What are the best scuba cruises in Caribbean?
syt...@yahoo.com
I'm considering taking a liveaboard scuba cruise on one of the scuba
fleets like the Aggressor, Netkon, Peter Hughes or any other fleet
operating in the Caribbean. I don't want to be on a "cattle ship" and
am looking for a class operation which has good diving as well as
offering courses and other learning opportunities as well as having
good accomodations.
Any recommendations and comments will be appreciated.
Thanks,
Sy
--
Please post and reply to syt...@yahoo.com
Joe English
accommodations on any liveaboard are quite small - cattle boats - not
usually. I was on the Nekton 24 dicer I believe - some dive early at a
spot some leave a little later
Dan Bracuk
:I'm considering taking a liveaboard scuba cruise on one of the scuba
:fleets like the Aggressor, Netkon, Peter Hughes or any other fleet
:operating in the Caribbean. I don't want to be on a "cattle ship" and
:am looking for a class operation which has good diving as well as
:offering courses and other learning opportunities as well as having
:good accomodations.
Nekton, Peter Hughes, Aggressors and Explorers are all good fleets.
They all have nice boats and offer courses.
For learning opportunities, consider Nekton. They have nightly
presentations on turtles, corals, pretty fishies, etc.
Some of the reports on this page,
http://www.pathcom.com/~bracuk/Trips/, are for Caribbean liveaboards.
Dan Bracuk
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
BillD
30-32 depending on which boat. First dive-everyone at once then people
tend to space them out as the week goes on.
Dancer was about 20 and plusher, hot towels after the dives, cocoa
with Bailys after the night dives.
Depending on where you live and the destination, it can be a lot
cheaper leaving from FL. on Nekton.
Reef Fish
syt...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I'm considering taking a liveaboard scuba cruise on one of the scuba
> fleets like the Aggressor, Netkon, Peter Hughes or any other fleet
> operating in the Caribbean.
Of these fleets, Nekton is the new kid in the neighborhood and the
only one that calls its fleet "Diving cruises", rather than liveaboard.
Until Nekton added its new destination of Cayman Islands, I woudl
have said the Cayman Aggressor is by far the liveaboard of choice,
based on my annual dives on the Cayman Aggressor from 1990 to
2004, and the other Caribbean locations on both the Aggressor and
the Peter Hughes fleets.
The itinerary of the Nekton Cayman is very similar to that of the
Cayman Aggressor. Its introductory offer of $300 off (I couldn't
find the price for the week's charter) would have enticed me, had
I not have all the diving I wanted to do in the Cayman Islands.
-- Bob.
Dan Bracuk
resulting in:
:The itinerary of the Nekton Cayman is very similar to that of the
:Cayman Aggressor. Its introductory offer of $300 off (I couldn't
:find the price for the week's charter) would have enticed me, had
:I not have all the diving I wanted to do in the Cayman Islands.
When I was in Little Cayman last December, word on the boat was that
Nekton would not be able to put divers into the Marine Park because
there was a 20 diver per boat rule. Don't know if the word was true
or not, but that was the word.
Reef Fish
Dan Bracuk wrote:
> "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@Yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard
> resulting in:
> :The itinerary of the Nekton Cayman is very similar to that of the
> :Cayman Aggressor. Its introductory offer of $300 off (I couldn't
> :find the price for the week's charter) would have enticed me, had
> :I not have all the diving I wanted to do in the Cayman Islands.
>
> When I was in Little Cayman last December, word on the boat was that
> Nekton would not be able to put divers into the Marine Park because
> there was a 20 diver per boat rule. Don't know if the word was true
> or not, but that was the word.
>
Nekton,
because everything worth diving in GCM. LCM, and the Brac are in the
Marine Park, especially Little Cayman, where the majority of the dives
are -- on Bloody Bay Wall.
-- Bob.
Greg Mossman
news:1148313547....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> When I was in Little Cayman last December, word on the boat was that
>> Nekton would not be able to put divers into the Marine Park because
>> there was a 20 diver per boat rule. Don't know if the word was true
>> or not, but that was the word.
>>
> If that were/is true, then one may as well forget about the Cayman
> Nekton,
> because everything worth diving in GCM. LCM, and the Brac are in the
> Marine Park, especially Little Cayman, where the majority of the dives
> are -- on Bloody Bay Wall.
And then it obviously wouldn't make sense for the Rorqual to move to the
Caymans and compete with the Aggressor. But they are, so presumably they
can.
Here's the Marine Park Regulations, courtesy of the Cayman Islands Port
Authority. I see nothing about a 20 diver maximum:
(Besides, the Cayman Aggressor with 18 passengers makes more than 20 divers
if over two of the crew are in the water too)
Marine Parks Regulations
Replenishment Zone
No taking conch or lobster by any means.
Line fishing and anchoring are permitted.
Spear guns, pole spears, fish traps and nets are prohibited, except that fry
and sprat may be taken with a fry or cast net.
Marine Park Zone
No taking any marine life, alive or dead.
Line fishing from shore is permitted (no boats).
Line fishing at any beyond the drop off is permitted.
No anchoring - use of fixed moorings only.
Boats of sixty (60) feet or less may anchor in sand, so long as no grappling
hooks are used and neither the anchor, rope nor chain lies on coral.
Anchoring is permitted is designated Port anchorage areas.
Anchoring prohibitions may be suspended during emergencies by order of the
Port Director.
Commercial use of the Bloody Bay Marine Park in Little Cayman is limited to
operations which have been licensed by the Marine Conservation Board.
Environmental Zone
No taking any marine life, alive or dead, with no exceptions.
Public may access at speeds of five (5) knots or less, but there may be no
anchoring of any boat and no in-water activities.
http://www.caymanport.com/business_coastal.htm#MARINE%20CONSERVATION%20LAWS
Dan Bracuk
resulting in:
:Here's the Marine Park Regulations, courtesy of the Cayman Islands Port
:Authority. I see nothing about a 20 diver maximum:
:http://www.caymanport.com/business_coastal.htm#MARINE%20CONSERVATION%20LAWS
Maybe it's part of this:
http://www.divecayman.ky/sites/marineparks.asp
Bloody Bay, Little Cayman - Special restrictions have been placed on
the use of the Bloody Bay Marine Park, no commercial operations may
use the park without a licence from the Marine Conservation Board.
Or, maybe, as I first said, the word on the boat was not true, or was
then but not now.
Reef Fish
Dan Bracuk wrote:
> "Greg Mossman" <mos...@qnet.com> pounded away at his keyboard
> resulting in:
>
> :Here's the Marine Park Regulations, courtesy of the Cayman Islands Port
> :Authority. I see nothing about a 20 diver maximum:
Even if there was such a rule, the Cayman Aggressor NEVER violated it,
in my years of annual diving on that liveaboard. First of all, many of
the
charters are NOT filled to the capacity 18. In fact, the quad cabin
seldom
accommodates more than 2 passengers. And seldom are more than two
members in the water at the same time. Even then, the entire 18
passengers
would have be ALL in the water at the same time also.
In short, it's a non-event that never happened, to the best of my
observation
and statistical knowledge. :-)
>
> :http://www.caymanport.com/business_coastal.htm#MARINE%20CONSERVATION%20LAWS
>
> Maybe it's part of this:
> http://www.divecayman.ky/sites/marineparks.asp
> Bloody Bay, Little Cayman - Special restrictions have been placed on
> the use of the Bloody Bay Marine Park, no commercial operations may
> use the park without a licence from the Marine Conservation Board.
Have you ever wondered WHY all those years in which I dived the Cayman
Aggressor (which was the ONLY liveaboard to dive there except the
Little
Cayman DIver?) while the Peter Hughes Fleet was competing directly with
the Aggressor on all the other popular locations: Belize, Bay Islands,
and
Turks and Caicos? I did, and asked Wayne Hasson about it.
The answer was that the Board that approves NEW VESSELS of any
kind to operate commercially in the Cayman Islands was very protective
about letting "outsider" in.
Perhaps now the Board is relaxing the old rules of admission of
non-native owned vessels and perhaps even some Marine Park rules.
In any event, only time will tell whether Nekton is taking reservations
before the coast is clear, or they are using the "special" as a trial
balloon to find out how much they can charge for their week's charter
and STILL fill that floating hotel. :-)
> Or, maybe, as I first said, the word on the boat was not true, or was
> then but not now.
Why don't somebody give the Nekton headquarter a PHONE CALL
and report here the latest rumor according to Nekton?
The deadline of the $300 discount is May 31, which is barely over
a week from now.
-- Bob.
-hh
Dan Bracuk wrote:
> "Greg Mossman" <mos...@qnet.com> pounded away at his keyboard
> resulting in:
>
> :Here's the Marine Park Regulations, courtesy of the Cayman Islands Port
> :Authority. I see nothing about a 20 diver maximum:
>
> :http://www.caymanport.com/business_coastal.htm#MARINE%20CONSERVATION%20LAWS
I also didn't notice the "Max number of boats per day" rule either.
> Or, maybe, as I first said, the word on the boat was not true, or was
> then but not now.
No, what you heard was correct. And the reality here is that there's
little new "Rules" that pop up that attempt to restrict free trade to
favor the established locals. On Little Cayman, I'd expect to hear a
new rule very soon regarding what size boats are allowed on what dive
site moorings, under the supposed rationale that some are subject to
being pulled out if the ship's too heavy.
...of course, broken moorings weren't considered a problem when
National Geographic and Howard Hall was filming a movie there a decade
ago on a ~100ft expedition ship. Go figure.
-hh
-hh
>
> ...because everything worth diving in GCM. LCM, and the Brac are in the
> Marine Park, especially Little Cayman, where the majority of the dives
> are -- on Bloody Bay Wall.
Bloody Bay wall is overdived IMO. Except for a couple of
behavior-modified groupers, a few rays and turtles, much of the marine
life that used to be there ten years ago has long since left for
quieter reefs.
YMMV on if it has anything to do with all those day operations' Newton
diveboats that are rigged for carrying more than 20 divers into the
Marine Park <wink>....or if it was fished out by the local Rotary's
fishing tournament (its legal to troll right off the drop-off).
BTW, since your last trip to the Caymans, Bob, "Prince Frederic" was
found. A fascinating site. And I'd consider it to be unlikely that
you've ever been in the belly of Rock Monster, either, since I've never
seen the Aggressor in that neighborhood either.
But please do continue to advocate staying on the beaten path.
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
> Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > ...because everything worth diving in GCM. LCM, and the Brac are in the
> > Marine Park, especially Little Cayman, where the majority of the dives
> > are -- on Bloody Bay Wall.
>
> Bloody Bay wall is overdived IMO. Except for a couple of
> behavior-modified groupers, a few rays and turtles, much of the marine
> life that used to be there ten years ago has long since left for
> quieter reefs.
Ah, but those are only the tourist attractions, not that they aren't
fun
to be with. Have dived with ALL those known friendly groupers,
and two different manta rays, and the one-eyed dolphin that visited
the brac.
The BEST of the bloody bay wall, to me, are those vertical walls,
some of which recessed inside the vertical line, full of luxious corals
and good sites for shark and turtle watching.
Those SITES are seldom dived -- I could name 2 or 3 that was
visited by the Cayman Aggressor only once or twice in my 14
trips in 14 years. And then when the Aggressor is at those sites,
most of the divers are above the Cayman depth rule of 120' (or
110'), so very few of them ever saw the BEST parts of the Bloody
Wall Bay!
> BTW, since your last trip to the Caymans, Bob, "Prince Frederic" was
> found. A fascinating site. And I'd consider it to be unlikely that
> you've ever been in the belly of Rock Monster, either, since I've never
> seen the Aggressor in that neighborhood either.
True. The Aggressor has never been OFF the Bloody Bay Wall
and the Jackson Wall -- which comprise only a small part of Little
Cayman. If I wanted to sample some unusual sites, I wouldn't
be diving the Cayman Aggressor. But the sites the CA visits are
generally the best available to a commercial liveablard operation
there.
>
> But please do continue to advocate staying on the beaten path.
Sure, Hugh. The 20+ different islands (not counting the few in
the Society Island) in French Polynesia where I have dived within
the past few years are what you consider "the beaten path"?
If you want to dive a REAL beaten path, try diving Easter Island,
and then come back and tell us about the cattle boats there.
BTW, Cayman diving is very rigidly regulated as to how long a
boat can stay on the same mooring, and how many boats can be
in the same vacinity at one time.
-- Bob.
-hh
> -hh wrote:
> > Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > ...because everything worth diving in GCM. LCM, and the Brac are in the
> > > Marine Park, especially Little Cayman, where the majority of the dives
> > > are -- on Bloody Bay Wall.
> >
> > Bloody Bay wall is overdived IMO. Except for a couple of
> > behavior-modified groupers, a few rays and turtles, much of the marine
> > life that used to be there ten years ago has long since left for
> > quieter reefs.
>
But which you've endorsed (per above) as "everything worth diving".
Now you're trying to distance yourself from them?
> Have dived with ALL those known friendly groupers...
You're free to call modified behavior "friendly", but it is still
behavior modification.
> The BEST of the bloody bay wall, to me, are those vertical walls,
> some of which recessed inside the vertical line, full of luxious corals
> and good sites for shark and turtle watching.
"To you", and because you go on to explain that you've only done these
sites very rarely, its likely just their novelty that makes them
appealing ... to you.
> Those SITES are seldom dived -- I could name 2 or 3 that was
> visited by the Cayman Aggressor only once or twice in my 14
> trips in 14 years.
Bzzt. They're only "seldom dived" by the Aggressor.
The Aggressor has a pretty rigid mooring schedule: Randy's Gazebo is
usually the first stop on Little Cayman, etc.
The reality is that these vertical walls are very routinely featured on
the dayboat trips. Next time you're on the CA IV, just watch where
they go.
This means that since you consider the vertical sites to be a "treat",
you simply just need to get off the rut you're in on the Aggressor and
get onto any of the dayboats. You'll be able to do the verticals 2-3-4
times per week, depending on which operation and weather permitting.
Come join me this fall and we'll go dive them until you're as sick of
their big, flat, boring topology as I am...I even promise to not
accidentally push you off the back of the boat while we're crossing the
Bight.
> > BTW, since your last trip to the Caymans, Bob, "Prince Frederic" was
> > found. A fascinating site. And I'd consider it to be unlikely that
> > you've ever been in the belly of Rock Monster, either, since I've never
> > seen the Aggressor in that neighborhood either.
>
> True. The Aggressor has never been OFF the Bloody Bay Wall
> and the Jackson Wall -- which comprise only a small part of Little
> Cayman. If I wanted to sample some unusual sites, I wouldn't
> be diving the Cayman Aggressor.
>
> But the sites the CA visits are generally the best available
> to a commercial liveablard operation there.
And yet you're endorsing (per above) only the Bloody Bay area as the
"everything worth diving" having never looked elsewhere.
And yet you complain that they don't usually go to the vertical sites
you claim to prefer.
...while continuing to try to deny that your Cayman Aggressor diving is
in a rut .
> > But please do continue to advocate staying on the beaten path.
>
> Sure, Hugh. ...French Polynesia...
You know that I meant your "beaten path" in the Caymans, where you've
claimed that "everything worth diving" is in Bloody Bay, despite your
own admission that you've never tried anywhere else.
Based on your own admission of 14 trips that have been mostly limited
to the Bloody Bay area, how many *different* Cayman Sister Island dive
sites have you actually dived on? My educated guess would be that
you've dived: Magic Roundabout (aka Nancy's), Meadows, Eagle Ray, JBW,
Cumber's, and Bus Stop in Jackson's, plus Mixing Bowl (aka 3 Fathoms),
Marilyn's, Donna's, Randy's, Ringer's, GW E&W, and Joy's Joy in Bloody
Bay, plus hopefully Soto Trader on the South side. That's a mere 16
sites of the 45+ moorings that Little Cayman has to offer, even though
I'm giving you credit for 4 more than the dozen sites that the
Aggressor's website lists for Little Cayman:
http://www.aggressor.com/_images/divemaps/cayman.gif
Either way, you've missed well over 50% of Little Cayman. And on
Cayman Brac, there's officially another 53+ sites (and unofficially
over 90), of which you've done the 356 wreck and probably nothing else
(a whopping 2%). Between these two, you've missed probably 80% of the
known dive sites when making your judgement of "everything worth
diving".
FYI, the sites I've referred to have moorings that the CA IV would be
permitted to use, so Wayne Hasson doesn't have that excuse. And YMMV
on how much Wayne's personal opinions on "dive site quality" are
probably influenced by pragmatic issues the financial aspect of burning
the fuel to go further, as well as pleasing the customer base who's
only interested in the "famous stuff" because of brainwashing from
literally decades of product hype. It is irritating to have to dive
there on a day with crappy conditions (20ft viz) just because some wonk
is demanding that he "HAS TO" dive the famous site.
> BTW, Cayman diving is very rigidly regulated as to how long a
> boat can stay on the same mooring, and how many boats can be
> in the same vacinity at one time.
But simply not at all documented within the rules that Greg provided,
nor necessarily enforced. Just like how there's divers who venture
below the 130fsw limit, the local existing dive operations are not
necessarily all living 100% within the rules that they're trying to get
strictly enforced on the new competition from Nekton.
For example, the local Newton 42 diveboats have 60 tank racks, and the
Newton 46 has 72 tank racks (and no one has done 3-tank trips for a
decade), which means that these boats are rigged for 30-36 divers. And
yet, there is "outrage" at the Nekton potentially bringing in "more
than 20", despite the fact that after the first dive of the day (before
the dayboats arrive), their respective surface intervals will stagger
to reduce their number of divers in the water at one time.
Gosh - - why would these day operators buy diveboats that are clearly
significantly larger than their allowed capacity? Does bigger somehow
make them cheaper? Or less costly per mile to operate? :-)
Besides,
-hh
Reef Fish
hh, that's what you get for TEMPERING with the automatic attribution
to come up with your WRONG attribution. The post in question was
posted by:
"Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grou...@Yahoo.com>
and everyone here already know that I am Dr. Ling, so there is no
need for you to keep on posting that "Bob Ling" bit as you had been
doing to try to tarnish my professional name. Netiquette alone
would dictate that you either use my signed name "Bob", or
Reef Fish Bob, to distinguish it from other Bobs, or simply Reef
Fish, which is unique in all USENET postings since 1981.
If you want to find out about professorional reputation, go to
sci.stat.math where I am, after one year, the TOP (most frequent)
POSTER, by Google count, and many discussants there had
arisen voluntarily to defend me against flamers.
If you want to find out some about me in my profession, just go to
Google WEB, and put, in quote, the search for "Ling RF",
or my full name that appeared in professional journals.
> > -hh wrote:
> > > Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ...because everything worth diving in GCM. LCM, and the Brac are in the
> > > > Marine Park, especially Little Cayman, where the majority of the dives
> > > > are -- on Bloody Bay Wall.
> > >
> > > Bloody Bay wall is overdived IMO. Except for a couple of
> > > behavior-modified groupers, a few rays and turtles, much of the marine
> > > life that used to be there ten years ago has long since left for
> > > quieter reefs.
> >
> > Ah, but those are only the tourist attractions...
>
> But which you've endorsed (per above) as "everything worth diving".
> Now you're trying to distance yourself from them?
Everyone except a pedantic, arguing, army peon, would bring out
such rhetoric for the sake of YOUR arguing, on a thread which
had gone very well, without you, about liveaboards and Cayman
diving.
Your arguing substance and style are DEJA VU, all over again.
I've learned to just ignore your NOISE when it reached that point,
and you have gone beyond it already.
For someone who spend half his diving life in the Brac because
his wife does NOT dive, Hugh is suddenly coming alive telling me,
who easily had done a couple hundred MORE dives in Little
Cayman than he had done in his life time, how much he knew from
copying from some Little Cayman dive books.
You missed one ot the better books, the one written by Schlomo Cohen.
-- Bob.
Lee Bell
>> Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> and everyone here already know that I am Dr. Ling, so there is no
> need for you to keep on posting that "Bob Ling" bit as you had been
> doing to try to tarnish my professional name.
Professional name? Are you teaching again or are you referring to your
"retired" profession? Nobody can tarnish your professional name without
your help. If you'd just quit helping, your professional name would be
safe.
I might be wrong, but hh's post above looks a lot like an automatic one,
perhaps something his mail client picked up from recent posts? Don't I
recall seeing something about you being unjustly attacked by another gang of
conspirators, travel agents or something? Damn, you sure do attract
attention from conspirators. I can't, for the life of me, figure out why
you attract so many malicious gangs.
Lee
-hh
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nass...@Yahoo.com
>
> >> Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > and everyone here already know that I am Dr. Ling, so there is no
> > need for you to keep on posting that "Bob Ling" bit as you had been
> > doing to try to tarnish my professional name.
>
> Professional name? Are you teaching again or are you referring to your
> "retired" profession? Nobody can tarnish your professional name without
> your help. If you'd just quit helping, your professional name would
> be safe.
Bob's simply yelling at me because I pointed out how he was
self-contradictory.
The basic observation and message was that Bob has never dived the
Little Cayman & Cayman Brac dive sites that he's compared to the ones
that he has dived in Bloody Bay. As such, his comparison is baseless
heresay...
...which certainly doesn't help his credibility, be it a "professional"
one or otherwise.
Bob was afforded by me the opportunity to rationally explain himself,
but he chose to go the unethical and irrational "Shoot the Messenger"
route instead.
...which also doesn't help his credibility, be it a "professional" one
or otherwise.
AFAIC, Bob's acting like a "Brainwashed" Novice who swallowed the
marketing hype that the only decent place to go is Bloody Bay, hook
line and sinker. Seen it many times before.
The shame of it is that Bob is squandering the opportunity to have a
week of diving in familiar yet new sites with someone who knows the
local waters and dive ops, which gives both freedom and flexibility
immediately. Personally, I don't think Bob's ever done a real
Southside (Windward) Wall in the Cayman Sisters to really know what
he's missing, for based on his claims of enjoying deep walls, I'd
expect he'd rave about them.
And I did promise to not >accidentally< push him off the back of the
diveboat when crossing the Bight. What more could he ask for? ;-)
-hh
Dan Bracuk
resulting in:
:The Aggressor has a pretty rigid mooring schedule: Randy's Gazebo is
:usually the first stop on Little Cayman, etc.
When I was on the Cayman Aggressor, we didn't go to the sister islands
at all. The Captain reacted to the weather.
On my trips to Brac and Little Cayman, I never saw the Aggressor.
Little Cayman Diver, yes, Aggressor, no.
Reef Fish
Lee Bell wrote:
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nass...@Yahoo.com
>
> >> Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > and everyone here already know that I am Dr. Ling, so there is no
> > need for you to keep on posting that "Bob Ling" bit as you had been
> > doing to try to tarnish my professional name.
>
> Professional name?
As Hugh found a student newspaper article about me, 10 years
after its appearance when he thought that would tarnish my
profession.
Why on earth would a 10 year old newspaper article that had
NOTHING to do with any of my scuba discussions in rec.scuba.*
be brought up by Hugh?
As it turned out, he shot his own foot. Check the archives --
but you don't know how. Too bad, Lee.
Then Hugh did one better, in rec.travel.air, when his INFO about
flying on CO were all wrong, and he bought out something I posted
about having bought a mercedes (in 1981) for the purpose of tax
write-off. What made Hugh go into such lengths to try to flame
me? As it turned out, he was wrong AGAIN. My tax write-off
of $50+ was 100% legit (passed both IRS and State audits) as
business expense (of my OWN money) when I was on Sabbatical
Leave.
> Are you teaching again or are you referring to your
> "retired" profession?
Does it make any difference? My profession is always my profession,
whether I am retired or not (which is merely a employment
classification).
That shows the shallowness of understanding anything, Lee. I am
still teaching, without pay, in sci.stat.math, and most of the students
there are statistical professionals. Some of them are as bad as you
are in your lack of training and knowledge about scuba, as they
lack the training in statistics.
> Nobody can tarnish your professional name without your help.
Why dont you try to tell that to the lawyers and judges about
LIBEL and SLANDER.
> If you'd just quit helping, your professional name would be safe.
My professional name is in excellent standing in my profession.
It is also in excellent standing in the sci.stat.math group inspite of
occasional snipers now (and a small gang of them last year).
>
> I might be wrong,
You have been wrong on several items above already. Why
should it be any different now on what you say below? You are
one of the few who are CONSISTENTLY wrong.
> but hh's post above looks a lot like an automatic one,
hh's automatic attempt at tarnishing my professional name.
> perhaps something his mail client picked up from recent posts?
Why don't you find out yourself to see that was impossible.
> Don't I
> recall seeing something about you being unjustly attacked by another gang of
> conspirators, travel agents or something?
So you did. And my posting account was justly restored in less than
10 days, even though Google had over 10,000 abuse reports (real or
false) every day, to investigate.
> Damn, you sure do attract
> attention from conspirators. I can't, for the life of me, figure out why
> you attract so many malicious gangs.
Of all people, you should know. The gang and lynch mob mentality.
It's always easy to attack someone, especially when they are WRONG,
to have the backup of other of his own mentality.
That happens in every group. I was attacked by a group of bridge
players (mostly Brits) in the rec.games.bridge (I even have a list
of names for "the VIllage Idiots" for them, as I have a list for the
Dysfunctional Gang in which Lee Bell and Hugh are members, in
rec.scuba) -- they attacked me for thinking I didn't know math,
didn't know statistics, and didn't know bridge -- until they realize
that I knew much more in everyone of those areas than they did.
THEN they quieted down, just as the sci.stat.* (three groups)
of former flamers quieted down, and just as rec.travel.air flamers
quited down (and gave Hugh no help that he had to cry for help
in rec.scuba! FUNNY), and just as the rec.travel.cruises
critics have NOW finally quieted down when they see how they
been wrong.
The only seemingly unrepentent chicken-shit GANG seems to be
the dying few in rec.scuba -- and Lee Bell and the Permanent
Grudge Holder Hugh Huntzinger are still futilely trying to find
dirt of fault when there they kept FAILING to do so.
Lee, I haven't heard you saying "Ask him is he knows what EPIRB
is" after you shot your own foot THREE TIMES while you had me
in your killfile.
That's how stupid you are, Lee.
Ganging up with Hugh, or several members of the Dysfunctional
Gang in rec.scuba is not going to enhance your credibility nor
good standing among other readers who are not as easily fooled
as YOU seem to think.
Now crawl back into the hole you belong -- your "blocked sender's
list" which you seem to brag about as if it were your accomplishement
until you realize how STOOOPID you were.
Adios. I have other newsgroups and much more interesting people
and subjects to tend to.
-- Bob.
> Lee
Alan Street
Reef Fish <Large_Nass...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
€ of former flamers quieted down, and just as rec.travel.air flamers
€ quited down (and gave Hugh no help that he had to cry for help
€ in rec.scuba! FUNNY)
I can't speak for the other groups, but the only reason rec.travel.air
has "quieted down" about you is that you haven't been there for quite a
while. You're still just as dispised and disrespected as ever in
rec.travel.air as you are in rec.scuba.*
€ Now crawl back into the hole you belong -- your "blocked sender's
€ list" which you seem to brag about as if it were your accomplishement
€ until you realize how STOOOPID you were.
€
€ Adios. I have other newsgroups and much more interesting people
€ and subjects to tend to.
€
Only in your dreams, Feesh. Only in your dreams.
-hh
> "-hh" <recscub...@huntzinger.com> pounded away at his keyboard
> resulting in:
> :The Aggressor has a pretty rigid mooring schedule: Randy's Gazebo is
> :usually the first stop on Little Cayman, etc.
>
> When I was on the Cayman Aggressor, we didn't go to the sister islands
> at all. The Captain reacted to the weather.
True enough. I was generalizing to when the CAIV is able to
successfully make the crossing from Grand Cayman to the Sister Islands,
and ignoring those weeks where it does not do so due to weather. These
'no crossing' trips tend to happen more frequently in the winter
months...my SWAG would be that this happens on average at least once
per month at that time of year.
> On my trips to Brac and Little Cayman, I never saw the Aggressor.
> Little Cayman Diver, yes, Aggressor, no.
The now-defunct Little Cayman Diver was based out of Cayman Brac, which
helps explain those sightings. With most visitors on the same weekend
arrive/depart schedule as the liveaboard, it had to similarly be around
at the beginning & end of each week.
For the Aggressor, if your LC trips were "winter season" when it is
less likely for them to be able to make the crossing, this alone could
explain it.
For the Brac, the Aggressor never came over until the 356 was sunk
(Sept 1996). Since the 356 is the only dive they generally do, their
general schedule is to come in the night do it first thing in the
morning, and be long gone by lunch. As such, this visit's timing and
briefness makes it fairly easy to miss noticing from the Brac.
-hh
Reef Fish
Alan Street wrote:
> In article <1148440937.0...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> Reef Fish <Large_Nass...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> € of former flamers quieted down, and just as rec.travel.air flamers
> € quited down (and gave Hugh no help that he had to cry for help
> € in rec.scuba! FUNNY)
>
> I can't speak for the other groups, but the only reason rec.travel.air
> has "quieted down" about you is that you haven't been there for quite a
> while. You're still just as dispised and disrespected as ever in
> rec.travel.air as you are in rec.scuba.*
That's interesting that Alan Street KNOWS that I am "dispised
and disrespected as ever in rec.travel.air" when NO ONE disputed
my post, except Hugh; and even after Hugh looked for help by
cross-posting it (for no reason whatsoever) to rec.scuba, the ONLY
response was from some one who gave evidence that was
directly CONTRARY to Hugh's claim, as I did.
Not even Alan Street (who usually stuck his nose in that group)
spoke up -- for fear that he would have appear as ridiculous as
Hugh did.
You're a bit too late, Alan. You're here only to be counted as a
member of the Dysfunctional Gang.
-- Bob.
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
> Dan Bracuk wrote:
> > "-hh" <recscub...@huntzinger.com> pounded away at his keyboard
> > resulting in:
> > :The Aggressor has a pretty rigid mooring schedule: Randy's Gazebo is
> > :usually the first stop on Little Cayman, etc.
> >
> > When I was on the Cayman Aggressor, we didn't go to the sister islands
> > at all. The Captain reacted to the weather.
Now hh dashes in with his FACTUAL ERRORS.
Afterall, what do you expect of someone who has NEVER been on
the Aggressor, but speak as if he knew what goes on.
> These 'no crossing' trips tend to happen more frequently in the winter
> months...my SWAG would be that this happens on average at least once
> per month at that time of year.
You're just a WA, making your WAG.
It's exactly the opposite. In the winter months, it crosses to LCM
AT MOST once a month -- and the total is LESS than that.
Perhaps one or two crossings during the period of SEVERAL
months, the December - March season. I have been told by
several Cayman Aggressor captains that it's the rule rather than
the exception of "no crossing" because of the "rough crossing" in
those months.
> For the Aggressor, if your LC trips were "winter season" when it is
> less likely for them to be able to make the crossing, this alone could
> explain it.
That alone EXPLAINS it. My first CA III trip was in Dec 1990. That
was the ONLY time the liveaboard was confined to Grand Cayman and
that's also when I first learned about the "no crossing" season, from
Wayne Hasson himself, who was one of the captains on that charter.
Thus, for my next 13 trips on the Cayman Aggressor, it went to
Little Cayman EVERY TIME, because I avoided the winter months.
>
> For the Brac, the Aggressor never came over until the 356 was sunk
> (Sept 1996).
That's because the Russian Wreck was the only attraction diving
in the Brac.
> Since the 356 is the only dive they generally do, their
> general schedule is to come in the night do it first thing in the
> morning, and be long gone by lunch.
Wrong AGAIN! The Aggressor ALWAYS moored at Little Cayman
the night before, crosses over early in the morning, and return after
the second dive, in order to COMPLY with the mooring rules. I have
been on those schedules EVERY year, from 1996 through 2004.
The wreck was so broken up by hurricanes that by 2000, it was
hardly worth diving, except for one large Scorpionfish that stays
at the stern of the ship and didn't mind being picked up for on-the-
hand portraits. During the latter years, I usually dived the wall,
less than 50 years from the bow of the ship.
> As such, this visit's timing and
> briefness makes it fairly easy to miss noticing from the Brac.
It the Aggressor had moored at the wreck mooring at the Brac
the night before, it would have violated the mooring restrictions!
>
> -hh
hh, the only thing worse than NO information is WRONG information.
-- Bob.
-hh
>
> -hh wrote:
> >
> > For the Brac, the Aggressor never came over until the 356 was sunk
> > (Sept 1996).
>
> That's because the Russian Wreck was the only attraction diving
> in the Brac.
Get real, Bob: Wayne had no affiliations with the Brac until he helped
get the 356 to sink there as an attraction. As such, he's obligated to
try to promote that one site.
It has never in Wayne's best interests to promote the Brac, since it
was the home port of his competitor Winston, and it would also always
incur Wayne higher operating costs: more fuel consumption since the
Brac is even further from Georgetown on Grand Cayman. As such, it has
always been in Wayne's business interests to "badmouth" Brac diving
(besides the 356).
You're merely being highly parochial in parroting his interests, and
had you ever made any effort to even try to be honest and objective by
checking things out on your own, your claims herein wouldn't have been
so utterly baseless.
>> Since the 356 is the only dive they generally do, their
>> general schedule is to come in the night do it first thing in the
>> morning, and be long gone by lunch.
>
> The Aggressor ALWAYS moored at Little Cayman
> the night before, crosses over early in the morning...
If they left at 4AM, a reasonable person would definitely still call
that "night".
FWIW, there's even some people that consider any time prior to their
wake-up alarm to be "night", even if its technically after local
sunrise.
> ... and return after the second dive...
Which is before lunch, as I said. Gosh, imagine that.
FWIW, the basis of my comment of "and be long gone by lunch" is that
I've seen the Aggressor well on its way to heading back to LC at
9:15AM. Just do the math.
> It the Aggressor had moored at the wreck mooring at the Brac
> the night before, it would have violated the mooring restrictions!
Cite, please.
Afterall, it would be quite odd if overnighting inside a highly
controlled Marine Park is permitted, but overnighting ouside of any of
the Marine Parks is not allowed.
Perhaps you're imbibing too much Kool-Aid on the Cayman Aggressor?
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
> Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Large _Nassau_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > -hh wrote:
> > >
> > > For the Brac, the Aggressor never came over until the 356 was sunk
> > > (Sept 1996).
> >
> > That's because the Russian Wreck was the only attraction diving
> > in the Brac.
>
>
> Get real, Bob: Wayne had no affiliations with the Brac until he helped
> get the 356 to sink there as an attraction. As such, he's obligated to
> try to promote that one site.
>
> It has never in Wayne's best interests to promote the Brac, since it
> was the home port of his competitor Winston,
Get real is right!
His "competitor" Winston? Since when was WInston ever a
competitor to the Aggressor. "Top Ten Reasons for NOT
diving the LCD II" is still in the archives, and Winston has been
out of business.
If there was anything worth diving in the Brac, the Aggressor could
easily have done ONE dive at the wreck and do 2 ohter sites
before returning to Little Cayman.
Hugh, just admit that you were talking through your hat because you
had NO EXPERIENCE on the Cayman Aggressor, NO knowledge
about the liveaboard and its schedules, and all you had was some
some cheap book on Little Cayman and your Wild Ass Guesses
(WAG) on the Aggressor Brac itinerary.
>
> >> Since the 356 is the only dive they generally do, their
> >> general schedule is to come in the night do it first thing in the
> >> morning, and be long gone by lunch.
> >
> > The Aggressor ALWAYS moored at Little Cayman
> > the night before, crosses over early in the morning...
>
> If they left at 4AM, a reasonable person would definitely still call
> that "night".
Pointless. The Aggressor does NOT leave the LCM until breakfast
time on the day of the Brac dive, so that the mooring time on the
Russian wreck is within the 4-hour restriction.
One more WAG by Hugh that was WRONG.
> FWIW, the basis of my comment of "and be long gone by lunch" is that
> I've seen the Aggressor well on its way to heading back to LC at
> 9:15AM. Just do the math.
If it gets to the wreck at 8 am and decided to do only ONE dive,
because
of the badly broken shape of the wreck, the 9:15 am return would
have been right on schedule on a one-tank dive there.
Keep speculating, Hugh. You have NO experience. NO fact.
All Hot Air.
-- Bob.
-hh
> -hh wrote:
> >
> > It has never in Wayne's best interests to promote the Brac, since it
>
> His "competitor" Winston? Since when was WInston ever a
> competitor to the Aggressor.
Back when he was still in business. Even *you* tried him.
> If there was anything worth diving in the Brac, the Aggressor could
> easily have done ONE dive at the wreck and do 2 ohter sites
> before returning to Little Cayman.
The Gospel as preached from the Saintly diveboat owner who would have
to have spent the money to do so on the additional fuel cost, which a
particular Loud_Mouthed_Grouper has proceeded to swallow "Hook, Line
and Stinker".
> Hugh, just admit that you were talking through your hat because you
> had NO EXPERIENCE on the Cayman Aggressor
When you cannot admit that you're talking out your ass because you
had ... and continue to have ... 'NO EXPERIENCE' on the dive sites
you're badmouthing?
Yes, you're being a hypocrite. Again. Despite ample opportunity
afforded for you to avoid being so. Again.
FWIW, I would be humored if you actually could provide any citation
where I've ever claimed that I've never been onboard the CAIV. Happy
Hunting!
> The Aggressor does NOT leave the LCM until breakfast
> time on the day of the Brac dive, so that the mooring time on the
> Russian wreck is within the 4-hour restriction.
>
and:
> > FWIW, the basis of my comment of "and be long gone by lunch" is that
> > I've seen the Aggressor well on its way to heading back to LC at
> > 9:15AM. Just do the math.
>
> If it gets to the wreck at 8 am and decided to do only ONE dive,
> because of the badly broken shape of the wreck, the 9:15 am
> return would have been right on schedule on a one-tank dive there.
But gosh, Bob: you just said that they do two dives, not one.
And don't think that I made my statement based on a "Sample Size of 1".
Furthermore, if they don't leave LC until *after* breakfast (as you
claim), for an 8am dive, since it takes an hour+ to make that transit
to windward, that would mean that breakfast would have had to have
finished by 7am. Figure a half hour to eat and a wake-up call at least
a half hour before that and your morning alarm was at 6am or earlier.
Gosh, how relaxing!
> Keep speculating, Hugh. You have NO experience. NO fact.
The list of the Cayman Brac dive sites that Bob's dived on besides the
356:
.
.
.
.
.
.
The list of the Little Cayman dive sites that Bob's dived on outside of
the Bloody Bay / Jackson's Marine Park:
.
.
.
.
.
.
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
YOur attribution screwed up AGAIN. It should be
> "Reef Fish" <Large _Nassau_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > -hh wrote:
> > >
> > > It has never in Wayne's best interests to promote the Brac, since it
> > > was the home port of his competitor Winston...
> >
> > His "competitor" Winston? Since when was WInston ever a
> > competitor to the Aggressor.
>
> Back when he was still in business. Even *you* tried him.
So? I tried the Peter Hughes Fleet at least 20 times, but once was
enough for WInston for me to conclude "Top Ten Reasons NOT to
dive the LCD II".
Even if Winston were a worthy competitor, such as the liveaboards
in Coco's Island, why should the Aggressor Fleet worry about the
competition?
Both Fleets are doing very well -- with Peter Hughes folding more of
his liveaboards than the Aggressor.
> > Hugh, just admit that you were talking through your hat because you
> > had NO EXPERIENCE on the Cayman Aggressor
-- Bob.
dazed and confuzzed
If it were so obvious, why do you have to keep telling us?
--
“TANSTAAFL”
____________________________________________________________________________
"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them;
The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3
-hh
> > >
> > > His "competitor" Winston? Since when was WInston ever a
> > > competitor to the Aggressor.
> >
> > Back when he was still in business. Even *you* tried him.
>
> Aggressor Fleet worry about the competition?
"If you ignore the competition, you risk losing to them."
> > > Hugh, just admit that you were talking through your hat because
> > > you had NO EXPERIENCE on the Cayman Aggressor
Cite Please (Second Request).
Note that ignoring this request again would be damaging to the
credibility of Robert F. Ling, PhD (formerly a Statistics professor at
Clemson University), as it shows that Dr. Ling is unwilling and/or
unable to provide a credible citation to back up his claim(s).
The list of the Cayman Brac dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
besides the 356:
.
.
.
.
The list of the Little Cayman dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
outside of the Bloody Bay / Jackson's Marine Park:
.
.
.
.
.
As long as these remain this empty, Bob Ling is affirming his
badmouthing of places that he's never dived, with all of its associated
reprocussions.
-hh
Reef Fish
That's because you can't expect the Dysfunctional to be INFORMED.
Go read the thread "Bob Banned" in rec.scuba to GET A CLUE.
-- Bob.
dazed and confuzzed
Do you mean "Bob's Ban"?
If so, you haven't shown much there either.
Danlw
"Reef Fish" <Large_Nass...@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1148440937.0...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
What a relief to find out you know more about every subject than everyone
else on the internet. Me thinks thou doest protest too much about, well,
just about everyone. Seems to me that many of those people have some valid
experience in the subject at hand. Me--I try to listen more and try to learn
something, even if I an expert on the subject. Try that, will cut down on
your posting time.
Have a nice day anyway. Dan
Lee Bell
> You are one of the few who are CONSISTENTLY wrong.
I called you an asshole. Got that one right didn't I?
Learn what an EPIRB is yet?
Reef Fish
Lee Bell wrote:
> "Reef Fish" wrote
>
> > You are one of the few who are CONSISTENTLY wrong.
>
> I called you an asshole. Got that one right didn't I?
So you're admitting that you LOST.
Lee> Lee's rule. He who calls names first has lost the debate . . .
Lee> even if he's right. < snip rest of Lee's drivel>
That one is just a bit TOO MUCH to pass up.
Lee had spent half of his rec.scuba life preaching his "rule",
usually when he LOST an argument and had nothing better
to counter. In the quotation above, he was preaching to
Greg Mossman, apparently after Greg had called someone
a moron, and hypocrite Lee Bell couldn't wait to stick his
nose in.
Yes, Lee Bell,
> > You are one of the few who are CONSISTENTLY wrong.
and you've lost AGAIN. Wassa matter, hypo boy? You used
to call me "an asshole's asshole" -- you mean you have
softened your hypocrisy? Tsk, tsk.
Go play in the sand box with you kind, hh and the Gorilla.
-- Bob.
-hh
> [snip]
>
> Note that ignoring this request again would be damaging to the
> credibility of Robert F. Ling, PhD (formerly a Statistics professor at
> Clemson University), as it shows that Dr. Ling is unwilling and/or
> unable to provide a credible citation to back up his claim(s).
"Bump"
> The list of the Cayman Brac dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
> besides the 356:
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
>
> The list of the Little Cayman dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
> outside of the Bloody Bay / Jackson's Marine Park:
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
As long as there's timestamps that show that Bob visited this thread,
yet cite requests are ignored and these lists remain this empty, Bob
Ling is damaging his own credibility and affirming his badmouthing of
places that he's never dived, with all of the associated reprocussions.
-hh
Lee Bell
>> > You are one of the few who are CONSISTENTLY wrong.
>>
>> I called you an asshole. Got that one right didn't I?
>
> So you're admitting that you LOST.
Only if I was the first to resort to name calling. I wasn't.
> Lee> Lee's rule. He who calls names first has lost the debate . . .
> Wassa matter, hypo boy? You used to call me "an asshole's asshole" --
> you mean you have
> softened . . .
i was right then too.
Lee
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > Note that ignoring this request again would be damaging to the
> > credibility of Robert F. Ling, PhD (formerly a Statistics professor at
Get real, hh! You were IGNORED the first time, for your pointless
drivel. So, you have to repeat the SAME drivel?
> "Bump"
Tell you what, after you repeat the same stupid post another half
dozen times or so, I 'll fill in the blanks for you.
Meanwhile why don't YOU start counting the TOTAL number of
times you have dived in Little Cayman, the different dive sites,
and the number times you have dived in each site, then we'll
talk more.
To help you out:
These are the Little Cayman dive sites and the number of dives Hugh
Huntzinger had dived up to now:
Dive Site Number of DIves
Randy's Gazebo
Nancy's Cup of Tea
Three Fathom Wall
Eagle Ray Roundup
Lea Lea's Lookout
Joy's Joy
etc.
> > The list of the Cayman Brac dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
> > besides the 356:
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> >
> >
> > The list of the Little Cayman dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
> > outside of the Bloody Bay / Jackson's Marine Park:
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
>
>
> As long as there's timestamps that show that Bob visited this thread,
> yet cite requests are ignored and these lists remain this empty,
I ignore pointless posts by the like of you ALL the time. YOu have
the audacity to think that just because YOU have requested it,
that anyone has to answer your drivel.
You are even a BIGGER FOOL than I had ever thought. Permanent
Grudge is one thing. But you don't have to be a Damned Fool
like yourself to hold a permanent grudge against me.
Get it?
>
Now apply your rule to MY condition that you'll fulfill your request --
that you fill out your LIFE TIME diving experience in Little Cayman,
as outlines above, listing ALL the sites and ALL the dives at each
site (by count).
Failing to do so, you can whine from now to your army bunk
freezes, and you are not going to get me to do anything simply
because YOU requested. ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!
-- Bob.
-hh
>
> Get real, hh! You were IGNORED the first time...
Yes, I know that you were *trying* to ignore me. But being of weak
will, you couldn't help yourself and here you are.
> Tell you what, after you repeat the same stupid post another half
> dozen times or so, I 'll fill in the blanks for you.
Sorry, but the list *is* already filled out, since that was its point.
> Meanwhile why don't YOU start counting the TOTAL number of
> times you have dived in Little Cayman, the different dive sites,
> and the number times you have dived in each site, then we'll
> talk more.
Didn't Bob also made a claim that he had "hundreds" of more dives just
in Little Cayman than I have dives lifetime worldwide? But gosh - -
Bob didn't make his usual inane $10,000 bet on that claim this time.
Golly gee, that's really odd. It seems that Bob's talk has become
phenominally cheap - - as cheap as his stretch polyester jumpsuits :-)
> These are the Little Cayman dive sites and the number of dives Hugh
> Huntzinger had dived up to now:
>
> Dive Site Number of DIves
> Randy's Gazebo
> Nancy's Cup of Tea
> Three Fathom Wall
> Eagle Ray Roundup
> Lea Lea's Lookout
> Joy's Joy
> etc.
I'm happy to provide you that data, Bob, but you will have to pay for
it:
my fee is CI$100 per dive site, and it is a package deal in that you
(Bob Ling) must pay that rate and buy all of the sites I've dived on
both Little Cayman as well as Cayman Brac:
I'm sure that Greg Mossman will agree to be the lawyer to hold the
funds (sufficient for full payment) in escrow for Bob's payment; Bob
will pay an additional 20% fee for Greg's services; Bob must send Greg
the down payment (I suggest US$10,000) to Greg to put in escrow prior
to Hugh being obligated to deliver any data; if Hugh fails to deliver,
Hugh owes Bob nothing and Bob gets Bob's deposit refunded minus Greg's
fee(s); Greg will be the sole arbiter for determining if Hugh's claims
are true and to resolve all other ambiguities or concerns regarding
loopholes or whatever else that needs to determined; Bob has until 1
June 06 to accept Hugh's terms and until 1 July 06 to have Bob's funds
in place with Greg.
Unlike Bob, I'm not cheap. :-)
> I ignore pointless posts by the like of you ALL the time.
Actions speak louder than words...and here you are ("Dance Puppet
Dance!")
> Now apply your rule to MY condition that you'll fulfill your request --
> that you fill out your LIFE TIME diving experience in Little Cayman,
> as outlines above, listing ALL the sites and ALL the dives at each
> site (by count).
As I said above, I am happy to so, under the contractural conditions
that I have specified. As such, I have been clearly responsive to your
request and the action is back in your court...its called "Pay to
Play", Bob.
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
You misattributed AGAIN. It's
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nass...@yahoo.com> wrote:
and now crossed posted to alt.usenet.kook, to rally some kook to
support hh's silly game. I eliminated the kooks and the rec.scubans.
Hugh first tried to flame me on knowledge about the Cayman Aggressor
and Little Cayman, when he was giving nothing but MISinformation,
all corrected by me.
Then he repeated taunted me with this:
> The list of the Little Cayman dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
> outside of the Bloody Bay / Jackson's Marine Park:
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
So, I offered for him to fill out HIS Little Cayman table before I
answer.
RF> Meanwhile why don't YOU start counting the TOTAL number of
RF> times you have dived in Little Cayman, the different dive sites,
RF> and the number times you have dived in each site, then we'll
RF> talk more.
RF> To help you out:
RF> These are the Little Cayman dive sites and the number of dives Hugh
RF> Huntzinger had dived up to now:
Dive Site Number of DIves
Randy's Gazebo
Nancy's Cup of Tea
Three Fathom Wall
Eagle Ray Roundup
Lea Lea's Lookout
Joy's Joy
etc.
>
>
> > These are the Little Cayman dive sites and the number of dives Hugh
> > Huntzinger had dived up to now:
> >
> > Dive Site Number of DIves
> > Randy's Gazebo
> > Nancy's Cup of Tea
> > Three Fathom Wall
> > Eagle Ray Roundup
> > Lea Lea's Lookout
> > Joy's Joy
> > etc.
Now Hugh pulled a fast retreat by offering a bet on a load dice,
completely unrelated to either of the above.
He wanted to count the Brac, which is where he spent his entire
diving live with a non-diving spouse when I had already said there
used to be ONE site worth diving in the Brac (the Russian wreck),
but no more.
>
> I'm happy to provide you that data, Bob, but you will have to pay for
> it:
Give up on your silly game, Hugh! Yous offered bet is about as
ridiculous if I offered you to change Brac to Cozumel, and ofter
the same terms and bet you offered.
You are soooooooooooo transparently STUPID.
Just change you bet to:
> my fee is CI$100 per dive, and it is a package deal in that you
> (Hugh Huntzinger) must pay that rate and buy all of the DIVES
> I've dived on both Little Cayman as well as Cozumel:
> Unlike Bob, I'm not cheap. :-)
Then take the bet!
Take another few hours to draw up other plans Hugh. I'll take the
same two minutes to offer you this one.
rec.scuba.locations used to be fun until hh and Lee and the other
Gang members come with no experience on dive locations.
I much rather club hh's head with the other Ad spamming Travel
agents because hh has already kissed the ass of the Chief
spammer who was stupid enough to show that he urged others
to file false abuse reports. That's Hugh new pal there now.
Hugh has also cross-posted his post to alt.usenet.kooks,
to solicite his pals that are kooks there, I suppose.
Hugh, the silly Permanent Grudge Holder of Midget Mentality.
-- Bob.
-hh
Bob was taken to task for badmouthing dive sites that he has never
dived on.
> Then he repeated taunted me with this:
>
> > The list of the Little Cayman dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
> > outside of the Bloody Bay / Jackson's Marine Park:
Don't forget:
"The list of the Cayman Brac dive sites that Bob Ling has dived on
besides the 356: ..."
These lists are empty (and will remain so) because Bob's never done any
of these dives. That was the point of making the list: to highlight
that Bob was hypocritically persisting in badmouthing these places that
he's never seen/dived.
> Now Hugh pulled a fast retreat by offering a bet...
Also wrong (again). This wasn't a bet: it was my selling price for
some information.
If you want the information, then pay up. If not, then don't.
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!
hh, having failed to bring out his pals in alt.usenet.kooks to help
him out, is trying to troll the rec.travel.cruise group to fall for his
silly game.
Any interested reader can read my follow-up in rec.travel.cruises.
"Army Intelligence" is an oxymoron.
Now you can clearly see why.
-- Bob.
Lee Bell
> -hh wrote:
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!
Misattribution?
> hh, having failed to bring out his pals in alt.usenet.kooks to help
> him out, is trying to troll the rec.travel.cruise group to fall for his
> silly game.
And all of this has exactly what to do with scuba locations? Weren't you
the one complaining about that recently?
Lee
Reef Fish
Lee Bell wrote:
> "Reef Fish" wrote
>
> > -hh wrote:
> > HAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!
>
> Misattribution?
>
> > hh, having failed to bring out his pals in alt.usenet.kooks to help
> > him out, is trying to troll the rec.travel.cruise group to fall for his
> > silly game.
>
> And all of this has exactly what to do with scuba locations?
Lee, didn't you realize that this thread came from rec.travel.CRUISES
on
"What are the best cruises in Caribbean" ?
On May 21, I responded,
RF> Until Nekton added its new destination of Cayman Islands, I woudl
RF> have said the Cayman Aggressor is by far the liveaboard of choice,
That's where the Aggressor came in.
Shortly thereafter, Hugh started making his noise, giving all kinds of
WRONG information about the Cayman Aggressor.
THe rest is history.
> Weren't you the one complaining about that recently?
>
> Lee
What is THAT?
The original poster posted in rec.travel.CRUISES ONLY, and then
cross-posted the same quesiton in rec.travel.cruises and rec.scuba
and rec.scuba.locations.
hh, not satisfied with his noise, cross-posted it to alt.usenet.kook.
Lee, you should keep your own nose clean, and not stick it everywhere,
especially not into the hole in hh, who has a batting average of
100% WRONG when he tried to pick on my posts.
-- Bob.
Reef Fish
found in rec.travel.cruises. He is standing very much alone out
there, acting like a fool, with his foolery clearly exposed.
What a "permanent grudge holder" LOSER that Hugh is.
-- Bob.
-hh
>
> What a "permanent grudge holder" LOSER that Hugh is.
Actions speak louder than words, and here is Bob, simply incapable of
not responding in some deluded fashion, proving himself to be worse.
Bob claims to be not flustered by a "loser", but actions speak louder
than words: Bob keeps lashing out because he believes that he is
losing to someone he claims is a loser.
As the saying goes: "Dance Puppet Dance". And a 500 line hero worship
thread must be just around the corner :-)
ObScuba, my offer to be Bob's guide to the best diving in the Sister
Islands that he's not yet done was actually sincere. His loss.
-hh
Reef Fish
Chronic poster of misattribution -hh wrote:
> >
> > What a "permanent grudge holder" LOSER that Hugh is.
Hugh is whining to his pals, after his whine in rec.travel.cruises
was swiftly silenced.
Poor Hugh. Can't get help from alt.usenet.kooks.
Can't get help from the group that had this posting address barred
for a week on their false abuse reports.
Can't get help even from THIS group on his failed schemes to
direct attention away from his inexperience and absence of
knowlsdge about the Cayman Aggressor and Little Cayman.
> As the saying goes: "Dance Puppet Dance". And a 500 line hero worship
> thread must be just around the corner :-)
Are you giving a preview of your scheme of bet with Lawyer Greg
drawing up the papers and the whole bit AGAIN?
-- Bob.
Lee Bell
> Lee, didn't you realize that this thread came from rec.travel.CRUISES
> on
Sure. Didn't you realize that it's in rec.scuba locations now?
> Lee, you should keep your own nose clean, and not stick it everywhere,
> especially not into the hole in hh, who has a batting average of
> 100% WRONG when he tried to pick on my posts.
Bob, you should consider why there seems to be gangs of people attacking you
everplace you go.
Lee
Lee Bell
> Oh, I forgot to mention that my follow-up to hh's post can be
> found in rec.travel.cruises. He is standing very much alone out
> there, acting like a fool, with his foolery clearly exposed.
You mean the forum where a gang of travel agents, a group not well known for
being unfair and unkind to potential world traveler customers, conspired to
get your e-mail address revoked? This is the forum where you think hh is
standing alone? How very amusing.
Lee
BillD
doing LC weather permitting.
On 22 May 2006 08:59:07 -0700, "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@Yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>Dan Bracuk wrote:
>> "Reef Fish" <Dr_Bo...@Yahoo.com> pounded away at his keyboard
>> resulting in:
>> :The itinerary of the Nekton Cayman is very similar to that of the
>> :Cayman Aggressor. Its introductory offer of $300 off (I couldn't
>> :find the price for the week's charter) would have enticed me, had
>> :I not have all the diving I wanted to do in the Cayman Islands.
>>
>> When I was in Little Cayman last December, word on the boat was that
>> Nekton would not be able to put divers into the Marine Park because
>> there was a 20 diver per boat rule. Don't know if the word was true
>> or not, but that was the word.
>>
>If that were/is true, then one may as well forget about the Cayman
>Nekton,
>because everything worth diving in GCM. LCM, and the Brac are in the
>Marine Park, especially Little Cayman, where the majority of the dives
>are -- on Bloody Bay Wall.
>
>-- Bob.
Reef Fish
That's EXACTLY right!
The attacked because I was waging a campaign against King Rat's ADs
in that group, 18,000+ of them over the years. "BUOYCOTT CRETINS
..." were heard lout and often for three days. :-)
During the week in which my posting id was barred PENDING
INVESTIGATION by Google, one of the conspirators Ray Goldenberg,
was dumb enough to post to tell everyone to 'keep hitting the 'REPORT
ABUSE' button', even before I started posting with my new account
there, on a tip probably from hh, that I had a new account.
That's FALSE ABUSE REPORT. King Rat shot his own foot on May 13.
Then I caught Ray's ass-kisser, and asked what he meant by telling
Ray, "I've done my part". He stalled for a couple of days, and
finally publicly shot his own foot to admit that he was a conspirator,
in indiscrimnant hitting of "REPORT ABUSE", merely on the frequency
of my posting -- which is NOT an abuse.
His post was like the bugglar proudly showing the video he took of
his own burglary. That's how DUMB those Travel agents are!
May 19.
DG> Oh, one final thought, Bob. You asked what I meant when
DG> I said "I have done my part".
DG> What I meant was that I was proud if any of the complaints
DG> that I sent to Google contributed to the loss of your precious
DG> large_nassau_grou...@yahoo.com account, and I am really
DG> annoyed that the complaints that I have filed with them
DG> against you since you showed your true colors by defying
DG> the ban and posting 54 more messages here, and a
DG> current total of 97 overall. Do you have a problem with that?
The 54 messages I posted under my Dr_Bob account was what
destroyed and completely obliviated their credibility.
In spite of a loss of 10 days of posting this month.
This month's top posters
254 large_nassau_grou...@yahoo.com
147 kjmul...@comcast.net
97 j.obo...@removefudged.sbcglobal.net
That was another 70 or 80 posts since DG (aka Dickhead Goldhaber)
shot his own foot and my account was restored on the same day of
his foot-shooting.
Even before I had reported Dickhead to Google, Google had already
decided to restore my posting account, on my counter-complaint of
the ring-leader's FALSE REPORTS! (The restoration was confirmed
over the weekend, and I resumed posting with this ID since May 22.
Now the Advertiser in that group are given Grades by me, for their
ads. Ray is holding a solid Grade of "F". There are now grades
ranging fro "A+" to "F-" for those who place ads there.
Now I have more credibility in that group than those two and their
supporting Old Ladies put tegether.
hh even tried kissing Ray Goldberger ass and tag behind Ray in
attacking me. TO NO AVAIL.
hh tried to solicit kooks from alt.usenet.kooks when he was
ridiculed by me for making a fool of himself there. TO NO AVAIL.
hh's post were getting shorter and shorter, and less and less
frequent. He was ALONE and had his ass kicked SOUNDLY,
and deservedly.
> How very amusing.
>
> Lee
Noe Schitt Sherlock!
That's just part of Hugh's history of stupid acts of his "permanent
grudge" declared aginst me, in 1996, and he had been making a
fool of himself ever since whenever he tried his deja vu antics.
-- Bob.
Lee Bell
>>> Oh, I forgot to mention that my follow-up to hh's post can be
>>> found in rec.travel.cruises. He is standing very much alone out
>>> there, acting like a fool, with his foolery clearly exposed.
>> You mean the forum where a gang of travel agents, a group not well known
>> for
>> being unfair and unkind to potential world traveler customers, conspired
>> to
>> get your e-mail address revoked? This is the forum where you think hh is
>> standing alone?
> That's EXACTLY right!
Everyone that thinks there's even a ghost of a chance that Bob was unfairly
attacked by a bunch of travel agents, feel free to express your opinion.
Reef Fish
Anyone who READ what you snipped would have known What an IDIOT
Lee Bell is for posting the above line.
That's EXACTLY right!
=============== what Lee snipped ===============
May 19.
> How very amusing.
> Lee
Noe Schitt Sherlock!
============== End of what Lee snipped
Even hh knew his ass was soundly kicked there. HE didn't dare
follow-up anymore on the Little Cayman subject.
"Scuba Dive SItes in Little Cayman"
in which Hugh was killed and buried in three swift strokes on May 26.
Someone mercifully took Hugh out of the picture by asking a question,
which I answered in that thread on May 27.
That thread ended in rec.travel.cruises on May 27 because my last
post is still standing in Google as the most recent post in it.
-hh is quietly starting into another thread in rec.travel.cruises on
May 28.
Meanwhile, Lee was seen kissing Hugh's ass in rec.scuba.location
THREE TIMES, all on May 27, with ZERO reason to support Hugh --
just kissing his ass and making unfounded snide remarks about me.
Lee, you're really MUCH worse than you used to be, even compared
to your ugly self last year when you had me killfiled and would pop
your head out only to ride behind someone tail, but managing only
to shoot your own foot.
-- Bob.
-hh
> Lee Bell wrote:
> >
> > Everyone that thinks there's even a ghost of a chance that Bob was unfairly
> > attacked by a bunch of travel agents, feel free to express your opinion.
As if anyone is surprised by yet another "Bob against the World" rant.
[deleted: another 70+ lines about a guy named Ray, which means ]
[that Bob can't even get his Hero Worship posts named properly. ]
> hh's post were getting shorter and shorter, and less and less
> frequent.
Its called Signal:Noise. Try it sometime.
Unfortunately, Bob's lack of real world/industry experience gets the
better of him here, for Quantity does not automatically equal Quality
in the real world. The concept that it does is merely an artifact of
that non-applied environment known as "Acedemia", where one also finds
frictionless planes, clean data sets, & spherical chickens with PhD's.
So take your spherical chicken and "Dance", Puppet.
And do make sure to wave it around so that everyone can see that you
have the biggest chicken. Just don't choke it too badly :-)
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
> > Lee Bell wrote:
> > >
> > > Everyone that thinks there's even a ghost of a chance that Bob was unfairly
> > > attacked by a bunch of travel agents, feel free to express your opinion.
>
You can delete it from your post, but you can't delete your SHAMEFUL
appearance in rec.travel.cruises from the archives that everyone had
seen.
You are just helping to spread the DIRT that's all over your FACE!
> -hh
hh is whining and ofbuscating back in his remaining refuge: the Land
of the Dysfunctional Gang -- now with Lee Bell being the mouthpiece.
Why was Hugh so silent in rec.travel.cruises since May 27?
-- Bob.
-hh
stalker:
Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Large_Nass...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
This thread is obviously dead, but Bob will of course now need to
"perpetuate" it with more of his lame untruths. Bob believes that he
is responding so as to get in the "Last Word", but its actually that
Bob simply lacks the willpower to control himself, and his actions are
being governed by those that are pushing his buttons:
"Dance, Puppet Dance".
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
> Oh, look: a second hero worship thread within a week from my obscessed
> stalker:
If you are going to keep on misattributing the poster, it's DR. Ling,
to YOU,
worthless army peon who has been stalking me for 10 years trying to
smear
me in my profession.
>
>
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nass...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> > -hh wrote:
> > > > Lee Bell wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Everyone that thinks there's even a ghost of a chance that Bob was unfairly
> > > > > attacked by a bunch of travel agents, feel free to express your opinion.
> > >
> > > [deleted: another 70+ lines
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/qogwk
> >
> > You can delete it from your post, but you can't delete your SHAMEFUL
> > appearance in rec.travel.cruises from the archives that everyone had
> > seen.
> >
> > You are just helping to spread the DIRT that's all over your FACE!
> >
> > > -hh
> >
> > hh is whining and ofbuscating back in his remaining refuge: the Land
> > of the Dysfunctional Gang -- now with Lee Bell being the mouthpiece.
> >
> > Why was Hugh so silent in rec.travel.cruises since May 27?
> >
> > -- Bob.
>
> This thread is obviously dead, but Bob will of course now need to
> "perpetuate" it with more of his lame untruths.
The person who posted after May 26 was your Dysfunctional pal
Lee Bell. How much did you pay him for being your sockpuppet?
Of course that give Hugh another chance to come back with HIS
impertinence? Why was it so quiet in rec.travel.cruises after this
post of mine on May 26?
Ganging up with a much dispised Travel agent who spammed in
rec.travel.cruises and even his pal didn't lift a little finger to help
Hugh's mouth-dancing about Hugh's knowledge about Little
Cayman -- THAT's how low and how stupid you are, Hugh
Huntzinger!
Why didn't your pals come to your rescue from alt.usenet,kooks?
-- Bob.
-hh
> -hh wrote:
> > Oh, look: a second hero worship thread within a week from my obscessed
> > stalker:
> > This thread is obviously dead, but Bob will of course now need to
> > "perpetuate" it with more of his lame untruths.
>
> impertinence?
Bob's right on schedule; he lacks the willpower to stop himself.
> ... Why was it so quiet in rec.travel.cruises after this
> post of mine on May 26?
Because unlike you, I'm in control.
> http://tinyurl.com/qxnv6
>
> Ganging up with a much dispised Travel agent ....
Ray's the guy who Bob is obcessing over more than me, even though this
is supposedly *my* hero worship thread. Confused? So am I.
> THAT's how low and how stupid you are...
But gosh, it is just so amazing that someone who is supposedly so
small, stupid and insignificant can just tie up a haughty PhD in
absolute knots with just a few words;
Dance, Puppet Dance. :-)
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
> > -hh right on schedule; he lacks the willpower to stop himself.
> > ... Why was it so quiet in rec.travel.cruises after this
> > post of mine on May 26?
>
> > http://tinyurl.com/qxnv6
> >
> > Ganging up with a much dispised Travel agent ....
> Because unlike you, I'm in control.
Of whose ass you kiss, that's for sure. Why are you NOT in control
here?
http://tinyurl.com/qxnv6
http://tinyurl.com/qogwk
> > THAT's how low and how stupid you are...
>
>
> Dance, Puppet Dance. :-)
Be original. That's one of the OTHER Dysfunctioal Gang's worn
out line.
You're dancing quite well to all the KICKs you've been getting.
-- Bob.
-hh
> -hh wrote:
>
> [snip]
3:44 am posting time.
(cough)
"As your concerned friend, I am pleased to recommend to you the art of
Kundalini Yoga, which should help, if not cure, your stomach, head, and
other parts of your anatomy which are all active parts of your
Obsessive, Compulsive Behaviour.
http://www.theinternetyogi.com/
I sincerely hope you feel better the next time you post, preferably a
few days from now."
Your devoted friend,
-hh
Reef Fish
-hh wrote:
> > -hh right on schedule; he lacks the willpower to stop himself.
> >
> > [snip]
>
>
> 3:44 am posting time.
>
> (cough)
Got a hernia for spending too much time on your knee worshipping me?
Need to learn how to read HEADERS, Stooopid! You would have
known that I was at a Hilton in Las Vegas.
After an evening session of winning a few hundred bucks at Blackjack.
> > ... Why was it so quiet in rec.travel.cruises after this
> > post of mine on May 26?
> > Ganging up with a much dispised Travel agent ....
The agents who rudely advertise in newsgroups. Hugh used to sing
this:
> Boycott businesses advertising on the Usenet discussion
> groups
ANOTHER proof of Hugh's hypocrisy. He now GANGS up with the
worst cretins in ALL newsgroups, and those who framed me for
protesting against their ADs.
Why are you NOT in control here?
http://tinyurl.com/qxnv6
http://tinyurl.com/qogwk
THAT's how low and how stupid you are...
> I sincerely hope you feel better the next time you post, preferably a
> few days from now."
Getting ready for another round of Blackjack Tournment, soon to start
at 10 am. (That's PACIFIC time, hugh. LOL)
> Your devoted friend<sic ; worshipper>
>
> -hh
You can get off your knees anytime now.
-- Bob.
Reef Fish
Reef Fish wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > > -hh right on schedule; he lacks the willpower to stop himself.
> > >
> > > [snip]
> >
> >
> > 3:44 am posting time.
> >
> > (cough)
>
> Got a hernia for spending too much time on your knee worshipping me?
>
> Need to learn how to read HEADERS, Stooopid! You would have
> known that I was at a Hilton in Las Vegas.
>
> After an evening session of winning a few hundred bucks at Blackjack.
>
>
> > > ... Why was it so quiet in rec.travel.cruises after this
> > > post of mine on May 26?
>
> > > Ganging up with a much dispised Travel agent ....
>
> The agents who rudely advertise in newsgroups. Hugh used to sing
> this:
>
> > Boycott businesses advertising on the Usenet discussion
> > groups
>
> ANOTHER proof of Hugh's hypocrisy. He now GANGS up with the
> worst cretins in ALL newsgroups, and those who framed me for
> protesting against their ADs.
>
>
> Why are you NOT in control here?
>
Lee Bell
> Why are you NOT in control here?
It's pretty obvious that he is, in fact, in control and that you are dancing
to his tune, just as he says.
Why do you bother?
Lee
Reef Fish
Lee > It's pretty obvious that he is, in fact, in control and that you
Lee > are dancing to his tune, just as he says
Lee, you're kissing the right ass, Hugh'd, but in the wrong follow-up
POST, and in the wrong THREAD. Pity.
-- Bob.
Lee Bell
> Lee > It's pretty obvious that he is, in fact, in control and that you
> Lee > are dancing to his tune, just as he says
> Lee, you're kissing the right ass . . .
Not at all. I didn't supported Hugh's posts. I questioned why you are
responding to them. You're supposed to be smarter than that. Why aren't
you acting like it?
Lee
Reef Fish
Lee Bell wrote:
> "Reef Fish" wrote
>
> > Lee > It's pretty obvious that he is, in fact, in control and that you
> > Lee > are dancing to his tune, just as he says
>
> > Lee, you're kissing the right ass . . .
The complete quote should have been
> > Lee, you're kissing the right ass, Hugh's, but in the wrong
> > follow-up POST, and in the wrong THREAD. Pity.
> Not at all. I didn't supported Hugh's posts.
Then why aren't YOU keeping your nose clean like everyone else?
> I questioned why you are responding to them.
The same reason I am telling Lee Bell why he is an officious, ass-
kisser, who can't mind his own business. The same reason I kick
otner asses. If I let one smart ass like your or Hugh have his way
when they are dead wrong, then I couldn't post anywhere without
smart asses like yourself trying to get some attention that you
otherwise wouldn't. I let you get all the BAD publicity for YOURSELF
as you stick your foot in your own mouth, as you have proven
every time.
> You're supposed to be smarter than that.
I am smarter than both you and Hugh put together, plus another
half dozen kooks thrown in. Hugh is already smarter than you.
He finally shut up, when all his tricks ran out. Lee Bell is just
dumb as ever.
> Why aren't you acting like it?
>
> Lee
I am exposing you and Hugh and kicking your asses, am I not?
That's a smart thing to do to dumb asses.
Go try your cheap rhetoric with someone your mentality, about
IQ of 90.
-- Bob.
Lee Bell
>> Not at all. I didn't supported Hugh's posts.
> Then why aren't YOU keeping your nose clean like everyone else?
>> I questioned why you are responding to them.
> The same reason I am telling Lee Bell why he is an officious, ass-
> kisser, who can't mind his own business.
Ahhh, now I see. It's because you can't help but dance to Hugh's tune.
You're still doing more to tarnish your own reputation, professional or
otherwise, than anyone one or any combination of others.
Keep up the good work.
We're laughing at you, not with you.
Lee
Reef Fish
Lee Bell wrote:
> "Reef Fish" wrote
>
> >> Not at all. I didn't supported Hugh's posts.
>
> > Then why aren't YOU keeping your nose clean like everyone else?
>
> >> I questioned why you are responding to them.
>
> > The same reason I am telling Lee Bell why he is an officious, ass-
> > kisser, who can't mind his own business.
>
> Ahhh, now I see. It's because you can't help but dance to Hugh's tune.
Hugh's tune STOPPED in rec.travel.cruises from which this thread
originate, after he failed to rally up supporters from
alt.usenet.kooks.
So, he manage to get ONE kook in rec.travel.cruises behind him,
Lee DING-DONG Bell.
>
> You're still doing more to tarnish your own reputation, professional or
> otherwise, than anyone one or any combination of others.
My professional reputation has NOTHING to do with these
recreational newsgroups for mental midgets like yourself.
My professional reputation is as solid as the rock of Gilbratar,
anywhere there are people in the know about my profession.
No need for YOU to wonder.
> We're laughing at you, not with you.
>
> Lee
Yes, Lee. Mindless Mental Midgets have a way of entertaining
themselves by laughing mindlessly at themselves.
-- Bob.
Lee Bell
> Hugh's tune STOPPED in rec.travel.cruises from which this thread
> originate, after he failed to rally up supporters from
> alt.usenet.kooks.
Dance little man, dance.
> So, he manage to get ONE kook in rec.travel.cruises behind him,
> Lee DING-DONG Bell.
I'm not in rec.travel.cruises.
> My professional reputation has NOTHING to do with these
> recreational newsgroups for mental midgets like yourself.
You're the one that brought up your professional reputation.
>> We're laughing at you, not with you.
> Yes, Lee. Mindless Mental Midgets have a way of entertaining
> themselves by laughing mindlessly at themselves.
It says "at you" Bob. Even your ability to read has deteriorated.
Feel free to have the last word.
Lee
Reef Fish
Lee Bell wrote:
> >> Ahhh, now I see. It's because you can't help but dance to Hugh's tune.
>
> > Hugh's tune STOPPED in rec.travel.cruises from which this thread
> > originate, after he failed to rally up supporters from
> > alt.usenet.kooks.
Forgot to mention that was May 26.
>
> > So, he manage to get ONE kook in rec.scuba.locations behind him,
> > Lee DING-DONG Bell.
>
> > My professional reputation has NOTHING to do with these
> > recreational newsgroups for mental midgets like yourself.
>
> You're the one that brought up your professional reputation.
Hugh was the one who tried repeatedly to tarnish it. Digging up
campus newspaper item 10 years old in one instance -- only to
have it back-fired at him.
> Feel free to have the last word.
>
> Lee
Why last word? I can go on as long as any Mental Midget like
yourself want to come back for more -- sticking your snotty
nose into Hugh's orafice where the sun don't shine.
Don't you have anything better to do, DING-DONG?
-- Bob.
"Magilla"
"Reef Fish" wrote
> Why last word? I can go on as long as any Mental Midget like
> yourself want to come back for more -- sticking your snotty
> nose into Hugh's orafice where the sun don't shine.
wants
orifice
doesn't
Would think that a doctorate in mathematics would need to have taken
some English studies.
Curtis
bob crownfield
> Lee Bell wrote:
>>>> Ahhh, now I see. It's because you can't help but dance to Hugh's tune.
>>> Hugh's tune STOPPED in rec.travel.cruises from which this thread
>>> originate, after he failed to rally up supporters from
>>> alt.usenet.kooks.
>
> Forgot to mention that was May 26.
>
>>> So, he manage to get ONE kook in rec.scuba.locations behind him,
>>> Lee DING-DONG Bell.
>>> My professional reputation has NOTHING to do with these
>>> recreational newsgroups for mental midgets like yourself.
>> You're the one that brought up your professional reputation.
>
> Hugh was the one who tried repeatedly to tarnish it. Digging up
> campus newspaper item 10 years old in one instance -- only to
> have it back-fired at him.
>
>> Feel free to have the last word.
>>
>> Lee
>
> Why last word? I can go on as long as any Mental Midget
you ARE the TRUE mental midget here.
> orafice
what the hell is that? Don't you have anything better to do?
>
> -- Bob.
>
Reef Fish
I was wondering when the OTHER Mental Midgets in the
Dysfunctional Gang was going to pick up where Lee left off.
Being a Spelling Cop in ngs has long been a dispised and
now OBSOLETE game to play. Go look up my "treatese"
on " key MISSPELLINGS and inconsequential TYPOS".
If I told you find "treatise on ... inconsequential TYPOS" you
won't find it.
-- Bob.
-hh
>
>
...where Bob's been guilty of it last week?
Bob's whining is all "Deja bu" :-)
-hh
"Magilla"
"Reef Fish" wrote
> Being a Spelling Cop in ngs has long been a dispised and
> now OBSOLETE game to play. Go look up my "treatese"
> on " key MISSPELLINGS and inconsequential TYPOS".
Ordinarily maybe, but when one boasts he is the great ding-a-ling, his
failure to master the language, or even a spell checker, helps to paint the
man we all see.
How can you expect to portray intelligence when you write like a high
school dropout and babble like a bitch?
Curtis
Lee Bell
> Bob's whining is all "Deja bu" :-)
Make that Deja bu hoo. 8^))
Reef Fish
Lee Bell wrote:
> "-hh" wrote
hh and his ass-kisser are back in tantum!
> > Bob's whining is all "Deja bu" :-)
It was Hugh's whining that was "deja bu".
And Hugh produced this http://tinyurl.com/leb3t
to shoot all the Spelling Cops in this group, and
neither he nor the Spelling Cops knew it. FUNNY.
You should be reading THIS:
>
> Make that Deja bu hoo. 8^))
-- Bob.
bob crownfield
> bob crownfield wrote:
>> Reef Fish wrote:
>>
>>> orafice
>> what the hell is that? Don't you have anything better to do?
freshman English composition flunks you
for error riddled posts like yours.
.
>
> -- Bob.
>
bob crownfield
and thus you win "The Laugh of the Day Award" !!
>
>
bob crownfield
and thus you too win "The Laugh of the Day Award" !!
>
> Curtis
>
>
>
"Magilla"
"chilly" wrote
>> How can you expect to portray intelligence when you write like a high
>> school dropout and babble like a bitch?
>
> There's a reason he makes such a big deal out of anyone pointing out a
> spelling mistake.
Which is?
Reef Fish
"chilly" is not even in this thread.
Are you so clueless that you're posting your reply to chilly's
PRIVATE e-mail to you, and quoting her e-mail out of context?
It's time for you to go back to your gorilla cage and stay there.
-- Bob.
"Magilla"
"Reef Fish" wrote
> "chilly" is not even in this thread.
>
> Are you so clueless that you're posting your reply to chilly's
> PRIVATE e-mail to you, and quoting her e-mail out of context?
>
> It's time for you to go back to your gorilla cage and stay there.
I'm damn good then Boob. My email account is not connected to my
newsgroup access.
Time for you to re-enter the stable and eat shit.
Curtis
Reef Fish
"Magilla" wrote:
> "Reef Fish" wrote
>
> > "chilly" is not even in this thread.
> >
> > Are you so clueless that you're posting your reply to chilly's
> > PRIVATE e-mail to you, and quoting her e-mail out of context?
> >
> > It's time for you to go back to your gorilla cage and stay there.
>
That's even WORSE! This thread has run 82 posts, and chilly
did not make a single post in it. Were you just hullucinating or
you're so deliriously confused that you couldn't tell one thread
from another when you made your silly reference to chilly?
>
> Time for you to re-enter the stable and eat shit.
Nice Freudian slip there. The stable is where Gorrilas like
yourself go. I didn't realize you go there to eat shit.
Reef Fish live in the ocean or in aquariums.
> > It's time for you to go back to your gorilla cage and stay there.
I suppose you didn't understand it because I should have said,
> > It's time for you to go back to your gorilla stable and eat shit there.
That must be IT!
-- Bob.
-hh
>
> did not make a single post in it. Were you just hullucinating or
> you're so deliriously confused that you couldn't tell one thread
> from another when you made your silly reference to chilly?
Try putting your famous money where your infamous mouth is, Bob.
All you have to do is to agree to pay to Magilla the fee of $1000 per
post from Chilly that you claim doesn't exist on this thread within
USENET, not merely within Google's News Server feed thereof.
-hh
"Magilla"
"-hh" wrote
> Ding-a-Ling "Reef Fish" frothed
He'd just lie and weasle out anyways.
But I really wonder how one who uses OE with AT&T newsgroups, and web
based email accounts, neither of which show Chilly in the inbox, can reply
to an email with a post? That takes a bit of conscience effort to do
accidentally, and it's not something I'd do on purpose. Booby, you have
hoof-in-mouth disease again, with a fresh layer on the hoof prior to
insertion.
Curtis
Lee Bell
> "chilly" is not even in this thread.
> Are you so clueless that you're posting your reply to chilly's
> PRIVATE e-mail to you, and quoting her e-mail out of
> context?
She posted twice on 6/4 and once on 6/5. Magilla's quote was from one of
those posts.
What's the matter, Bob, forget how to use Google?
Lee
cag...@gmail.com
the Rorqual gets put on a day boat to do bloddy wall.
Reef Fish wrote:
> Dan Bracuk wrote:
> > "Greg Mossman" <mos...@qnet.com> pounded away at his keyboard
> > resulting in:
> >
> > :Here's the Marine Park Regulations, courtesy of the Cayman Islands Port
> > :Authority. I see nothing about a 20 diver maximum:
>
> Even if there was such a rule, the Cayman Aggressor NEVER violated it,
> in my years of annual diving on that liveaboard. First of all, many of
> the
> charters are NOT filled to the capacity 18. In fact, the quad cabin
> seldom
> accommodates more than 2 passengers. And seldom are more than two
> members in the water at the same time. Even then, the entire 18
> passengers
> would have be ALL in the water at the same time also.
>
> In short, it's a non-event that never happened, to the best of my
> observation
> and statistical knowledge. :-)
>
> >
> > :http://www.caymanport.com/business_coastal.htm#MARINE%20CONSERVATION%20LAWS
> >
> > Maybe it's part of this:
> > http://www.divecayman.ky/sites/marineparks.asp
> > Bloody Bay, Little Cayman - Special restrictions have been placed on
> > the use of the Bloody Bay Marine Park, no commercial operations may
> > use the park without a licence from the Marine Conservation Board.
>
> Have you ever wondered WHY all those years in which I dived the Cayman
> Aggressor (which was the ONLY liveaboard to dive there except the
> Little
> Cayman DIver?) while the Peter Hughes Fleet was competing directly with
> the Aggressor on all the other popular locations: Belize, Bay Islands,
> and
> Turks and Caicos? I did, and asked Wayne Hasson about it.
>
> The answer was that the Board that approves NEW VESSELS of any
> kind to operate commercially in the Cayman Islands was very protective
> about letting "outsider" in.
>
> Perhaps now the Board is relaxing the old rules of admission of
> non-native owned vessels and perhaps even some Marine Park rules.
>
> In any event, only time will tell whether Nekton is taking reservations
> before the coast is clear, or they are using the "special" as a trial
> balloon to find out how much they can charge for their week's charter
> and STILL fill that floating hotel. :-)
>
>
> > Or, maybe, as I first said, the word on the boat was not true, or was
> > then but not now.
>
> Why don't somebody give the Nekton headquarter a PHONE CALL
> and report here the latest rumor according to Nekton?
>
> The deadline of the $300 discount is May 31, which is barely over
> a week from now.
>
> -- Bob.
Reef Fish
cag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Just spoke to Karen at Nekton re 20 person limit. Anyone over 20 on
> the Rorqual gets put on a day boat to do bloddy wall.
Well. well, well! After a long detour of nearly 80 posts, we're
finally back on the original topic!
Unfortunately, your two lines are as cryptic as ever, in the light
of the original questions. So, let me re-phrase MY questions:
1. What is the cost of the charter (too late for the $300 discount
NOW)?
2. Where will the Rorqual be moored? (in light of your comment) that
a "day boat" will do Bloody Bay wall if there are over 20 divers?
3. 20 get on a day boat. Where do the OTHERS dive? From the
Nekton which house more than 20 divers?
-- Bob.
"Magilla"
"Reef Fish" wrote
> Reef Fish live in the ocean or in aquariums.
But you're a horse's ass, and since you are what you eat.......
-hh
> Just spoke to Karen at Nekton re 20 person limit. Anyone over 20 on
> the Rorqual gets put on a day boat to do bloddy wall.
That's quite a clever solution...and it thumbs the nose at the
entrenched "rule mongers" who were trying to use the rules as an
anti-competitive hammer.
FWIW, any idea whose dayboat? My bet would be first on McCoy's, then
Paradise.
-hh
Dan Bracuk
resulting in:
:FWIW, any idea whose dayboat? My bet would be first on McCoy's, then
:Paradise.
My guess is their own chase boats.
Dan Bracuk
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
-hh
Dan Bracuk wrote:
> "-hh" <recscub...@huntzinger.com> pounded away at his keyboard
> resulting in:
>
> :FWIW, any idea whose dayboat? My bet would be first on McCoy's, then
> :Paradise.
>
> My guess is their own chase boats.
Good point.
FWIW, this will probably infuriate the protectionists who tried to keep
them out entirely (by occupying a second one of "their" moorings), but
the Rules do allow operations to put more than one boat per day in the
Marine Park...I think the limit's 3 or 4?
-hh