancelling and asking for their money back.
>>
>>And people can dispute a charge for up to 6 months after incurring it
>>and they always get their money back.
>>
>>Jenni- on my site on a chargeback, I not only had to refund the
>>membership fee, I got stuck with an additional $15.00 chargeback
>>fee, That hurts.
>>
>
>next 11 are "free". This eliminates the need for refunds after a
>month. And she can close down anytime, with minimal refunds.
>Check it out --- it's in there somewhere.
>
>Not that she couldn't still get hit with some chargebacks, but I'm
>wondering if she's actually going to tell people that you're paying
>$60 for the first month.
>
The way the credit card companies handle it is that if you ask for
a refund, they send you a form to fill out and sign and you get
your money back. It doesn't matter how Jenni sets up the membership
agreement.
I had charged monthly with automatic rebilling and and I had some
cancellations that resulted in 6 months of chargebacks.
neitzch...@my-deja.com
it.
>
If
> she really wants to know, she'll pay me for information.
>
> I'm not convinced that she did this out of necessity. I think it
might
> have even been d'ex putting ideas into her head. Regardless of how
she
> came up with these ideas, I honestly think she figured she could
> increase her profit this way. But she's soooo wrong.
>
> I am now amoung the many who are saying she is doomed.
>
I'm sure her reasoning is that at $60 it's still half as expensive as
Ana's membership fee, or way less than what adult sites charge. But
since in her "concept" page (the one linked from the disclaimer that
says Jennicam is not appropriate for children) she admits that she may
not be on Cam much, that is a waste of money IMHO.
neitzch...@my-deja.com
A Frayed Knot <dave...@dwp.net> wrote:
> In article <fornicate-A5282...@news.mts.net>,
> yack <forn...@jennicam.i-p.com> wrote:
> > I'm a little disappointed in myself for enjoy that fact she just
blew
> it.
>
> Is there anyone else who thinks there's a subtle irony in the fact
that
> that on her "new, improved site" the splash screen is an image of a
> bomb?
> -----
I hadn't thought of it, but it is ironic. I did look at it and wonder
why she chose such a lame graphic.
Does she think that she is "Da Bomb!" ????
Jeff
>I'm sure her reasoning is that at $60 it's still half as expensive as
>Ana's membership fee, or way less than what adult sites charge. But
>since in her "concept" page (the one linked from the disclaimer that
>says Jennicam is not appropriate for children) she admits that she may
>not be on Cam much, that is a waste of money IMHO.
And she'll be on cam even less if she actually lands, at last, a real job.
If National Geographic didn't want a cam in the workplace, how indulgent do
you think Burger King will be?
neitzch...@my-deja.com
BK already has cams in the workplace, maybe she will hack into the
system & pirate the feed to her website, giving us a view as she asks
"Do you want fries with that?"
Randall Flagg
she could get some enhancements and then get a job at Hooters. they
already have web cams set up
neitzch...@my-deja.com
Randall Flagg <narcis...@excite.com> wrote:
> > > you think Burger King will be?
> > >
> >
> > BK already has cams in the workplace, maybe she will hack into the
> > system & pirate the feed to her website, giving us a view as she
asks
> > "Do you want fries with that?"
> >
>
> she could get some enhancements and then get a job at Hooters. they
> already have web cams set up
>
The Hooters in Reading, Pa doesn't have them. I have been to quite a
few, this must be a new development. The one in Reading is new, only a
few months old. You would figure they would have all the new bells &
whistles. I will check for lunch today & report back.
National Audio Visual Conservation Center
anonymous wrote:
>
> In article <0uoess82i7g8i2fkk...@news.sniffalottapuss.edu>,
> sniffal...@jennicam.i-p.com says...
> >
> >On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 04:52:35 -0000, n...@important.com (anonymous)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Jenni is also going to find out about chargebacks- People are fairly
> >>forgiving when they only have $15 into a years entertainment- if a
> >>few months go by they don't care.
> >>
> >>Pop $60 into a site and a few days or weeks go by without anything
> >>exciting, and people start cancelling and asking for their money back.
> >>
> >>And people can dispute a charge for up to 6 months after incurring it
> >>and they always get their money back.
> >>
> >>Jenni- on my site on a chargeback, I not only had to refund the
> >>membership fee, I got stuck with an additional $15.00 chargeback
> >>fee, That hurts.
> >>
> >
> >As I recall. the setup on her site is you pay for one month and the
> >next 11 are "free". This eliminates the need for refunds after a
> >month. And she can close down anytime, with minimal refunds.
> >Check it out --- it's in there somewhere.
> >
> >Not that she couldn't still get hit with some chargebacks, but I'm
> >wondering if she's actually going to tell people that you're paying
> >$60 for the first month.
> >
>
> The way the credit card companies handle it is that if you ask for
> a refund, they send you a form to fill out and sign and you get
> your money back. It doesn't matter how Jenni sets up the membership
> agreement.
>
> I had charged monthly with automatic rebilling and and I had some
> cancellations that resulted in 6 months of chargebacks.
This is all academic, you understand? She reads this site assiduoulsly.
No doubt by now the $60 deal is ancient history in the canyons of her
mind.
National Audio Visual Conservation Center
Jeff wrote:
>
> In article <8q81o4$pbj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, neitzch...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >I'm sure her reasoning is that at $60 it's still half as expensive as
> >Ana's membership fee, or way less than what adult sites charge. But
> >since in her "concept" page (the one linked from the disclaimer that
> >says Jennicam is not appropriate for children) she admits that she may
> >not be on Cam much, that is a waste of money IMHO.
>
> And she'll be on cam even less if she actually lands, at last, a real job.
>
> If National Geographic didn't want a cam in the workplace, how indulgent do
> you think Burger King will be?
LOL!
anonymous
>> I had charged monthly with automatic rebilling and and I had some
>> cancellations that resulted in 6 months of chargebacks.
>
>This is all academic, you understand? She reads this site assiduoulsly.
>No doubt by now the $60 deal is ancient history in the canyons of her
>mind.
I hope so.
Goolia
"Randall Flagg" <narcis...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:8q8891$1o8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <8q86ot$vqh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> neitzch...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > In article <qlMx5.27642$m7.13...@news3.rdc1.on.home.com>,
> > system & pirate the feed to her website, giving us a view as she asks
> > "Do you want fries with that?"
> >
>
> she could get some enhancements and then get a job at Hooters. they
> already have web cams set up
>
shape.
Jeff
>I may be mistaken---but I think Hooters prefers that their employees be in
>shape.
If we see Dex pushing Jenni to work off the ass cheese, it's because he wants
comps on their deep-fried chicken wings.
Mr. Sniffalottapuss
>
>And she'll be on cam even less if she actually lands, at last, a real job.
>
>If National Geographic didn't want a cam in the workplace, how indulgent do
>you think Burger King will be?
Somewhere, a long time ago, I remember reading something where Jenni
said the reason he left Nat Geographice was so she could work from
home and be on cam more (for her "fans"). Of course, she may have
been lying.
National Audio Visual Conservation Center
Goolia wrote:
>
> "Randall Flagg" <narcis...@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:8q8891$1o8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <8q86ot$vqh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > neitzch...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > > In article <qlMx5.27642$m7.13...@news3.rdc1.on.home.com>,
> > > Gump...@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote:
> > > > In article <8q81o4$pbj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, neitzch...@my-deja.com
> > > wrote:
> > > > >I'm sure her reasoning is that at $60 it's still half as expensive
> > as
> > > > >Ana's membership fee, or way less than what adult sites charge. But
> > > > >since in her "concept" page (the one linked from the disclaimer
> > that
> > > > >says Jennicam is not appropriate for children) she admits that she
> > > may
> > > > >not be on Cam much, that is a waste of money IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > And she'll be on cam even less if she actually lands, at last, a
> > real
> > > job.
> > > >
> > > > If National Geographic didn't want a cam in the workplace, how
> > > indulgent do
> > > > you think Burger King will be?
> > > >
> > >
> > > BK already has cams in the workplace, maybe she will hack into the
> > > system & pirate the feed to her website, giving us a view as she asks
> > > "Do you want fries with that?"
> > >
> >
> > she could get some enhancements and then get a job at Hooters. they
> > already have web cams set up
> >
> I may be mistaken---but I think Hooters prefers that their employees be in
> shape.
I would hope you're correct. And IMAGINE how EXHAUSTED she'd be by
break time! She'd probably leave, go home and take a power nap, and
write a long, exhausting journal about how TIRED it made her.
National Audio Visual Conservation Center
"Mr. Sniffalottapuss" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:18:30 GMT, Gump...@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote:
>
> >
> >And she'll be on cam even less if she actually lands, at last, a real job.
> >
> >If National Geographic didn't want a cam in the workplace, how indulgent do
> >you think Burger King will be?
>
> Somewhere, a long time ago, I remember reading something where Jenni
> said the reason he left Nat Geographice was so she could work from
> home and be on cam more (for her "fans"). Of course, she may have
> been lying.
Ya THINK?
Mr. Sniffalottapuss
Center <culp...@erols.com> wrote:
>> > she could get some enhancements and then get a job at Hooters. they
>> > already have web cams set up
>> >
>> I may be mistaken---but I think Hooters prefers that their employees be in
>> shape.
>
>I would hope you're correct. And IMAGINE how EXHAUSTED she'd be by
>break time! She'd probably leave, go home and take a power nap, and
>write a long, exhausting journal about how TIRED it made her.
Didn't she have at job at Victoria's Secret, back in DC for about a
week?
neitzch...@my-deja.com
<3g9isskuanm5ac9rs...@news.sniffalottapuss.edu>,
Surely not as a sales consultant??? Maybe as a stock person WAY in the
back where it wouldn't ruin sales?
stan...@my-deja.com
neitzch...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Jenni's new site design has a space for advertisments. This nixes the
> idea that it's not commercial anymore. She is putting it out there that
> it's all about the money now. Ads, quadrupling her membership fee, what
> is next??? Or will the new increase pay for the streaming OozeCam?
>
A low blow there Mr. Neitzche. Have you received a pay raise in the last few
years? Did you take it or give it back? Bet you took it didn't you and I hope
it was a good one I'me sure you're a nice hard working fellow. All the same
why shouldn't Jenni go for a little moe , a little more for all the hard long
work she's put in , anyone who is a web jockie knows what hard work keeping
up a site and running a very busy life acan be.
I see this as a bold and darring move by this very asstute figure. Look for
big things yet to come!
stan...@my-deja.com
Mr. Sniffalottapuss <sniffal...@jennicam.i-p.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 04:52:35 -0000, n...@important.com (anonymous)
> wrote:
>
> >forgiving when they only have $15 into a years entertainment- if a
> >few months go by they don't care.
> >
> >Pop $60 into a site and a few days or weeks go by without anything
> >exciting, and people start cancelling and asking for their money back.
> >
> >And people can dispute a charge for up to 6 months after incurring it
> >and they always get their money back.
> >
> >Jenni- on my site on a chargeback, I not only had to refund the
> >membership fee, I got stuck with an additional $15.00 chargeback
> >fee, That hurts.
> >
>
> next 11 are "free". This eliminates the need for refunds after a
> month. And she can close down anytime, with minimal refunds.
> Check it out --- it's in there somewhere.
>
> Not that she couldn't still get hit with some chargebacks, but I'm
> wondering if she's actually going to tell people that you're paying
> $60 for the first month.
>
Whats so darned unusual abou that? Take a look at you phone bill or better
yet cable bill , see what the monthly charge is relall all about OK? Try it
then come back and tell us what you have learned? Thanks
Randall Flagg
>
> A low blow there Mr. Neitzche.
hey, watch it Neithzche. low blows are mine and luddys dept.
> Have you received a pay raise in the last few
> years? Did you take it or give it back? Bet you took it didn't you
and I hope
> it was a good one I'me sure you're a nice hard working fellow.
im not even sure he is a fellow but more to the point, has he gotten a
300% pay raise in the last 3 years. if so i wanna talk about that low
blow arrangement.
> All the same
> why shouldn't Jenni go for a little moe
why not indeed. i say, "bleed the suckers dry"
> , a little more for all the hard long
> work she's put in
maybe im missing something......is this sarcasm?
>, anyone who is a web jockie
jockie? is this drunken sarcasm??
> knows what hard work keeping
> up a site and running a very busy life acan be.
its true. that can be difficult. good thing she has Jodi to do the
first so she can concentrate on not doing the second.
>
> I see this as a bold and darring move by this very asstute figure.
asstute! dammit that must have been sarcasm!
> Look for
> big things yet to come!
implants!
ya know you do have to feel for the girl when she has people like this
and Gerry (assuming this isnt him) on her side. its kinda like having
an arguement and then Dr. Laura starts agreeing with you. ya really
have to start questioning if you were right in the first place.
Randall Flagg
stan...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article
<0uoess82i7g8i2fkk...@news.sniffalottapuss.edu>,
> Mr. Sniffalottapuss <sniffal...@jennicam.i-p.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 04:52:35 -0000, n...@important.com (anonymous)
> > wrote:
> >
fairly
> > >forgiving when they only have $15 into a years entertainment- if a
> > >few months go by they don't care.
> > >
> > >Pop $60 into a site and a few days or weeks go by without anything
> > >exciting, and people start cancelling and asking for their money
back.
> > >
> > >And people can dispute a charge for up to 6 months after incurring
it
> > >and they always get their money back.
> > >
> > >Jenni- on my site on a chargeback, I not only had to refund the
> > >membership fee, I got stuck with an additional $15.00 chargeback
> > >fee, That hurts.
> > >
> >
> > next 11 are "free". This eliminates the need for refunds after a
> > month. And she can close down anytime, with minimal refunds.
> > Check it out --- it's in there somewhere.
> >
> > Not that she couldn't still get hit with some chargebacks, but I'm
> > wondering if she's actually going to tell people that you're paying
> > $60 for the first month.
> >
>
> Whats so darned unusual abou that?
<in my best Tom Jones> its not unusual to be loved by anyone.da.dadada.
sorry, just felt like singing
> Take a look at you phone bill
ok. $25.00 for last month. and i got the use of a phone for a month.
now if they could just get rid of those damn telemarketers it would be
a bargin.
> or better
> yet cable bill
nope, no cable bill.
tv has 57 channels and nothing on
of course the internet has 57,000,000 channels and still not very much
on.
> , see what the monthly charge is really all about OK?
ok. its about getting a service and then paying for that service
> Try it
> then come back and tell us what you have learned?
i have learned most services provide to you, and then charge you.
maybe jenni should try this idea
> Thanks
>
your welcome. now get back to your homework.
rf
Jeff
<snip>
>why shouldn't Jenni go for a little moe , a little more for all the hard long
>work she's put in , anyone who is a web jockie knows what hard work keeping
>up a site and running a very busy life acan be.
>
>big things yet to come!
Uh, er... I hardly know where to begin.
I, too, would like to see Jenni "go for a little moe." She can't do worse than
Dex, and it would make some lucky Moe's dream come true.
As for Jenni's "busy life," allow me to direct you to a very informative site.
It's www.jennicam.org. Check it out. I think you'll find it quite
enlightening.
As for "bold," "darring" and "asstute," I'll give you the benefit of the doubt
and trust that "bold" is a misspelling. (Old? Bald??) But I can't imagine what
you mean by "darring" and "asstute." Please explain.
anonymous
>
>
>As for "bold," "darring" and "asstute," I'll give you the benefit of the doubt
>and trust that "bold" is a misspelling. (Old? Bald??) But I can't imagine what
>you mean by "darring" and "asstute." Please explain.
>
asstute = ass + tute
the 'tute' is a mispelling of 'toot'
just as some people toot there own whistles,
Jenni toots her own ass.
hence asstoot mispelled as 'asstute'
yack
> In article <8q5ka8$unj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> neitzch...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > Jenni's new site design has a space for advertisments. This nixes the
> > idea that it's not commercial anymore. She is putting it out there that
> > it's all about the money now. Ads, quadrupling her membership fee, what
> > is next??? Or will the new increase pay for the streaming OozeCam?
> >
>
> A low blow there Mr. Neitzche. Have you received a pay raise in the last
> few
> years? Did you take it or give it back? Bet you took it didn't you and I
> hope
> it was a good one I'me sure you're a nice hard working fellow. All the
> same
> why shouldn't Jenni go for a little moe , a little more for all the hard
> long
> work she's put in , anyone who is a web jockie knows what hard work
> keeping
> up a site and running a very busy life acan be.
>
> I see this as a bold and darring move by this very asstute figure. Look
> for
> big things yet to come!
>
you know, your sermon is getting old. I'm still laughing so far, but I
worry if you keep it up, it won't be funny anymore.
I am a 'web jockie' (I think), and I know how much work she has to do to
keep the site running. And she's been doing the bare minimum. Sitting
in chat rooms and not reading email doesn't really demand a lot from a
person. Most people who have more extensive websites often have a full
time job to boot, and they aren't complaining.
What better things to come? You are clearly full of shit. You know
nothing. You are trying to convince everyone here that you are part of
jenni's inner circle when you are not. We see through you.
stan...@my-deja.com
Gump...@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote:
> In article <8qdr6e$m6g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, stan...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >why shouldn't Jenni go for a little moe , a little more for all the hard long
> >work she's put in , anyone who is a web jockie knows what hard work keeping
> >up a site and running a very busy life acan be.
> >
> >I see this as a bold and darring move by this very asstute figure. Look for
> >big things yet to come!
>
MAYBE THEN YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE BUT AS you did so shal I
>
> I, too, would like to see Jenni "go for a little moe." She can't do worse than
> Dex, and it would make some lucky Moe's dream come true.
Have you ever been introduced to Dex? How can you be so sure he isn't
everything than Jenni thinks she see in him? Maybe he's a peach maybe you
should find out before you go so down on him.
>
> As for Jenni's "busy life," allow me to direct you to a very informative site.
> It's www.jennicam.org. Check it out. I think you'll find it quite
> enlightening.
I watched Jenni off and on all day and to me it looked like a day that was
pretty full of stuff. Tell me , what didn't you see that I saw?
> As for "bold," "darring" and "asstute," I'll give you the benefit of the doubt
> and trust that "bold" is a misspelling. (Old? Bald??) But I can't imagine what
> you mean by "darring" and "asstute." Please explain.
The new direction being taken by JKR indicates a filling ness to take the
Bold step, thats what I'm trying to say right here and right now. Jenni has
always broken new Cam ground and it looks like to many of us it's about to be
that way once again! Jennie is an asstute. She has shown an asstutefull
awareness of the recent trend among web sites to kick things up a notch. I
think you will agree with me here.
Randall Flagg
>
> I watched Jenni off and on all day and to me it looked like a day
that was
> pretty full of stuff. Tell me , what didn't you see that I saw?
>
prove a negative? prove to me you didnt jerk off today. guess what?
you can't. doesnt prove a damn thing tho
neitzch...@my-deja.com
> neitzch...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > Jenni's new site design has a space for advertisments. This nixes
the
> > idea that it's not commercial anymore. She is putting it out there
that
> > it's all about the money now. Ads, quadrupling her membership fee,
what
> > is next??? Or will the new increase pay for the streaming OozeCam?
> >
>
> A low blow there Mr. Neitzche. Have you received a pay raise in the
last few
> years? Did you take it or give it back? Bet you took it didn't you and
I hope
> it was a good one I'me sure you're a nice hard working fellow. All the
same
hard long
> work she's put in , anyone who is a web jockie knows what hard work
keeping
> up a site and running a very busy life acan be.
>
> I see this as a bold and darring move by this very asstute figure.
Look for
> big things yet to come!
>
My son (he's 8 years old) maintains his own website, and has for about 4
years now. He has better design skills than Jenni. What hard work has
Jenni done? She's had about 6 months & all she has to show for it is a
crappy design. I could have done that in about 25 hours & it would have
looked much better.
Instead of astute (marked by practical hardheaded intelligence) I think
you meant to use the term obtuse (Lacking quickness of perception or
intellect) if you have seen Jenni's actions over the past few years.
The gains I have made over the past 5 years have come from me working
hard, gaining education/experience, and from me taking the opportunities
that were presented to me. I never tried to make a living from the
viewing public, then cry for more because "$15 just doesn't go as far as
it used to". Simply put, I EARNED what I have, Jenni hasn't done
anything to get a raise.
neitzch...@my-deja.com
> asstute = ass + tute
> the 'tute' is a mispelling of 'toot'
>
> just as some people toot there own whistles,
> Jenni toots her own ass.
>
> hence asstoot mispelled as 'asstute'
>
>
That is just too fucking funny. The best comedy has to have a grain of
truth in it!!! In this case, it's about a beachful of it.
neitzch...@my-deja.com
> Have you ever been introduced to Dex? How can you be so sure he isn't
> everything than Jenni thinks she see in him? Maybe he's a peach maybe
you should find out before you go so down on him.
>
> >
I don't know about peach, but he has a hairy belly. Maybe Jenni should
have found out before she "go so down on him" , huh?
> I watched Jenni off and on all day and to me it looked like a day that
was pretty full of stuff. Tell me , what didn't you see that I saw?
>
I'd say with Dex's constipation, it was really "full" of stuff
> The new direction being taken by JKR indicates a filling ness to take
the Bold step, thats what I'm trying to say right here and right now.
Jenni has always broken new Cam ground and it looks like to many of us
it's about to be that way once again! Jennie is an asstute. She has
shown an asstutefull awareness of the recent trend among web sites to
kick things up a notch. I think you will agree with me here.
>
First off, I don't even believe that astutefull is a proper word, not
one that would pass a scrabble challenge anyway. What is a "filling
ness"? Is that what happens to my stomach when I see too much of Jenni's
life? I have a filling ness & a need to vomit. Jenni took the idea of
the Netscape fishCam & played with it. She didn't break new ground at
all. Her Bold step, was that of the second men to visit the moon. She
put a twist on it & from there a horde of people have come along who do
it much better & are more original than Jenni. Check out Ana Voog
(anacam.com) if you want to see what a webcam Girl should look like, or
what a website design should be.
If you call those gaudy colors & simple frame design "kicking it up a
notch" then welcome to 1998 pal!!! Jenni needs to work on a site with
easier navigation that is easy on the eyes. But to do that she would
have to take away all pictures of her & of Dex!! :) New direction, that
kills me. Her site looks like a reject from 3 years ago.
yack
> > As for Jenni's "busy life," allow me to direct you to a very
> > informative site.
> > It's www.jennicam.org. Check it out. I think you'll find it quite
> > enlightening.
>
> I watched Jenni off and on all day and to me it looked like a day that
> was
> pretty full of stuff. Tell me , what didn't you see that I saw?
>
would you please list some of the 'stuff' she did. And perhaps you
would like to post the odd cam pic showing some of this 'stuff' that she
does.
'pretty full of stuff' make me think of really just ONE thing, if you
catch my drift.
yack
(anonymous) wrote:
> In article <Wgvy5.37919$m7.18...@news3.rdc1.on.home.com>,
> Gump...@hotmail.com says...
> >
> >
> >As for "bold," "darring" and "asstute," I'll give you the benefit of the
> >doubt
> >and trust that "bold" is a misspelling. (Old? Bald??) But I can't
> >imagine what
> >you mean by "darring" and "asstute." Please explain.
> >
>
> asstute = ass + tute
> the 'tute' is a mispelling of 'toot'
>
> just as some people toot there own whistles,
> Jenni toots her own ass.
>
> hence asstoot mispelled as 'asstute'
>
LOL. You aren't without your charms.
Mike McLean
>BK already has cams in the workplace, maybe she will hack into the
>system & pirate the feed to her website, giving us a view as she asks
>"Do you want fries with that?"
Hack in and pirate the feed . . . come on, lets be real. This is Jenni
we are talking about.
neitzch...@my-deja.com
Ok, ok. she'll PAY someone to hack into the feed & transmit it to the
world.
morindim
right on target.