New member-created myth-busting website!
De-Fact-o
De-Fact-o.com is now up and running.
As a member you can now submit your own articles and, (after your
article has been approved) receive updates about how and when it is
voted and commented on.
You will soon have a profile page that displays your username and
avatar and stats on how often your articles are viewed and your
overall rating as an author. You can also rate others.
It is open to the general public.
Start today:
http://www.de-fact-o.com/member.php
Here is an example of how the Paul Wellstone (DFL-MN) plane crash was
handled by De-Fact-o.com:
"The FBI was on the scene of Wellstone's plane crash suspiciously
early"
FALSE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=77
--------------------------------
"A distress call should have been heard if Wellstone's plane had
experienced trouble"
FALSE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=57
--------------------------------
"Wellstone's co-pilot gave Zacharias Moussaoui a CD-ROM detailing 747
flight operations"
TRUE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=19
--------------------------------
"Poor weather conditions brought down Wellstone's airplane"
FALSE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=48
--------------------------------
And on the Bible:
-------------------
It was Delilah who cut Samson's hair in the Bible
FALSE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=81
-------------------
In the Bible, Adam and Eve ate from a forbidden apple
FALSE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=68
-------------------
God tried to kill Moses in the Bible
TRUE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=42
-------------------
Judas dies two different ways in the Bible
TRUE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=9
-------------------
Moses parted the Red Sea in the Bible
PROBABLY FALSE
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=6
-------------------
And common/random factoids:
FALSE
Storing coffee in the refrigerator or freezer keeps it fresh
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=125
-------------------
FALSE
Searing meat helps seal in its juices
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=124
-------------------
FALSE
Putting the avocado pits in guacamole keeps it from turning brown
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=123
-------------------
TRUE
Cutting lettuce with a metal knife causes it to brown faster than
tearing the leaves or using a plastic knife
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=122
-------------------
FALSE
Science experiments have shown how positive thoughts have beautiful
effects on water crystals
http://www.de-fact-o.com/fact_read.php?id=121
-------------------
Get in on the ground floor and make your case about nearly any topic!
Just remember, the site errs on the side of skepticism. A well
researched fact-based article is *much* more likely to get approved
than a loosely-tied together string of facts supporting a highly
speculative "theory".
JoAnne Schmitz
wrote:
Recently Added:
TRUE The artifical sweetner Aspartame can cause cancer
The idea is marked as true, but the analysis doesn't support that claim.
It mentions possible damage and researchers suggesting that more studies
need to be done, and there are footnotes. It refers to the susceptibility
to Aspartame by those with phenylketonurea, though it doesn't make it clear
that this is now an easily diagnosed disease and no one with it will be
eating any Aspartame unless they've got idiot guardians or a death wish.
There is no presentation of scientific studies that show no negative effect
by Aspartame on metabolically normal persons. So the article is guilty of
the fallacy of special pleading.
Then it dives right into a heapin' helpin' of industry conspiracy theory.
While "cui bono" is a good question to ask, it's not enough.
JoAnne "sorry" Schmitz
--
The new Urban Legends website is <http://www.tafkac.org>
That's TAFKAC.ORG
Do not accept lame imitations at previously okay URLs
Simon Slavin
<ra6p945cmgmsg9nbs...@4ax.com>:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:17:05 -0700 (PDT), De-Fact-o <ma...@de-fact-o.com>
> wrote:
>
> Recently Added:
>
> TRUE The artifical sweetner Aspartame can cause cancer
>
> The idea is marked as true, but the analysis doesn't support that claim.
I have trouble working out these sites. Do they feature false ULs in
order to attract members who want to correct them, or are they clueless ?
Do they realise only afterwards that it's necessary to establish standards
for proof ? Do they feel they can imagine truth-by-democracy is worth
anything ? And what are they for ?
Simon.
--
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk
De-Fact-o
<slavins.delete.these.four.wo...@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 08/08/2008, JoAnne Schmitz wrote in message
>
> > On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:17:05 -0700 (PDT), De-Fact-o <m...@de-fact-o.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > Recently Added:
>
> > TRUE The artifical sweetner Aspartame can cause cancer
>
> > The idea is marked as true, but the analysis doesn't support that claim.
>
> I have trouble working out these sites. Do they feature false ULs in
> order to attract members who want to correct them, or are they clueless ?
> Do they realise only afterwards that it's necessary to establish standards
> for proof ? Do they feel they can imagine truth-by-democracy is worth
> anything ? And what are they for ?
>
> Simon.
> --http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk
They are meant to convince like any other article, with citations and
sources. It is not meant to be the end-all be-all on any topic.
De-Fact-o
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:17:05 -0700 (PDT), De-Fact-o <m...@de-fact-o.com>
This one has been fixed to take into account your well made points.
The true rating was based on the fact that it has shown to cause
cancer in animals, but it has been deemed to be misleading, therefore
it was changed by the author.
Lon
Their main purpose seems to be an overwhelming desire to prove that
Sturgeon's Revelation was highly optimistic.
JoAnne Schmitz
wrote:
>On Aug 10, 3:32 pm, Simon Slavin
He's asking about the motivations for setting up the site. You're talking
about the motivations of the person who wrote the article.
What is your motivation in setting up this site? Are you also the author
of the article? Do you agree with all the articles' opinions?
JoAnne "slipping" Schmitz
Simon Slavin
a0ab2e...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>:
> <slavins.delete.these.four.wo...@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I have trouble working out these sites. [snip]
> > Do they feel they can imagine truth-by-democracy is
>
> They are meant to convince like any other article, with citations and
> sources. It is not meant to be the end-all be-all on any topic.
Oh. Well, that's probably not a lot of use to us. It's a self-
perpetuating collection of things that may or may not be true. Your site
will never find that out with its current setup.
First, it's pretty easy to write an article that convinces most people.
What you do is write something that people want to believe. It's almost
no work at all to persuade someone of something they want to believe: they
get a relaxed happy glow from them and want them to persist for as long as
possible. It's harder to persuade people of things they don't want to
believe. That's why they're called 'difficult' truths.
Second, your site establishes whether an article is true by letting people
vote on it. You give no reason for people to vote for articles that are
really true: they don't get ejected if they get too many answers wrong.
Consequently, rather than caring for truth, people are going to vote for
articles they want to be true. Which will be the articles they want to
believe. Which will be the articles that give them those warm fuzzy
relaxed feelings.
What you're doing is something I call 'truth by democracy'. It works only
when your voters are experts in the field, and not always then. And it's
not what this newsgroup exists to do, it is more likely to have the
opposite results.
Simon.
--
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk
Le Trôle
news:26bd8586-7a5f-4dc0...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 8, 2:15 pm, JoAnne Schmitz <jschm...@qis.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:17:05 -0700 (PDT), De-Fact-o <m...@de-fact-o.com>
> wrote:
>
> Recently Added:
>
> TRUE The artifical sweetner Aspartame can cause cancer
>
> The idea is marked as true, but the analysis doesn't support that claim
Everytrhinh I meeded tp knoe I lrarende in the fiest grade/
Piosting driunk, good anf dronk, has a certain amount of built-im trith
detextiomn'
Ni con artist is dsogoog th\zat he cNB DEFEt a drunk nor even thosst th\t
tfemslvses [ost drunk to escape the filter,.
drunk is win, except win not oh fuck iy I can;t be bojthered to com-lete thr
esr.
R H Draney
>
>Piosting driunk, good anf dronk, has a certain amount of built-im trith
>detextiomn'
If there was ever a time to re-open the m*tt* contest, this would be it....r
--
Evelyn Wood just looks at the pictures.
De-Fact-o
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:54:35 -0700 (PDT), De-Fact-o <m...@de-fact-o.com>
The motive for the site was to create a place for skeptics to create
articles and discuss the truth value of strange and interesting facts
and rumors. The votes do not "decide" the truth value. They merely
tell the reader if the article convinced many people. The sources are
the presence of authority opinion. Articles can be taken down if they
are proven to be entirely off-base, we will be setting well defined
standards and procedures for this soon.
De-Fact-o
> Do you agree with all the articles' opinions?
>
> JoAnne "slipping" Schmitz
So far, yes. But the criteria for getting an article approved is that
is is well sourced and well reasoned and has not been proven wrong.
Under these standards it is quite possible an article or two will be
approved that the administrators themselves do not agree with the
truth rating of.
In other words, it is scholarship of the article that will help it
survive as a De-Fact-o article, not how well it agrees with the
opinions of the administrators of the site.
We will be in contact with member-authors if there are questions or
concerns about various truth ratings, we will not simply reject an
article without discussing the matter with the member-author.
Hatunen
<ma...@de-fact-o.com> wrote:
>On Aug 13, 2:35 pm, JoAnne Schmitz <jschm...@qis.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:54:35 -0700 (PDT), De-Fact-o <m...@de-fact-o.com>
>> wrote:
[...]
>> What is your motivation in setting up this site? Are you also the author
>> of the article? Do you agree with all the articles' opinions?
>>
>> JoAnne "slipping" Schmitz
>>
>> The new Urban Legends website is <http://www.tafkac.org>
>> That's TAFKAC.ORG
>> Do not accept lame imitations at previously okay URLs
>
>The motive for the site was to create a place for skeptics to create
>articles and discuss the truth value of strange and interesting facts
>and rumors. The votes do not "decide" the truth value. They merely
>tell the reader if the article convinced many people. The sources are
>the presence of authority opinion. Articles can be taken down if they
>are proven to be entirely off-base, we will be setting well defined
>standards and procedures for this soon.
You're just repeating the original AFU FAQ, noted above by
Joanne. Because most of the original "members" of AFU, who made
it a rather lively place, have slid away to other enterprises,
the TAFKAC site may not be as up to date as one might like, but I
see little reason to start still another one (snopes, and
Barbara, were once a part of AFU but went off to do rather as you
are proposing to do).
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hat...@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Le Trôle
news:DO6dneEbiYy...@bt.com...
> "De-Fact-o" <ma...@de-fact-o.com> wrote in message
> news:26bd8586-7a5f-4dc0...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Everytrhinh I meeded tp knoe I lrarende in the fiest grade/
>
> Piosting driunk, good anf dronk, has a certain amount of built-im trith
> detextiomn'
> Ni con artist is dsogoog th\zat he cNB DEFEt a drunk nor even thosst
th\t
> tfemslvses [ost drunk to escape the filter,.
>
> drunk is win, except win not oh fuck iy I can;t be bojthered to com-lete
thr
> esr.
I don't remember this post.
Simon Slavin
fcf614...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>:
> The motive for the site was to create a place for skeptics to create
> articles and discuss the truth value of strange and interesting facts
> and rumors. The votes do not "decide" the truth value. They merely
> tell the reader if the article convinced many people.
Ah. So the motive for the site is to rate the voters on how gullible they
are. Presumably you forward the email addresses of the most gullible
members to people who want to sell them things.
On 27/08/2008, De-Fact-o wrote in message <83ac551d-2f54-4306-a725-
3c6b82...@v57g2000hse.googlegroups.com>:
> So far, yes. But the criteria for getting an article approved is that
> is is well sourced and well reasoned and has not been proven wrong.
> Under these standards it is quite possible an article or two will be
> approved that the administrators themselves do not agree with the
> truth rating of.
>
> In other words, it is scholarship of the article that will help it
> survive as a De-Fact-o article, not how well it agrees with the
> opinions of the administrators of the site.
Well if that's all your site does, people can do that here. They don't
need your site.
Simon.
--
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk
R H Draney
What *do* you remember?...
R H "hoping he doesn't say the Alamo" Draney
De-Fact-o
<slavins.delete.these.four.wo...@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 27/08/2008, De-Fact-o wrote in message <f2c6385c-4544-45f7-8373-
>
>
> > The motive for the site was to create a place for skeptics to create
> > articles and discuss the truth value of strange and interesting facts
> > and rumors. The votes do not "decide" the truth value. They merely
> > tell the reader if the article convinced many people.
>
> Ah. So the motive for the site is to rate the voters on how gullible they
> are. Presumably you forward the email addresses of the most gullible
> members to people who want to sell them things.
>
> On 27/08/2008, De-Fact-o wrote in message <83ac551d-2f54-4306-a725-
>
>
> > So far, yes. But the criteria for getting an article approved is that
> > is is well sourced and well reasoned and has not been proven wrong.
> > Under these standards it is quite possible an article or two will be
> > approved that the administrators themselves do not agree with the
> > truth rating of.
>
> > In other words, it is scholarship of the article that will help it
> > survive as a De-Fact-o article, not how well it agrees with the
> > opinions of the administrators of the site.
>
> Well if that's all your site does, people can do that here. They don't
> need your site.
I am hoping we can work together. Obviously our site is a bit
different. But we were hoping our articles could be debated here
too. I notice you already post links to other sites attempting to
debunk things. Thought you might be interested in ours. Maybe some
might like our interface and work with it, I don't know.
David DeLaney
>Simon Slavin <slavins.delete.these.four.wo...@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> De-Fact-o wrote in message <f2c6385c-4544-45f7-8373-
>> > articles and discuss the truth value of strange and interesting facts
>> > and rumors. The votes do not "decide" the truth value. They merely
>> > tell the reader if the article convinced many people.
>>
>> Ah. So the motive for the site is to rate the voters on how gullible they
>> are. Presumably you forward the email addresses of the most gullible
>> members to people who want to sell them things.
>> Well if that's all your site does, people can do that here. They don't
>> need your site.
>
>I am hoping we can work together. Obviously our site is a bit
>different. But we were hoping our articles could be debated here
>too. I notice you already post links to other sites attempting to
>debunk things. Thought you might be interested in ours. Maybe some
>might like our interface and work with it, I don't know.
I'm thinking that from your reactions, the "attempting to debunk things" part
of your site seems to have been stapled on as an afterthought, and that your
motives for posting here do seem to be much more "get the site link into
public view" than "hey, I've found these various things to check out in the
media, are any/all of them true/false/debunked and can we discuss them at
length?". But that's just what I'm gathering from your postings. Not having
visited your site ever.
Dave "since we do have one of our own already, PLUS one from a pair who left
us long ago that's currently the standard outside here to refer people to"
DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Keith F. Lynch
> Simon Slavin <slavins.delete....@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> Well if that's all your site does, people can do that here. They
>> don't need your site.
> I am hoping we can work together.
Why the trend toward fleeing Usenet for websites? It's not just here;
I've seen it on other newsgroups. Is it just a push by owners of
those websites so they can get more ad revenue?
Websites are good for reference. Newsgroups are good for discussions.
There's no need to replace either with the other.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
David DeLaney
>De-Fact-o <ma...@de-fact-o.com> wrote:
>> Simon Slavin <slavins.delete....@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Well if that's all your site does, people can do that here. They
>>> don't need your site.
>
>> I am hoping we can work together.
>
>Why the trend toward fleeing Usenet for websites? It's not just here;
>I've seen it on other newsgroups. Is it just a push by owners of
>those websites so they can get more ad revenue?
>
>Websites are good for reference. Newsgroups are good for discussions.
>There's no need to replace either with the other.
Unfortunately, websites are shi ny. And full of pictures, some of which are
worth almost 150 words each. This exerts a certain pull on various types of
people...
Dave
Ralph Jones
DeLaney) wrote:
>Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>De-Fact-o <ma...@de-fact-o.com> wrote:
>>> Simon Slavin <slavins.delete....@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Well if that's all your site does, people can do that here. They
>>>> don't need your site.
>>
>>> I am hoping we can work together.
>>
>>Why the trend toward fleeing Usenet for websites? It's not just here;
>>I've seen it on other newsgroups. Is it just a push by owners of
>>those websites so they can get more ad revenue?
>>
>>Websites are good for reference. Newsgroups are good for discussions.
>>There's no need to replace either with the other.
>
>Unfortunately, websites are shi ny. And full of pictures, some of which are
>worth almost 150 words each. This exerts a certain pull on various types of
>people...
>
'Twould be splendid if those were the only people disappearing from
Usenet, but there appear to be more factors at work...
rj
De-Fact-o
> There's no need to replace either with the other.
Exactly our point. No need to feel threatened by us at all. We will
include this group in our next e-mail to our members as a good
discussion board.
Don Freeman
I'm not so sure that is desirable.
Charles Bishop
<free...@cosmoslair.com> wrote:
Hey what could it hurt?
charles, what month is it anyway?, bishop
David DeLaney
It is not; this is a newsgroup, not a mailing list (and is not one of the
bit.listserv.* newsgroups set up specifically to be a mailing list, either).
Sending random emails to newsgroups is a good way to find one day your ISP
suddenly isn't allowing you to access news.
Don Freeman
I guess it is traditional.
David DeLaney
>Don Freeman <free...@cosmoslair.com> wrote:
>>De-Fact-o wrote:
>>>> Websites are good for reference. Newsgroups are good for discussions.
>>>> There's no need to replace either with the other.
>>>
>>> Exactly our point. No need to feel threatened by us at all. We will
>>> include this group in our next e-mail to our members as a good
>>> discussion board.
>>
>>I'm not so sure that is desirable.
>
>It is not; this is a newsgroup, not a mailing list (and is not one of the
>bit.listserv.* newsgroups set up specifically to be a mailing list, either).
>Sending random emails to newsgroups is a good way to find one day your ISP
>suddenly isn't allowing you to access news.
Oh dear. I have _seriously_ misread the intent of Don's post. Apologies.
Sure, let your members know (in email) that we're here.
(That's SO not how I first read it. Bah.)
Dave "runs from room, blushing" DeLaney
Lon
In sometimes a perpetuating manner as more and more "service" providers
simply stop carrying usenet.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
Oh my Gawd! Now that I'm retired from Academe, I have
totally forgotten the significance of September. I don't
even recognize Labor Day any more.
Charles of the East
Larry Farrell
Yabbut ain't it great! I retired at the end of Spring Semester, 2008,
and have already settled into a completely new routine that has no
connection to the academic year.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
JoAnne Schmitz
wrote:
>I am hoping we can work together. Obviously our site is a bit
>different. But we were hoping our articles could be debated here
>too. I notice you already post links to other sites attempting to
>debunk things. Thought you might be interested in ours. Maybe some
>might like our interface and work with it, I don't know.
There's nothing wrong with debating your articles here. I think it could
provide interesting discussions.
It would be more helpful to post the full article here rather than just a
link. The former suggests a desire to discuss; the latter suggests a
desire to direct traffic to your site, as others have noted.
If the site is of interest, people will visit it. The fact that visitors
can vote on the articles might encourage the traffic that you desire.
JoAnne "free market" Schmitz
De-Fact-o
> bit.listserv.* newsgroups set up specifically to be a mailing list, either).
> Sending random emails to newsgroups is a good way to find one day your ISP
> suddenly isn't allowing you to access news.
I don't think you understand. De-Fact-o.com will simply recommend
this newsgroup as another good outlet for discussing myths. I don't
understand the "random emails to newsgroups" concern. This is not
being done or even considered.
De-Fact-o
Oh, I understand. You thought we would e-mail this newsgroup. No, we
simply added a link to this newsgroup for our members in case they
would like another resource for myth and folklore discussion other
than De-Fact-o.com.
Lee Ayrton
I say go ahead and show the link to this group, we could use some new
blood. Oh, and some new posters, too. But: it would be kind to them, and
polite to us, to also link this:
At the /very least/, before posting here they should read:
http://tafkac.org/afu/guides/afu_short_intro.html
http://tafkac.org/afu/guides/afu_survival_guide.html
For bonus points, they should take in:
http://tafkac.org/afu/guides/frequently_whimpered_whines.html
After all, you don't want your users to come back to you and cry that we
beat them bloody for insisting that it is Absolute Truth that posh stands
for "port out, starboard home", or that cement mixers Do Too carry nine
yards. We may be diminished, crusty and incestuous, but we still demand
rigorous thought and documentable proof.
--
"Thank heavens I'm atheist, otherwise I'd be in fear of going
to hell." Veronique explains comparative religion.
R H Draney
>
>After all, you don't want your users to come back to you and cry that we=20
>beat them bloody for insisting that it is Absolute Truth that posh stands=
>=20
>for "port out, starboard home", or that cement mixers Do Too carry nine=20
>yards. We may be diminished, crusty and incestuous, but we still demand=20
>rigorous thought and documentable proof.
And we're going to look at them funny if they claim to be from Newfoundland, or
are big fans of Marvel Comics' "Gambit"....
R H "we've been burned before" Draney
Lee Ayrton
Whee do you stand on the imprisonment of betas?
Don Freeman
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2008, R H Draney wrote:
>
>> Lee Ayrton filted:
>>>
>>> After all, you don't want your users to come back to you and cry that
>>> we=20
>>> beat them bloody for insisting that it is Absolute Truth that posh
>>> stands=
>>> =20
>>> for "port out, starboard home", or that cement mixers Do Too carry
>>> nine=20
>>> yards. We may be diminished, crusty and incestuous, but we still
>>> demand=20
>>> rigorous thought and documentable proof.
>>
>> And we're going to look at them funny if they claim to be from
>> Newfoundland, or
>> are big fans of Marvel Comics' "Gambit"....
>>
>> R H "we've been burned before" Draney
>
> Whee do you stand on the imprisonment of betas?
>
I'm voting for lethal injection.
Warren Oates
Lee Ayrton <lay...@panix.com> wrote:
> After all, you don't want your users to come back to you and cry that we
> beat them bloody for insisting that it is Absolute Truth that posh stands
> for "port out, starboard home", or that cement mixers Do Too carry nine
> yards. We may be diminished, crusty and incestuous, but we still demand
> rigorous thought and documentable proof.
>
That's a ship high in transit, full of prisoners being sent to Australia
for uncommon carnal knowledge.
Warren gxddbov Oates.
Lee Ayrton
> In article <Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@panix3.panix.com>,
> Lee Ayrton <lay...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> After all, you don't want your users to come back to you and cry that we
>> beat them bloody for insisting that it is Absolute Truth that posh stands
>> for "port out, starboard home", or that cement mixers Do Too carry nine
>> yards. We may be diminished, crusty and incestuous, but we still demand
>> rigorous thought and documentable proof.
>>
>
> That's a ship high in transit,
Or, rather, Special High-Intensity Training. And they're going to get
more of it than they can stand.
> full of prisoners being sent to Australia
> for uncommon carnal knowledge.
But... But... They were fornicating under command of the king!
Lee Ayrton
> Lee Ayrton wrote:
>> On Mon, 7 Sep 2008, R H Draney wrote:
>>> Lee Ayrton filted:
>>>>
>>>> After all, you don't want your users to come back to you and cry that
>>>> we beat them bloody for insisting that it is Absolute Truth that posh
>>>> stands for "port out, starboard home", or that cement mixers Do Too
>>>> carry nine yards. We may be diminished, crusty and incestuous, but
>>>> we still demand rigorous thought and documentable proof.
>>>
>>> And we're going to look at them funny if they claim to be from
>>> Newfoundland, or are big fans of Marvel Comics' "Gambit"....
>>>
>>> R H "we've been burned before" Draney
>>
>> Whee do you stand on the imprisonment of betas?
>
> I'm voting for lethal injection.
Aw, come on. The laser scanner at the checkout was always more lethal to
the fishes than the color injections were.
Lee "Do colored glass fish flow with age?" Ayrton
Warren Oates
Lee Ayrton <lay...@panix.com> wrote:
> But... But... They were fornicating under command of the king!
>
They're still a bunch of prisoners of Mother England.
--
W. Oates
Lee Ayrton
Oh, Mr. Game Warden? If I throw him back do I get to try for another one?
Lee "`bpme' doesn't spell anything" Ayrton
Don Freeman
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, Don Freeman wrote:
>
>> Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>> On Mon, 7 Sep 2008, R H Draney wrote:
>>>> Lee Ayrton filted:
>>>>>
>>>>> After all, you don't want your users to come back to you and cry
>>>>> that we beat them bloody for insisting that it is Absolute Truth
>>>>> that posh stands for "port out, starboard home", or that cement
>>>>> mixers Do Too carry nine yards. We may be diminished, crusty and
>>>>> incestuous, but we still demand rigorous thought and documentable
>>>>> proof.
>>>>
>>>> And we're going to look at them funny if they claim to be from
>>>> Newfoundland, or are big fans of Marvel Comics' "Gambit"....
>>>>
>>>> R H "we've been burned before" Draney
>>>
>>> Whee do you stand on the imprisonment of betas?
>>
>> I'm voting for lethal injection.
>
> Aw, come on. The laser scanner at the checkout was always more lethal
> to the fishes than the color injections were.
>
I still have that recipe for Mole People should we get any unexpected
guests.
Lon
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2008, R H Draney wrote:
>
>> Lee Ayrton filted:
>>>
>>> After all, you don't want your users to come back to you and cry that
>>> we=20
>>> beat them bloody for insisting that it is Absolute Truth that posh
>>> stands=
>>> =20
>>> for "port out, starboard home", or that cement mixers Do Too carry
>>> nine=20
>>> yards. We may be diminished, crusty and incestuous, but we still
>>> demand=20
>>> rigorous thought and documentable proof.
>>
>> And we're going to look at them funny if they claim to be from
>> Newfoundland, or
>> are big fans of Marvel Comics' "Gambit"....
>>
>> R H "we've been burned before" Draney
>
> Whee do you stand on the imprisonment of betas?
One should at least be charitable enough to put them in transparent
prisons.
Keith F. Lynch
> ... for uncommon carnal knowledge.
"Unlawful."
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Ulo Melton
>On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, Warren Oates wrote:
>
>> In article <Pine.NEB.4.64.08...@panix1.panix.com>,
>> Lee Ayrton <lay...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But... But... They were fornicating under command of the king!
>>
>> They're still a bunch of prisoners of Mother England.
>
>Oh, Mr. Game Warden? If I throw him back do I get to try for another one?
>
>Lee "`bpme' doesn't spell anything" Ayrton
I don't think you really caught anything, pommy.
--
Ulo Melton
http://www.sewergator.com - Your Pipeline To Adventure
"Show me a man who is not afraid of being eaten by an alligator
in a sewer, and I'll show you a fool." -Roger Ebert
R H Draney
Unfortunately, all my transparent containers are full of bonsai kittens....
R H "wondering if there's a way to work farting on cakes in here" Draney
David DeLaney
>On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, Don Freeman wrote:
>> Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>> Whee do you stand on the imprisonment of betas?
>>
>> I'm voting for lethal injection.
>
>Aw, come on. The laser scanner at the checkout was always more lethal to
>the fishes than the color injections were.
>
>Lee "Do colored glass fish flow with age?" Ayrton
I don't know. My colored glass whale broke over a decade ago.
Dave "it has not yet, however, flowed over the edge of the sink near which it
has been sitting that whole time, so I guess that's a data point" DeLaney
Lee Ayrton
> Warren Oates <warren...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ... for uncommon carnal knowledge.
>
> "Unlawful."
Yeah, but I found his variant more entertaining to imagine.
Lon
I could probably do it, but I'm late for the barbecue at the Church of
Euthanasia where they allegedly have a special feast tonight.
Lon
> Warren Oates <warren...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ... for uncommon carnal knowledge.
>
> "Unlawful."
Maybe he doesnt get around much?
Jesse F. Hughes
> In sometimes a perpetuating manner as more and more "service" providers
> simply stop carrying usenet.
>
Well, of course they're dropping Usenet! It's a pedophile tool.
You're against pedophiles, aren't you?
--
Jesse F. Hughes
Baba: Spell checkers are bad.
Quincy (age 7): C-H-E-K-E-R-S A-R-E B-A-D.
Ralph Jones
<je...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:
>Lon <lon.s...@comcast.net> writes:
>
>> In sometimes a perpetuating manner as more and more "service" providers
>> simply stop carrying usenet.
>>
>Well, of course they're dropping Usenet! It's a pedophile tool.
>You're against pedophiles, aren't you?
Shut up and eat your lollipop.
rj
je...@phiwumbda.org
> Lon <lon.stow...@comcast.net> writes:
> > In sometimes a perpetuating manner as more and more "service" providers
> > simply stop carrying usenet.
>
> Well, of course they're dropping Usenet! It's a pedophile tool.
> You're against pedophiles, aren't you?
This was my last post before my ISP dropped the Usenet feed.
I guess my argument was a bit too persuasive. Stupid RCN.
Pardon the badly formatted Google post. I'll find a new service soon.
--
Jesse F. Hughes
Lon
Yeah, Comcrap just dropped usenet too.
Giganews seems reasonably straightforward to sign up for and cheap for
text use.