an anniversary today
dyo...@ksu.edu
comments on the World Trade Center attacks.
I could make some pitiful attempt to review how he handled this, but
seeing it speaks for itself. It's in my video archives.
David D
DDY's Late Show Fan Page
http://www.ddy.com/dl3.html
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
It's also probably the last time that Dave was vital.
A lot of people remember that moment,
but how many remember much about LS since?
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Bill's posts are like a Jackson Pollock painting;
as if a child threw paint haphazardly at the canvas,
then expected everyone else to do all the work
of finding the 'genius within the mess.'"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DTSmith
<CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
> It's also probably the last time that Dave was vital.
> A lot of people remember that moment,
> but how many remember much about LS since?
I do. It's just a comedy and entertainment show, you know.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
Yes, but what I mean is,
when was the last time people *outside* of this newsgroup
gathered around the water cooler the next morning
and asked each other, "Hey, did you see that bit on Letterman last night?"
johnny bobby bee
> Yes, but what I mean is,
> when was the last time people *outside* of this newsgroup
> gathered around the water cooler the next morning
> and asked each other, "Hey, did you see that bit on Letterman last night?"
Look who's back to her trolling ways. Get a remote already.
Too quiet in here for you?
--
As we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, we should be
glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously.
--Benjamin Franklin
dsi...@yahoo.com
no_spam...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
> > Yes, but what I mean is,
> > when was the last time people *outside* of this newsgroup
> > gathered around the water cooler the next morning
> > and asked each other, "Hey, did you see that bit on Letterman last night?"
>
> Look who's back to her trolling ways. Get a remote already.
Sorry, but I have to agree. I can't recall the last time there was a
really noteworthy segment on the big show -- -maybe- Obama, but that's
stretching it.
--Dave Sikula
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
>> Yes, but what I mean is,
>> when was the last time people *outside* of this newsgroup
>> gathered around the water cooler the next morning
>> and asked each other, "Hey, did you see that bit on Letterman last
>> night?"
>
> Look who's back to her trolling ways. Get a remote already.
>
> Too quiet in here for you?
>
Oh, ffs. Can't I talk about Letterman?
Or do you prefer wading through a thousand posts of Brady flirting with
anything with a vagina?
Brady
> johnny bobby bee wrote:
>> Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
>>> Yes, but what I mean is,
>>> when was the last time people *outside* of this newsgroup
>>> gathered around the water cooler the next morning
>>> and asked each other, "Hey, did you see that bit on Letterman last
>>> night?"
>>
>> Look who's back to her trolling ways. Get a remote already.
>>
>> Too quiet in here for you?
>>
>
>
> Oh, ffs. Can't I talk about Letterman?
> Or do you prefer wading through a thousand posts of Brady flirting with
> anything with a vagina?
What'd *I* do?!
Jeepers.
Brady
DTSmith
<CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
> Oh, ffs. Can't I talk about Letterman?
> Or do you prefer wading through a thousand posts of Brady flirting with
> anything with a vagina?
Actually, yes.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
Er, nothing......sorry.
I just find it odd that the signal to noise ratio of OT posts is fine,
but the second I say something negative about David, I'm a troll.
johnny bobby bee
> Er, nothing......sorry.
> I just find it odd that the signal to noise ratio of OT posts is fine,
> but the second I say something negative about David, I'm a troll.
At least OT posts are clearly marked and you can skip them if you
choose. Your 'troll' posts are not clear until I read them. I'd rather
not killfile you, but you're loud and clear. I get it, the show sucks.
Do something about it (if you can), stop complaining, or just change the
damn channel.
Gary
I also agree with Crash and Dake. I think Dave has thrown in the towel
creatively.
I thought the really significant thing from the Rolling Stone
interview was Dave saying that he felt he (and the show) can't go on
"fooling himself" with regard to his competition with Jay, and
admitting that Jay just has broader appeal than him.
My theory is that this resignation regarding the ratings, plus all the
person goings-on in his life, Dave just couldn't be bothered putting
*that* much effort into the show anymore.
Gary
katycren
You happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time -- collateral
damage, so to speak. There was a negative post about Crash and she
responded quickly with a counter post. I don't think she was being a
troll since all she did was offer a criticism of the show, but I also
don't think she 'gets' you, Brady. That's not to say she doesn't care,
but she's out-of-touch with the Southern sctick. What Crash calls
'flirting' is what folks here in the deep South call 'friendly.' And
being a native Alabamian, you were raised to be charming and
deferential to women. Perhaps, however, you're a little more friendly
with those AFL regulars that you've known for many years, most of whom
are female. Have you noticed that? First, AFL lost Cyber, then Brad
-- the two funniest AFLers dead, in Cyber's case, or alive -- and now,
sadly, Brad's twin, Tom, who makes only a rare appearance, and Micah,
the musical genius who pulled a Drifter and left us just when we
needed him most. What has happened to the first dudes of AFL? Thank
goodness, we still have Donz, since without him there would *be* no
AFL. I'm not trying to discount the importance of Alan or Keith or
David or Steve or Bob or BB or DT or JBB or RH or Gary or any other
guys here whose names or initials I've forgotten, but it seems AFL has
lost more of the first generation male regulars than the female ones
(KarKel).
Come home, boys -- it's suppertime.
Kate
katycren
or Dake or Greg
Alan Page
"Gary" wrote...
> I thought the really significant thing from the Rolling Stone
> interview was Dave saying that he felt he (and the show) can't go on
> "fooling himself" with regard to his competition with Jay, and
> admitting that Jay just has broader appeal than him.
Dave has an appeal to different viewers than Jay.
Look at who's President.
It's natural...one person can't be loved by all...or even a majority.
From the Rolling Stone interview...
RS: How much do you care about the ratings battle with "The Tonight
Show" and Jay anymore? Does it matter to you who comes in firs in this whole
game?
Dave: Well, absolutely. I wish that we - and when I say "we" I mean
"me" - I wish I could have prevailed. I think it would have made things
easier for us. But the reason is the difference between me and Jay. I think
more people are responding to Jay than will ever respond to me, and after a
while you have to face that. I'm doing the best I can, I enjoy doing what we
do, and we get a certain amount of recognition for it, but the truth is, if
there's a difference between the shows, it just comes down to me an Jay. I
think he has greater appeal for more people than I do.
RS: That's a contrast to the years past when people in your camp
explained the ratings gap between Jay and you by saying it was because of
the lead-in programming or 11 o'clock news and so on. Now you're saying, in
you view, that it really does come down to personality.
Dave: I think so. As much as I would like to point the finger and say,
"Well, here's the real story" - and everything's a factor, really - maybe
years ago I was unwilling to recognize the difference in Jay and myself as
being more meaningful. But I just think that we've been at this long enough.
I have a tremendous staff, I have tremendous writers, tremendous producers,
so what really would make the difference? Well, the answer is me. I just
think that Jay has a wider appeal than I do and, you know, good for him.
RS: I get the sense that this is not something that agonizes you
anymore.
Dave: Yeah, and also it seems unlikely that now, after years and years
of trying under a wide variety of circumstances and advantages and
disadvantages, that suddenly I'm going to prevail. You can't go through life
fooling yourself, you have to be hones with the situation. That's fine. I
can say it's fine, because I've been lucky enough to do the show and I've
had a lot of fun doing it. So if I don't get this, well, that's too bad, a
lot of people suffer far greater than I have.
--
Alan
~WWWWW~
What a Wonderful Web We Weave
Alan Page
"Alan Page" wrote...
> From the Rolling Stone interview...
> anymore.
>
> hones with the situation.
Dave: ...You can't go through life fooling yourself, you have to be
honest with the situation.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
>> Er, nothing......sorry.
>> I just find it odd that the signal to noise ratio of OT posts is fine,
>> but the second I say something negative about David, I'm a troll.
>
> At least OT posts are clearly marked and you can skip them if you
> choose.
No, most of them are NOT "clearly marked" OT.
I can't tell you how many posts I've waded through
that say "Show synopsis" that are just people talking about earthquakes
or Sarah Palin, but I'd guess it's in the tens of thousands. Far more
then the *one* post I made condemning the vitality of the show. Deal
with it.
Your 'troll' posts are not clear until I read them. I'd rather
> not killfile you, but you're loud and clear. I get it, the show sucks.
> Do something about it (if you can), stop complaining, or just change the
> damn channel.
>
Johnny, if I want to express something negative pertaining to the show
in a constructive manner, I will do so.
I'm tired of being cock-blocked and it stops now.
If you don't like it, there's not much I can do about it,
nor will I lose any sleep over it at night.
By all means, kill file me. I'll live.
Donz5
I'd place all these dudes (including me) among the 2nd generation
AFLers. Before them were Dean Adams, Scott Barvian, Funt!, Tim Page,
even Aaron Barnhart, and loads of other gents whose names don't roll
off the tongue as quickly as these five.
I think it was when Aaron was featured in a CBS profile in 1995 when
the newsgroup entered a new phase, bringing in tons of new folk, among
them, the always engaging Rick Namey.
Good times.
Gary
first place!)
Gary
katycren
Barnhart, those names are new to me. Someday you should write a
history of AFL.
> I think it was when Aaron was featured in a CBS profile in 1995 when
> the newsgroup entered a new phase, bringing in tons of new folk, among
> them, the always engaging Rick Namey.
>
Rick could have a whole chapter to himself.
> Good times.
So you say. Why not write a memoir and let us be the judge?
Kate
Donz5
Get back to me when I'm 20 years younger. :)
Alan Page
"Gary" wrote...
> Thanks for posting the quote Alan (and for sending it to me in the
> first place!)
I just disagree with your statement that "Dave has thrown in the towel
creatively."
LSwDL & TSwJL have 2 different audiences, I just happen to be in the
group that enjoys LSwDL.
Maybe
<CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
> johnny bobby bee wrote:
> > choose.
>
> No, most of them are NOT "clearly marked" OT.
> I can't tell you how many posts I've waded through
> that say "Show synopsis" that are just people talking about earthquakes
> or Sarah Palin, but I'd guess it's in the tens of thousands. Far more
> then the *one* post I made condemning the vitality of the show. Deal
> with it.
>
Most are clearly marked OT and if they are not marked OT, they are
marked "time wasting thread" which almost always is OT.
And as far as the "show synopsis" posts, there is only so much you can
say about a particular show and then people move on to the other
topics Brady mentions in his original post. So yes, it can get pretty
OT but in the beginning, it is all about the show.
Maybe...Brady gives us a range of topics to discuss after discussing
the show.
Brady
> You happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time -- collateral
> damage, so to speak. There was a negative post about Crash and she
> responded quickly with a counter post. I don't think she was being a
> troll since all she did was offer a criticism of the show, but I also
> don't think she 'gets' you, Brady. That's not to say she doesn't care,
> but she's out-of-touch with the Southern sctick. What Crash calls
> 'flirting' is what folks here in the deep South call 'friendly.' And
> being a native Alabamian, you were raised to be charming and
> deferential to women. Perhaps, however, you're a little more friendly
> with those AFL regulars that you've known for many years, most of whom
> are female. Have you noticed that? First, AFL lost Cyber, then Brad
> -- the two funniest AFLers dead, in Cyber's case, or alive -- and now,
> sadly, Brad's twin, Tom, who makes only a rare appearance, and Micah,
> the musical genius who pulled a Drifter and left us just when we
> needed him most. What has happened to the first dudes of AFL? Thank
> goodness, we still have Donz, since without him there would *be* no
> AFL. I'm not trying to discount the importance of Alan or Keith or
> David or Steve or Bob or BB or DT or JBB or RH or Gary or any other
> guys here whose names or initials I've forgotten, but it seems AFL has
> lost more of the first generation male regulars than the female ones
> (KarKel).
> Come home, boys -- it's suppertime.
It's all good. I'm accustomed to people not getting me. I don't even get
me. Just please don't tell me I'm *gregarious*. I'm really not.
Gregarious, that is.
I don't know about all this 'flirting vs friendly' business.
Maybe this is the week I get into a feud with someone.
Anybody got a problem with any of that?
Brady
Brady
I don't understand.
Here's the thing, Crash. Discussions in newsgroups are just like
discussions in real life -- they can & will evolve, naturally. That's
part of what makes it so fun & interesting in here!
Brady
Brady
> You happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time -- collateral
> damage, so to speak. [...] Thank
> goodness, we still have Donz, since without him there would *be* no
> AFL. I'm not trying to discount the importance of Alan or Keith or
> David or Steve or Bob or BB or DT or JBB or RH or Gary or any other
> guys here whose names or initials I've forgotten, but it seems AFL has
> lost more of the first generation male regulars than the female ones
> (KarKel).
> Come home, boys -- it's suppertime.
I had a dream about Karen (KarKel) just a couple of nights ago.
It's true.
Brady
Gary
> "Gary" wrote...
> > Thanks for posting the quote Alan (and for sending it to me in the
> > first place!)
>
> I just disagree with your statement that "Dave has thrown in the towel
> creatively."
> LSwDL & TSwJL have 2 different audiences, I just happen to be in the
> group that enjoys LSwDL.
Alan, I still love watching Dave, and love listening to him talking
off the cuff. He will always be infinitely superior to Leno in my
book. I just have an issue with the standard of the written material I
see on the show these days.
But if you think the material is still as strong as maybe 10 years
ago, then my theories are not relevant to you, and I understand that.
I just thought that quote was interesting from my perspective of the
show these days. But of course I could be reading something into
nothing.
Gary
Deborah
wrote:
Sounds like this is one of the older more established ngs. It's been
nice of you folks to accomodate me in here. I was referred here by
the show, when I wrote and asked a question they didn't have time to
answer. But I really feel like an idiot for never having thought to
look for a newsgroup about the Late Show. I've been on usenet since
1994.
Oh well, better late than never.
Deborah
Gary
Brady, the synopsis’ are great, and the following tangents are often
better. Actually, this group would die without the tangents, “OT”
labels or not. It’s called conversation.
Gary
Deborah
<alp...@spamsucceed.net> wrote:
>
>"Gary" wrote...
>> Thanks for posting the quote Alan (and for sending it to me in the
>> first place!)
>
> I just disagree with your statement that "Dave has thrown in the towel
>creatively."
> LSwDL & TSwJL have 2 different audiences, I just happen to be in the
>group that enjoys LSwDL.
Me too. I don't even switch to Leno during "dark weeks". If I'm
still up I just read a book or something.
Deborah
Alan Page
"Maybe" wrote...
> Maybe...Brady gives us a range of topics to discuss after discussing
> the show.
I only read McBradee's synopsis for the sports.
Alan Page
"Gary" wrote...
> But if you think the material is still as strong as maybe 10 years
> ago, then my theories are not relevant to you, and I understand that.
> I just thought that quote was interesting from my perspective of the
> show these days. But of course I could be reading something into
> nothing.
I don't compare today's material to that of 10 years ago.
What I got from Dave's quote is that he is happy with what's going on
now.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> Here's the thing, Crash. Discussions in newsgroups are just like
> discussions in real life -- they can & will evolve, naturally. That's
> part of what makes it so fun & interesting in here!
>
> Brady
I fully understand, Brady. I only mentioned it because "Johnny Bobby
Bee" accused me of 'trolling', when in fact my post was *on-topic*.
This person claimed that my posts were not labeled as "Trolling"
when in fact, there are far more topics here that are OT
and unlabeled....so why attack an on-topic post?
I know the answer: because it doesn't kiss Dave's ass,
so therefore I'm 'trolling'.
Get a life, johnny!
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> What I got from Dave's quote is that he is happy with what's going on
> now.
>
....he's one of the select few who are.
Alan Page
"CB" wrote...
> ....he's one of the select few who are.
But then...it is *his* show.
Marilyn
> I can't tell you how many posts I've waded through
> that say "Show synopsis" that are just people talking about earthquakes or
> Sarah Palin, but I'd guess it's in the tens of thousands. Far more then
> the *one* post I made condemning the vitality of the show. Deal with it.
Crash, when it comes to wasted posts of arguments and negativity, most of
which have nothing to do with the show, you should put a mirror on your
monitor. In other words, I'm betting you're the leader in off-topic posts in
this newsgroup over the past several months.
Brady
Hey, M - I think the clock on your computer is outta whack.
(Your post is timestamped 11:44 AM CT -- Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:44:25 -0400.)
Brady
katycren
I can't remember the last time I watched Leno. It's been years. I
often watch the Late Show reruns during dark weeks, or, like you, I
read a book. Now that I have DVR, I watch all the episodes of The
Daily Show and The Colbert Report that I haven't seen yet or maybe a
movie. I recorded Dan in Real Life with Steve Carrell last weekend
(DirecTV was offering a free trial of the Starz network) and finally
got to watch it last night. Great film, btw. I really, really loved
it.
KC
Marilyn
items box until it came back up- just now. Maybe it's AFL's way of saying,
don't be unpleasant. Keep it peaceful.
"Brady" <water...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:kO6dnQXXmb3zTk_V...@earthlink.com...
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
Check your facts.
First of all, I haven't posted much of *anything* in the last two months;
Second, I don't usually post unless it pertains to the show.
There are rare exceptions, but typically not.
Brady
>> Hey, M - I think the clock on your computer is outta whack.
>>
>> (Your post is timestamped 11:44 AM CT -- Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:44:25 -0400.)
>>
> That's when I tried to post it. Then usenet went down and it sat in my sent
> items box until it came back up- just now. Maybe it's AFL's way of saying,
> don't be unpleasant. Keep it peaceful.
Ah. *Ah*. Well, you appear to be good to go now.
Brady
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> "CB" wrote...
>> ....he's one of the select few who are.
>
> But then...it is *his* show.
>
If a joke is told in a studio,
and there's no one there to hear it,
does it still get a laugh?
:)
Helen Read
>
> Sounds like this is one of the older more established ngs. It's been
> nice of you folks to accomodate me in here. I was referred here by
> the show, when I wrote and asked a question they didn't have time to
> answer. But I really feel like an idiot for never having thought to
> look for a newsgroup about the Late Show.
AFL was the *first* newsgroup that I looked for (and found), back in
1993. James Langdell has been here almost from AFL's beginning, which
was around 1990 or 1991.
--
HPR
johnny bobby bee
> I know the answer: because it doesn't kiss Dave's ass,
> so therefore I'm 'trolling'.
> Get a life, johnny!
I knew I'd regret replying to your post, but what the hell.
I don't give a shit if you kiss Dave's ass, I don't. I know when the
show sucks and when it doesn't. All I'm saying is you're SO damn boring.
Boring and you've become a damn broken record. We fucking get it,
already. Again, you think the show is lame and hasn't done anything
funny in years. The writing sucks. Yes, yes, yes. You hate Bob. BORING!
Why do you constantly keep saying the same thing time and time again. I
should get a life? Holy Christ, the irony.
At least I watch the show because I enjoy it,and think it's funny. What
the hell are you doing watching it? Get a life, indeed.
--
As we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, we should be
glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously.
--Benjamin Franklin
katycren
I didn't know that, Helen. But, as I told Don, I'm woefully ignorant
of AFL's history. I didn't discover AFL until sometime after 1997 when
I stumbled on a link while exploring AOL for the Late Show. And I
believe I omitted James when discussing the remaining male AFL'ers. I
must have had a spell since James easily ranks in the 'funniest guys
in AFL' category with his brilliant Mock Top Ten lists. (My sincere
apologies to James.) Donz calls himself a 'second generation' AFL'er
so James might be the only first generation male still here in the
ng.
Which females were the earliest members of AFL, besides yourself?
Aren't Marilyn and Traci among the first generation?
Kate
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
>> I know the answer: because it doesn't kiss Dave's ass,
>> so therefore I'm 'trolling'.
>> Get a life, johnny!
>
> I knew I'd regret replying to your post, but what the hell.
>
> I don't give a shit if you kiss Dave's ass, I don't. I know when the
> show sucks and when it doesn't. All I'm saying is you're SO damn boring.
> Boring and you've become a damn broken record. We fucking get it,
> already. Again, you think the show is lame and hasn't done anything
> funny in years. The writing sucks. Yes, yes, yes. You hate Bob. BORING!
>
> Why do you constantly keep saying the same thing time and time again. I
> should get a life? Holy Christ, the irony.
>
> At least I watch the show because I enjoy it,and think it's funny. What
> the hell are you doing watching it? Get a life, indeed.
>
I watch the show because I've always watched it. It's really none of
your business why I watch it, and if I feel like being critical, I will.
Nothing you can do about it, Skippy. It is a *LETTERMAN* discussion
group. It's even got Letterman's name in the title! See how that works,
genius?
Regarding my "repetitious" post that you objected to, I've never before
posted the thought that Dave's show has not been noteworthy since his
9/11 return speech. That was an entirely new thought
that occurred to me when someone mentioned the 9/11 anniversary.
So I *don't* keep saying the same thing time and time and time again...
You just hear what you want to hear.
(and you're probably a Republican who likes to control the content of
what people can or can't talk about in a free society such as a newsgroup)
Traci
I came in around mid '95, but didn't post for nearly 6 months. (Remember
netiquette?)
Marilyn and the Limo Ladies predate me by at least a year...probably
longer. I'm definitely a 2nd generation AFL chick.
I rarely look back and say "Boy I wish," but boy I wish we had the crew
from about 8 years ago still here. Lately I only stop in out of
nostalgic obligation.
<sigh>
Traci
--
"Not only do I want an *elite* president. I want someone who is
embarrassingly superior to me. Somebody who speaks 16 languages and
sleeps two hours a night hanging upside down in a chamber they
themselves designed."
--Jon Stewart, TDS
Helen Read
>
> Which females were the earliest members of AFL, besides yourself?
> Aren't Marilyn and Traci among the first generation?
I started lurking AFL in the fall of 1993, and started posting in the
spring of 1994. This was back in the days when good newbies lurked for
months to get to know a group before ever posting. I just missed the
Time of Troubles during the summer of 1993, when there was no new Dave
during the transition from NBC to CBS. I remember when Donz first
arrived, sometime in late 1993 or early 1994. The only other female
poster that I remember from back then went by the screen name eylersj or
something close to that. I think her actual name was Janet Eylers. There
may have been a couple of other women in those days, but not many.
Marilyn and Traci came a little bit later.
--
HPR
Alan Page
"CB" wrote...
> (and you're probably a Republican who likes to control the content of
> what people can or can't talk about in a free society such as a newsgroup)
jbb can't even vote here.
You really need to know what you pontificate.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> This was back in the days when good newbies lurked for
> months to get to know a group before ever posting.
Why? Are you so special that no one should speak until they "get to know
" how you operate? Or are you just a fan of the show like the rest of us?
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> "CB" wrote...
>> (and you're probably a Republican who likes to control the content of
>> what people can or can't talk about in a free society such as a newsgroup)
>
> jbb can't even vote here.
> You really need to know what you pontificate.
>
Ah....thank GOD.
Helen Read
> Helen Read wrote:
>> This was back in the days when good newbies lurked for
>> months to get to know a group before ever posting.
>
> Why? Are you so special that no one should speak until they "get to know
> " how you operate? Or are you just a fan of the show like the rest of us?
It was part of Usenet etiquette in those days, what was called
netiquette. It was common courtesy for newbies to read and follow the
advice in news.announce.newusers before joining other newsgroups. The
most important advice given to the newbies was to lurk in a newsgroup --
*any* newsgroup -- for a long time before ever posting, in order to
learn the culture of that particular group before shooting your mouth
off. Too bad most newbies today don't even know about this tradition.
Try Googling "Usenet netiquette" or "Emily Postnews" if you are
interested in learning about this history.
--
HPR
johnny bobby bee
> (and you're probably a Republican who likes to control the content of
> what people can or can't talk about in a free society such as a newsgroup)
HA! That's the best laugh I had all day. If only you knew.
No, I'm just tired of whiny jerks.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
I'm actually already familiar with the netiquette.
I just find it interesting that someone (who is basically just like
everyone else with the exception of when they might have found the
group) should be expected to cower in the corner, quietly observing and
taking notes for a period of a few *months* before they dare be allowed
to speak or offer a thought. It's a bit antiquated, don't you think?
Is the discussion of a TV show *so* complex that no one fresh out of the
womb can handle it? Maybe there should be a six week online course for
how to post at alt.fan.letterman? Topics could include;
-how to flirt with Brady
-how to wrongly assume someone's identity
-how to be incestuously clique-ish
-how to purposely antagonize someone because you heard from someone else
they were an ass
-how to tell people they shouldn't discuss the group's main topic
etc.
If you went to a party and didn't know anybody, would you stand in the
corner the entire evening and watch how the people were interacting
before you even considered going up to somebody and introducing
yourself? Wouldn't common sense dictate that you have enough life
experience to know how to initiate a conversation with another human?
What kind of evening would you have if you simply went home and said to
yourself, "I think I understand how these people interact, and next time
they invite me, I may even contribute to the conversation. Yep, that's
what I'll do!"
johnny bobby bee
> jbb can't even vote here.
Says you. I voted for Nader twice. ;)
Suzanne
I've been lurking since 91-92. Chase Kimball was always interesting
too. I have to get up so early in the morning that I rarely get to
watch the show. This newsgroup keeps me up on whats is going on, gives
me a heads up when I should check something out on DaveTV or to check
on a good band. I miss the a lot of the "old" group to. They were very
creative. I was thrilled to death to see James reprise his dark week
list again. It was fantastic. Be nice to have CB's mailbag back but
I'm sure that is too much to hope for. What ever happened to Annette?
Kansan1225?
Suzanne
Suzanne
Suzanne
<CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
>
> If you went to a party and didn't know anybody, would you stand in the
> corner the entire evening and watch how the people were interacting
> before you even considered going up to somebody and introducing
> yourself? Wouldn't common sense dictate that you have enough life
> experience to know how to initiate a conversation with another human?
> What kind of evening would you have if you simply went home and said to
> yourself, "I think I understand how these people interact, and next time
> they invite me, I may even contribute to the conversation. Yep, that's
> what I'll do!"
>
> --
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> "Bill's posts are like a Jackson Pollock painting;
> as if a child threw paint haphazardly at the canvas,
> then expected everyone else to do all the work
> of finding the 'genius within the mess.'"
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I don't think anyone is saying that you should not introduce yourself
and join the conversation. Even in "real" life you don't join a group
(on the net or at a party) and begin to tell everyone that the way
they do things is wrong and that they are stupid. In the real world
you would be shunned, much the same as you are on the net.
Suzanne
Marilyn
>Even in "real" life you don't join a group (on the net or at a party) and
>begin to tell everyone that the way they do things is wrong and that they
>are stupid.
Well said, Suzanne. It's like voluntarily going to a Tupperware party and
announcing to everyone that Tupperware sucks. (and all the attendees are
cliquish)
Alan Page
"johnny bobby bee" wrote...
> Says you. I voted for Nader twice. ;)
For Queen?
Alan Page
"Suzanne" wrote...
> Chase Kimball was always interesting too.
Pecked to death by parrots.
> Be nice to have CB's mailbag back...
He's dead also.
> What ever happened to Annette?
Still thrown over Dave's chair.
> Kansan1225?
Locked up for stalking.
katycren
It's like going to a wedding and telling everyone that 50% of
marriages end in divorce. And why not just live together?
It's like going to a garden club and telling everyone that flowers
wilt and are a waste of money. And if you're smart, you'd buy
artificial arrangements.
It's like going to a Harley rally and telling the bikers that it's way
too loud. And wouldn't it be quieter if they all rode Suzukis?
Gary
I got to give it to Crash; that was a pretty funny retort to Helens
post.
Gary
Gary
And I like that 'Tupperware party' analogy too!
I know I shouldn’t, but I find these AFL squabbles entertaining. But
enough! It’s Friday night. I’m going out getting drunk!
Gary
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
Bad example, because tupperware *does* suck and tupperware parties *are*
extremely cliquish.
Sometimes it takes a "maverick" to the rock the boat.
John McCain -- look out!
Don't think for a second that the group is perfect as is.
Bill Kawalec
"Gary" <garycolin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ce55de88-6815-4540...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Gary
***************************************************
got to admit, a lot more thought went into that than what my response would
have been, which is "that's just bullshit." I've never seen so many people
just so damn proud of being a clique.
Bill Kawalec
On Sep 19, 5:59 pm, "Marilyn" <marilyn...@cox.net> wrote:
> Suzanne wrote:
> >Even in "real" life you don't join a group (on the net or at a party) and
> >begin to tell everyone that the way they do things is wrong and that they
> >are stupid.
>
> Well said, Suzanne. It's like voluntarily going to a Tupperware party and
> announcing to everyone that Tupperware sucks. (and all the attendees are
> cliquish)
otoh, you wouldn't invite someone to a Tupperware party, then go out of your
way to let them know they don't fit in, so the analogy pretty much sucks.
Keith Rose
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot <CSBan...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
>Marilyn wrote:
> > Suzanne wrote:
> >> Even in "real" life you don't join a group (on the net or at a
>party) and
> >> begin to tell everyone that the way they do things is wrong and that
>they
> >> are stupid.
> >
> > Well said, Suzanne. It's like voluntarily going to a Tupperware party
>and
> > announcing to everyone that Tupperware sucks. (and all the attendees are
> > cliquish)
> >
> >
>
>
>Bad example, because tupperware *does* suck and tupperware parties *are*
>extremely cliquish.
And yet you would immediately express *shock* and *outrage* that
the tupperware party attendees are put off when you barge into the
party screeching about how much tupperware sucks, and why do they
hate you so?!?!.
>Sometimes it takes a "maverick" to the rock the boat.
>John McCain -- look out!
>Don't think for a second that the group is perfect as is.
A troll is not a "maverick." A troll is just a sociopath who is
starved for attention.
R H Draney
>
>"Gary" <garycolin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:ce55de88-6815-4540...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>On Sep 19, 5:00 pm, Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
><CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
>>
>> If you went to a party and didn't know anybody, would you stand in the
>> corner the entire evening and watch how the people were interacting
>> before you even considered going up to somebody and introducing
>> yourself? Wouldn't common sense dictate that you have enough life
>> experience to know how to initiate a conversation with another human?
>> What kind of evening would you have if you simply went home and said to
>> yourself, "I think I understand how these people interact, and next time
>> they invite me, I may even contribute to the conversation. Yep, that's
>> what I'll do!"
>
>post.
>
>got to admit, a lot more thought went into that than what my response would
>have been, which is "that's just bullshit." I've never seen so many people
>just so damn proud of being a clique.
Wouldn't it be a lot simpler to just get a big rubber stamp for your forehead
that says "NOOB"?...r
--
Little-known fact: About 2% of the famous
quotations credited to "Anonymous" were actually
originated by Jasper D Anonymous, a 14th-century
maker of carriage wheels.
Alan Page
"CB" wrote...
> Bad example, because tupperware *does* suck...
Tupperware doesn't suck, it burps.
Completely different direction of air.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> In article <48d3f0e7$0$4873$607e...@cv.net>,
> Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot <CSBan...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
>> Marilyn wrote:
>>> Suzanne wrote:
>>>> Even in "real" life you don't join a group (on the net or at a
>> party) and
>>>> begin to tell everyone that the way they do things is wrong and that
>> they
>>>> are stupid.
>>> Well said, Suzanne. It's like voluntarily going to a Tupperware party
>> and
>>> announcing to everyone that Tupperware sucks. (and all the attendees are
>>> cliquish)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Bad example, because tupperware *does* suck and tupperware parties *are*
>> extremely cliquish.
>
>
> And yet you would immediately express *shock* and *outrage* that
> the tupperware party attendees are put off when you barge into the
> party screeching about how much tupperware sucks, and why do they
> hate you so?!?!.
The "tupperware" analogy sucked on all counts.
A tupperware party has a host, the gathering takes place in their home,
and they decide the chosen few who get to attend.
However, no one is "invited" to a newsgroup.
People show up as they please, uninvited, and no one owns the facility
where the "party" occurs. This is a public forum for all intensive
purposes, much to the chagrin of some of the characters here who try to
police the place. I consider myself to be much like the Mexicans that
nobody wants in this country, I have a job to do. A job that nobody
wants -- to make you see what cliquey, elitist sycophants some of you are.
Maybe
> I came in around mid '95, but didn't post for nearly 6 months. (Remember
> netiquette?)
>
> Marilyn and the Limo Ladies predate me by at least a year...probably
> longer. I'm definitely a 2nd generation AFL chick.
>
I must be 3rd or 4th generation. I got my computer in '95 and the
first thing I did was find this newsgroup but I didn't post anything
until '96. I was way too chicken, I just wanted to read the posts for
a while. Then when I did get the nerve to post, Donz yelled at me for
something and wanted two sources. That's when I felt I had arrived!
I didn't even have the AOL back then as I was all Netcom and Prodigy.
It was Monica Bay that told me about the AOL Dave site that was about
to open and I should get the AOL because she was going to be a part of
it.
Maybe...and the rest is history!
Keith Rose
>
>The "tupperware" analogy sucked on all counts.
>A tupperware party has a host, the gathering takes place in their home,
>and they decide the chosen few who get to attend.
>However, no one is "invited" to a newsgroup.
>People show up as they please, uninvited, and no one owns the facility
>where the "party" occurs. This is a public forum for all intensive
>purposes, much to the chagrin of some of the characters here who try to
>police the place. I consider myself to be much like the Mexicans that
>nobody wants in this country, I have a job to do. A job that nobody
>wants -- to make you see what cliquey, elitist sycophants some of you are.
Textbook trollish response. Well done! Although I will have to deduct
points for your racist statement against Mexicans. And the phrase is
"intents and purposes," not "intensive purposes."
Alan Page
"Maybe" wrote...
>Then when I did get the nerve to post, Donz yelled at me for
> something and wanted two sources. That's when I felt I had arrived!
Only 2 sources? Times were easier then for sure.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> "CB" wrote...
>> Bad example, because tupperware *does* suck...
>
> Tupperware doesn't suck, it burps.
> Completely different direction of air.
>
At least someone has a sense of humor :)
Ever thought of writing for the LS?
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> Textbook trollish response. Well done! Although I will have to deduct
> points for your racist statement against Mexicans.
If you understood the context, you'd realize that the comment was
*sympathetic* to Mexicans.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
> "Maybe" wrote...
>> Then when I did get the nerve to post, Donz yelled at me for
>> something and wanted two sources. That's when I felt I had arrived!
>
> Only 2 sources? Times were easier then for sure.
>
So he's always been like that?
Traci
>
> "Suzanne" wrote...
>
> > Chase Kimball was always interesting too.
>
> Pecked to death by parrots.
I thought it was poison vinegar?
> > Be nice to have CB's mailbag back...
>
> He's dead also.
Long time gone.
> > What ever happened to Annette?
>
> Still thrown over Dave's chair.
Actually she's writing for the NY Times.
> > Kansan1225?
>
> Locked up for stalking.
Sounds about right!
Traci
--
"Not only do I want an *elite* president. I want someone who is
embarrassingly superior to me. Somebody who speaks 16 languages and
sleeps two hours a night hanging upside down in a chamber they
themselves designed."
--Jon Stewart, TDS
Deborah
wrote:
>Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
>> Helen Read wrote:
>>> This was back in the days when good newbies lurked for
>>> months to get to know a group before ever posting.
>>
>> Why? Are you so special that no one should speak until they "get to know
>> " how you operate? Or are you just a fan of the show like the rest of us?
>
>It was part of Usenet etiquette in those days, what was called
>netiquette. It was common courtesy for newbies to read and follow the
>advice in news.announce.newusers before joining other newsgroups. The
>most important advice given to the newbies was to lurk in a newsgroup --
>*any* newsgroup -- for a long time before ever posting, in order to
>learn the culture of that particular group before shooting your mouth
>off. Too bad most newbies today don't even know about this tradition.
>
>Try Googling "Usenet netiquette" or "Emily Postnews" if you are
>interested in learning about this history.
I know about that advice, but I've never followed it. Sometimes I've
paid for not following it in spades. But this ng isn't nearly as
rough as some of them.
I'm not Jewish, but after the 2nd Intifada (sp?) I subscribed
temporarily to soc.culture.israel to get a better idea what was
happening and that ng was as much a war zone as the geographic middle
east. I got in trouble for having some sympathy for the Palestinians.
Oddly enough I also had a problem when I subscribed to the ng for
Vancouver Canucks fans. I wasn't enough of a hockey fan to meet their
standards.
The point is, if you're not going to fit in, you're not going to fit
in, and it really doesn't matter how much time you spend lurking.
Might as well just get the fight over with and move on.
Deborah
DTSmith
> If you went to a party and didn't know anybody, would you stand in the
> corner the entire evening and watch how the people were interacting
> before you even considered going up to somebody and introducing
> yourself? Wouldn't common sense dictate that you have enough life
> experience to know how to initiate a conversation with another human?
> What kind of evening would you have if you simply went home and said to
> yourself, "I think I understand how these people interact, and next time
> they invite me, I may even contribute to the conversation. Yep, that's
> what I'll do!"
That's EXACTLY what I'd do. You hit the nail right on the head.
Deborah
wrote:
Kansan was here? I knew him from alt.gossip.celebrities. He dropped
out of sight there a few years ago. Even though he was pretty weird,
with his Illuminati thing, and his obsession with Heidi Klum, a lot of
people asked after him when he disappeared. He seemed like a nice
enough guy. Harmless for all his weirdness.
Deborah
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
"That is why you fail." -- Yoda
DTSmith
<CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
for all intensive purposes
Wow.
Marilyn
Dude, ease up. She's Mexican.
Alan Page
"Deborah" wrote...
> Kansan was here?
Gosh yes.
> ...his obsession with Heidi Klum...
Obsession doesn't even come close.
acd
> On Sep 17, 4:01 pm, Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
>
> <CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
> > It's also probably the last time that Dave was vital.
> > A lot of people remember that moment,
> > but how many remember much about LS since?
>
> I do. It WAS just a comedy and entertainment show, you know.
Fixed that for ya.
Brady
Oh, I see what you did. You post-edited, thus turning the tables using
the ole switcheroo. Hah. Brilliant! I don't think any *noob* has ever
done that before. He got *pwned*! Woo! Baba booey!
Brady
Brady
> katycren says...
>>
>> Aren't Marilyn and Traci among the first generation?
>
> I came in around mid '95, but didn't post for nearly 6 months. (Remember
> netiquette?)
>
> Marilyn and the Limo Ladies predate me by at least a year...probably
> longer. I'm definitely a 2nd generation AFL chick.
>
> I rarely look back and say "Boy I wish," but boy I wish we had the crew
> from about 8 years ago still here. Lately I only stop in out of
> nostalgic obligation.
>
> <sigh>
Let me ask you a question. Would it be fair to say that out of all the
posters in AFL who've come & gone & remained, and out of all the
participants in other newsgroups and/or forums you may have participated
in over the years, that I -- me; Brady -- am the one poster from whom
you've gleaned the most, oh, let's just say *loving inspiration* and ...
raw eroticism?
Brady
Deborah
<garycolin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Sep 18, 1:29 am, "dsik...@yahoo.com" <dsik...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 17, 4:45 pm, johnny bobby bee <useraddshine-
>>
>> no_spam...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> > Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
>> > > Yes, but what I mean is,
>> > > when was the last time people *outside* of this newsgroup
>> > > gathered around the water cooler the next morning
>> > > and asked each other, "Hey, did you see that bit on Letterman last night?"
>>
>> > Look who's back to her trolling ways. Get a remote already.
>>
>> Sorry, but I have to agree. I can't recall the last time there was a
>> really noteworthy segment on the big show -- -maybe- Obama, but that's
>> stretching it.
>>
>> --Dave Sikula
>
>I also agree with Crash and Dake. I think Dave has thrown in the towel
>creatively.
>
>I thought the really significant thing from the Rolling Stone
>interview was Dave saying that he felt he (and the show) can't go on
>"fooling himself" with regard to his competition with Jay, and
>admitting that Jay just has broader appeal than him.
>
>My theory is that this resignation regarding the ratings, plus all the
>person goings-on in his life, Dave just couldn't be bothered putting
>*that* much effort into the show anymore.
>
>Gary
He's got his thumb in a whole bunch of pies. If you read his
wikipedia page, you'll be surprised how much extraneous business he's
into, via Worldwide Pants. Then there's his racing team. And I did
not know, until I read that page, that he has a charitable foundation.
Now his contributions to that might be tax deductible but I have
nothing against people who earn $40 million a year making their own
decisions about how they'll donate their money rather than letting the
government make all the decisions for them.
The guy is no slouch.
If there was anything about the RS interview that bothered me it was
that he was a little TOO self-deprecating. I do not believe for one
moment that he's a dope. His show varies a bit in terms of
entertainment value, but I like him, I think he's a pretty decent
man, and I'm always happy to spend an hour looking in on his work
world. Often I do get some laughs, and lord knows, I need them.
Deborah
Bill Kawalec
"Keith Rose" <xke...@xmayparkx.com> wrote in message
news:IXSAk.758$x%.101@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
ya know, I hate the killfile, but I killfiled Crash, just because of the
constant rants, but, I got to admit, you folks got nothin'.
AND, I'll just add that, if you consider that Mexican remark "racist,"
you're sadly out of touch.
Bill Kawalec
"R H Draney" <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:gb0s2...@drn.newsguy.com...
> Bill Kawalec filted:
>>
>>"Gary" <garycolin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:ce55de88-6815-4540...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>On Sep 19, 5:00 pm, Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
>><CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> If you went to a party and didn't know anybody, would you stand in the
>>> corner the entire evening and watch how the people were interacting
>>> before you even considered going up to somebody and introducing
>>> yourself? Wouldn't common sense dictate that you have enough life
>>> experience to know how to initiate a conversation with another human?
>>> What kind of evening would you have if you simply went home and said to
>>> yourself, "I think I understand how these people interact, and next time
>>> they invite me, I may even contribute to the conversation. Yep, that's
>>> what I'll do!"
>>
>>I got to give it to Crash; that was a pretty funny retort to Helens
>>post.
>>
>>***************************************************
>>got to admit, a lot more thought went into that than what my response
>>would
>>have been, which is "that's just bullshit." I've never seen so many people
>>just so damn proud of being a clique.
>
> Wouldn't it be a lot simpler to just get a big rubber stamp for your
> forehead
> that says "NOOB"?...r
Again, proving my point.
Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot
Nicely said, Deborah. :)
Bill Kawalec
"Deborah" <deb...@ladeedadeeda.com> wrote in message
news:4d28d414utlmla16v...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:24:47 -0400, Helen Read <re...@math.uvm.edu>
> wrote:
>
>>Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
>>> Helen Read wrote:
>>>> This was back in the days when good newbies lurked for
>>>> months to get to know a group before ever posting.
>>>
>>> Why? Are you so special that no one should speak until they "get to know
>>> " how you operate? Or are you just a fan of the show like the rest of
>>> us?
>>
>>It was part of Usenet etiquette in those days, what was called
>>netiquette. It was common courtesy for newbies to read and follow the
>>advice in news.announce.newusers before joining other newsgroups. The
>>most important advice given to the newbies was to lurk in a newsgroup --
>>*any* newsgroup -- for a long time before ever posting, in order to
>>learn the culture of that particular group before shooting your mouth
>>off. Too bad most newbies today don't even know about this tradition.
>>
>>Try Googling "Usenet netiquette" or "Emily Postnews" if you are
>>interested in learning about this history.
>
> I know about that advice, but I've never followed it. Sometimes I've
> paid for not following it in spades. But this ng isn't nearly as
> rough as some of them.
roughest I've seen. Every other one I've frequented is limited to justone or
two folks who can never be wrong.
Coggy13
> Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot <CSBandic...@xXaolXx.com> wrote:
>
>
> points for your racist statement against Mexicans. And the phrase is
> "intents and purposes," not "intensive purposes."
That's a very common error. It comes from hearing the phrase a lot
compared to reading it.
I wrote for my college newspaper and made that mistake in my first
story. Luckily the editor that night was better read than myself.
Coggy13
> "Suzanne" wrote...
>
> > Kansan1225?
>
> Locked up for stalking.
>
I just figured he was Seal, and Ms. Klum agreed to marry him and have
his children if he stopped.
Bill Kawalec
"Coggy13" <Galvin...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0774d570-8b29-4ad6...@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
*********************************
it;s about as logical as the "would of, could of, should of" that's creeping
in everywhere these days. It's the price of teaching that dumbass "phonetic
spelling."
R H Draney
>
>
>"R H Draney" <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>news:gb0s2...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> Bill Kawalec filted:
>>>
>>>would
>>>have been, which is "that's just bullshit." I've never seen so many people
>>>just so damn proud of being a clique.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be a lot simpler to just get a big rubber stamp for your
>> forehead
>> that says "NOOB"?...r
>
>Again, proving my point.
I've seen this happen time and time again on one newsgroup or another, and it's
astonishing how much alike the fights look...someone saunters in and without so
much as looking around starts posting off-topic rants...one or two helpful souls
suggest "we don't do that here", which invariably leads to "you guys are picking
on me!"....
A few people killfile the newcomer...a few others start throwing in little
references to his outlandish behavior...with the number of people actively
interacting with him, he decides the best approach is to become even more
strident....
At some point, whatever trajectories the various factions have taken heretofore,
a post from the new guy changes from the original trollish subject matter to a
sort of meta-troll: "all you people stick up for each other and suppress any
kind of dissenting voice!"...accusations of netkkkoppery are made...someone
decides on the basis of nothing whatsoever that "there can't be this many
different people who hate me; most of them must be sock puppets for the
others"....
Nyms shift to dodge killfiles...people start reverse-engineering message headers
to "prove" that poster X and poster Y are really the same person...private
contact information gets posted...abuse complaints are forwarded....
Some start reposting the opponent's messages in full...all snipping stops for
fear of being accused of "selective editing"...line counts increase into the
triple and even quadruple digits...soon, everyone is being addressed by a
third-grade corruption of his or her actual name, on the naive assumption that
this is somehow clever....
Finally, one of the abuse complaints "takes"...a combatant's account is
suspended...he comes back a few days later with a new name but makes no pretense
at being a fresh face; from the first few posts the new name is referring in
detail to incidents from the earlier rounds of the battle....
As I say, I've already seen it, and it wasn't particularly entertaining the last
time...what's on the other channel?...r
Coggy13
> On Sep 19, 12:59 pm, "Marilyn" <marilyn...@cox.net> wrote:
> Suzanne wrote:
>
> It's like going to a Harley rally and telling the bikers that it's way
> too loud. And wouldn't it be quieter if they all rode Suzukis?
I read that last word quickly and confused it with one of the people
to whom you were responding.
Certainly made it a more entertaining sentence.
Steve Curtis
>Crash 'Strawman' Bandicoot wrote:
>>for all intensive purposes
>Wow.
As opposed to "mild" purposes?
AFL Drifter
>I came in around mid '95, but didn't post for
> nearly 6 months. (Remember netiquette?)
>Marilyn and the Limo Ladies predate me by at
> least a year...probably longer. I'm definitely a
> 2nd generation AFL chick.
>I rarely look back and say "Boy I wish," but
> boy I wish we had the crew from about 8
> years ago still here. Lately I only stop in out of
> nostalgic obligation.
><sigh>
Brady:
>Let me ask you a question. Would it be fair to
> say that out of all the posters in AFL who've
> come & gone & remained, and out of all the
> participants in other newsgroups and/or
> forums you may have participated in over the
> years, that I -- me; Brady -- am the one poster
> from whom you've gleaned the most, oh, let's
> just say *loving inspiration* and ... raw
> eroticism?
Drifter:
AWAV
I thinking this "AWAV" thing might take off, at least there should be
several opportunities.
Rod Fernandez
> Helen Read wrote:
>> This was back in the days when good newbies lurked for
>> months to get to know a group before ever posting.
>
>
> Why? Are you so special that no one should speak until they "get to know
> " how you operate? Or are you just a fan of the show like the rest of us?
Helen never claimed to be so special, but I'm convinced she *really* is.
Rod