The Firewall
James Kew
>ObPeeve: Self-appointed vigilante types.
...and this makes me think a bit. I have mixed feelings about the
"firewall" policy that seems so strong at the moment.
Peeves is what this group is for. Peeves. That's what I'm here for,
that's what most of us are here for, that's what the silent majority
are here for. And if a newcomer has a worthy and well-expressed
peeve, I for one would like to see it posted without a subsequent
barrage of flamage followed by the swift exit of a proto-peevester,
never to return. Let the new talent in!
But at the same time, we need some way of keeping the quality up - to
use an awful cliche, a high signal-to-noise ratio. Some way of
discouraging the clueless and the cascaders.
Jeff Mortenson deserved what he got. Stumbled into the group, posted
an article so poorly written it strained the eyes, flailed wildly
when this was pointed out, and then thankfully sank without trace.
Denise Caire seems to have gone for the "Aliens" approach - strapping
on an inadequate flamethrower she descends trigger-happy into the pit
to do battle with the monsters. Denise, you're no Ripley. If you
want to peeve, peeve. If you want to flame, go and play somewhere
else, please?
Where did Ryan Franklin go? I thought he had the makings of a good
peever, with a bit of practice. No, another victim. Shame.
I don't enjoy the flamewars. Yeah, sure, every now and then you get
a line so finely honed that you have sit in silent admiration a
while, but they get very tedious very fast. I have a sneaking
admiration for the people at ed.uk - some fine peeves with very
little flamage. Perhaps it's the weather that does it?
Peeve: Peevetown. What a comfortable little clique. It's like
small children playing. "I wanna be the doctor this time! You be
the patient!"
______________________________________________________________________
James Kew <j....@ic.ac.uk> "Well, on a scale of one to ten
Physics (SSTH) I'd say it's bicycle clip time."
Imperial College, London. - Eddie Hitler, Bottom
Al Crawford
>
> ...and this makes me think a bit. I have mixed feelings about the
> "firewall" policy that seems so strong at the moment.
Ditto. While I agree that there is a need for a "Heavy Squad" to help keep
the signal-noise ratio acceptable by weeding out the weak and clueless, it
shouldn't be *obligatory* that anyone new who posts here has to run the
gauntlet. If we keep it up, there's a strong chance that this group'll turn
into something along the lines of <shudder> talk.bizarre and become
extremely cliquey and filled with stupid rituals. I hate to say it, but
this whole "Peevetown" thing has more than a faint aroma of "stupid ritual"
to it. It's a bit cliquey. A fun idea at first but it's got out of hand and
somewhat tired. Sticking a reference to it at the end of a peeve was all
very well, but when discussion of "Peevetown" becomes the principal topic
of conversation, something has gone wrong.
> And if a newcomer has a worthy and well-expressed peeve, I for one would
> like to see it posted without a subsequent barrage of flamage followed by
> the swift exit of a proto-peevester, never to return. Let the new talent
> in!
I agree wholeheartedly, esp since a lot of the old talent has become
distinctly atrophied of late. Let's face it, there are certain individuals
whose presence here seems solely concerned with flaming and who never
actually post peeves.
> Jeff Mortenson deserved what he got. Stumbled into the group, posted
> an article so poorly written it strained the eyes, flailed wildly
> when this was pointed out, and then thankfully sank without trace.
Thankfully? To be quite honest, I *enjoyed* Morty's posts. Not because they
were even remotely articulate but because they were excellent flame-fodder.
They gave the groups resident predators something to have fun shredding
while providing some entertainment in the process. Watching them tear
someone clueless limb-from-limb can be fun. Watching them disembowel
someone who doesn't really deserve it is *not*.
> Where did Ryan Franklin go? I thought he had the makings of a good
> peever, with a bit of practice. No, another victim. Shame.
Agreed. That's the one recent case where somebody did seem to have a bit of
potential, even if he did go on a bit (and coming from me, that means he
*really* went on a bit :-)) and had a monomaniacal obsession with one
particular peeve.
> I don't enjoy the flamewars. Yeah, sure, every now and then you get
> a line so finely honed that you have sit in silent admiration a
> while, but they get very tedious very fast. I have a sneaking
> admiration for the people at ed.uk - some fine peeves with very
> little flamage. Perhaps it's the weather that does it?
It's the rain, yep. Puts out all known flames. I think one problem with
this newsgroup, though, is that there are only a finite number of peeves on
the planet and we're running out fast. I personally intend to cut right
back on my own posting in my various guises as a form of self-imposed
quality control. I've posted some pretty pathetic efforts of late, and plan
to lie low until I have something worth posting. Allowing the peeve
reserves to build again, as it were.
--
Al Crawford - aw...@dcs.ed.ac.uk
Department Of Computer Science, The University of Edinburgh
Rm 1410, JCMB, Kings Buildings, Mayfield Rd, EDINBURGH, EH9 3JZ, Scotland
Tel: +44 (0) 31 650 5165 Fax: +44 (0) 31 667 7209
A J Cunningham
>And lo, j....@ic.ac.uk (James Kew) spake unto the masses saying:
>>
>> ...and this makes me think a bit. I have mixed feelings about the
>> "firewall" policy that seems so strong at the moment.
>Ditto. While I agree that there is a need for a "Heavy Squad" to help keep
>the signal-noise ratio acceptable by weeding out the weak and clueless,
"Noone expects the Peevetown Inquisition"
On the subject of jobs I'd like to volunteer to be the leader of the
"Jimmy Squad" in the Peevetown bar. Those who know me will testify to my
qualifications for this post.
ObPeeve: The bloody stationery cupboard at work. It's a very special
cupboard with Psi capabalilities. It detects me climbing three flights
of stairs to get to it all the time thinking "New Pencil" and then
proceeds to hide all the pencils. If I come in looking for an envelope
it hides them but the pencils have reappeared. I'm sure if I got enough
of my office mates together and we all focussed on a different item we
could open the doors to find a previously bulging cupboard completely
bare.
T
--
Tony Cunningham, Insignia Solutions. t...@ed.ac.uk
Inspiration, move me brightly, light the song with sense and colour, hold
away despair. More than this I will not ask faced with mysteries dark and vast.
Tim Mefford
>
>I agree wholeheartedly, esp since a lot of the old talent has become
>distinctly atrophied of late. Let's face it, there are certain individuals
>whose presence here seems solely concerned with flaming and who never
>actually post peeves.
>
Hey! Al Crawford is back. Welcome back, Al. It's good to have
you back and all, but !Al will keep posting, won't he? Not that I
like him better or anything, you understand.
So, does anyone have Janis Cortese's e-mail address?
Now that Al mentions it, I might not ever have been talented, but I have
been feeling rather atrophied lately. Perhaps I'm becoming jaded to
the intrinsic peevishness of life.
ObAside: One wouldn't think fertilizer would kill a lawn, but an overly
concentrated dose will cause it to burn and die.
ObPeeve: Some people pay lots of money to a company called Chemlawn to
spray chemicals on their grass with the intent of having it grow.
ObBob: Bonilla
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Essene & Chinese birth controls must reduce birth or Easter Isle
type overpopulation destroys God's Spaceship Earth! God's law
prevents all conception below pH3. Therefore, Essene contracepted
for 400 yrs. with rosehips, pH2! So, absolute clean, apply vaseline,
oil, butter, or cream, insert teaspoon juicy lemon pulp pH2. O.K.!
Next day douche with qt. soapy water pH8, restoring pH5 balance God
made!"
-- Dr. Bronner's Pure-Castile Soap
"Or you could use a condom."
Tim Mefford (t...@physics.orst.edu) O.K.!
Don Baldwin
>> "firewall" policy that seems so strong at the moment.
>
>Ditto. While I agree that there is a need for a "Heavy Squad" to help keep
>the signal-noise ratio acceptable by weeding out the weak and clueless, it
>shouldn't be *obligatory* that anyone new who posts here has to run the
>gauntlet.
Hmmm, I don't think everyone new who's posted here HAS had to run a
gauntlet. I can name a number of new posters (to be specific, most of
the Edinburgh Cabal) who have not had to endure a trial by fire. It
seems to be the case that, if you're articulate and/or interesting
(or stubborn, like me), you can find a place here.
>If we keep it up, there's a strong chance that this group'll turn
>into something along the lines of <shudder> talk.bizarre and become
>extremely cliquey and filled with stupid rituals. I hate to say it, but
>this whole "Peevetown" thing has more than a faint aroma of "stupid ritual"
>to it. It's a bit cliquey.
I don't think this is THAT exclusive of a news group. I was able to
trundle in and get my green card pretty easy, last year. You don't
post to talk.politics.guns (for long) if you're anti-gun. You don't
post to rec.pets.cats if you hate the little pigeon muggers. And you
don't stay in this news group unless people think you have something
to offer. Kind of like a moderated group but a bit more democratic!
>It's the rain, yep. Puts out all known flames. I think one problem with
>this newsgroup, though, is that there are only a finite number of peeves on
>the planet and we're running out fast. I personally intend to cut right
>back on my own posting in my various guises as a form of self-imposed
>quality control. I've posted some pretty pathetic efforts of late, and plan
>to lie low until I have something worth posting. Allowing the peeve
>reserves to build again, as it were.
Or maybe time to encourage peeve conservation and recycling?
Peeve: I had the most revolting roommate once...
don
Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide
>distinctly atrophied of late. Let's face it, there are certain individuals
>whose presence here seems solely concerned with flaming and who never
>actually post peeves.
Whoops, I think he means me. (I mean, judging from the e-mail to the
same effect that I got from him after I questioned his manhood.)
Al, quit whining and get a life. Every word I post is laden with more
true peeving than the worst peeve you ever had. How much stomach
acid do you think it takes to be as nasty as I am? If you're too dense
to see the peevish nature of my words, you're about the only one....
Oh yeah, I forgot.....there was mark.e.anderson, Mary Jacobs, Denise
Caire, Jeff Mortenson, and a few mega-dense others. How quickly we forget.
"The peeve that can be spoken is not the true peeve."
And besides, I'm a sweetheart. Ask anyone who knows me. Why, I'm
surprised they haven't canonized my ass.
And quit fantasizing about Jenni when you wank, it's unbecoming.
JZ
Racing is stupid. The only trouble is, not racing is unthinkable.
- Scott Fisher
Al Crawford
>
> Hmmm, I don't think everyone new who's posted here HAS had to run a
> gauntlet. I can name a number of new posters (to be specific, most of
> the Edinburgh Cabal) who have not had to endure a trial by fire.
I was informed by He Of The 242lbs that the only reason I escaped it was
because he happened to have no outgoing news at the time. Dunno about the
other Edinburgh folk, though. *Nobody* escapes entirely though, there's a
constant low murmuring of it, rather like background radiation, whereby the
usual bunch seem to flame people pretty much at random, just to keep in
practice. It's not *that* annoying though, well not for me anyway, since
I've long since added most of these folk to my trusty killfile. Killfiles
are for wimps, says Geoff? Well, that's his view, but they allow me to get
through this group reasonably quickly while cutting out most of the stuff
that isn't worth reading anyway.
> It seems to be the case that, if you're articulate and/or interesting
> (or stubborn, like me), you can find a place here.
I'd agree about that. So how the hell did I survive?
> I don't think this is THAT exclusive of a news group. I was able to
> trundle in and get my green card pretty easy, last year. You don't
> post to talk.politics.guns (for long) if you're anti-gun. You don't
> post to rec.pets.cats if you hate the little pigeon muggers. And you
> don't stay in this news group unless people think you have something
> to offer. Kind of like a moderated group but a bit more democratic!
It's got more exclusive as time has gone by though. This time last year it
seemed fairly easy for anybody to just wander in and, single digit IQs
excepted, last out. These days though, it seems that almost *everybody* who
posts here for the first time gets the hazing treatment. It's *one* way of
moderating the group, but personally speaking I'd prefer to see people
being given a chance before a full barrage is leased on them.
> Or maybe time to encourage peeve conservation and recycling?
Nah, recycling is one of the problems I'm trying to avoid. For someone who
is, reputedly at least, of above average intelligence, I have a truly
cruddy memory. Which leads me to post the same peeves more than once
sometimes. Can't be very entertaining for those who've already read it and
can actually remember it.
--
Not Al Crawford - Not_Al_...@ed.ac.uk
"The water shines/A sheepdog skips across the face/A dozen times"
Scott Larnach
> For someone who is, reputedly at least, of above average intelligence,
> I have a truly cruddy memory.
It is a well known fact that there isn't, um, memory, ah...
correlation... something. That's what I... whatever, anyway.
S
Jenni Sheehey
>
>> I don't think this is THAT exclusive of a news group. I was able to
>> trundle in and get my green card pretty easy, last year. You don't
>> post to talk.politics.guns (for long) if you're anti-gun. You don't
>> post to rec.pets.cats if you hate the little pigeon muggers. And you
>> don't stay in this news group unless people think you have something
>> to offer. Kind of like a moderated group but a bit more democratic!
>
>It's got more exclusive as time has gone by though. This time last year it
>seemed fairly easy for anybody to just wander in and, single digit IQs
>excepted, last out. These days though, it seems that almost *everybody* who
>posts here for the first time gets the hazing treatment.
This may or may not be true, but I think that most people who are
seriously bothered by getting toasted won't like much of what goes on in
this group. Even the nicest of the people here are more than a little
cynical and crotchety (regardless of age), so most of what is said here
would probably offend the sensibilities of someone who was seriously
upset by the kind of treatment that is given the average reasonably
articulate poster. If the poster has read the group for even a little
while, he'll realise that there's no reason to take it personally, and
feel free to ignore it if he so chooses.
>Which leads me to post the same peeves more than once
>sometimes. Can't be very entertaining for those who've already read it and
>can actually remember it.
I think it's really more the execution of a peeve than its content that
makes it entertaining. That's why even some *good* ideas get shot down
when they're accompanied by poor grammar, spelling, format, and/or
style.
ObPeeve: Slow printers. Yeah, I really *wanted* to stay at work last
night until 7:30 printing those stupid color transparencies.
--Jenni
Paul Goldberg
> Ditto. While I agree that there is a need for a "Heavy Squad" to help keep
> the signal-noise ratio acceptable by weeding out the weak and clueless, it
> shouldn't be *obligatory* that anyone new who posts here has to run the
> gauntlet. If we keep it up, there's a strong chance that this group'll turn
> into something along the lines of <shudder> talk.bizarre and become
> extremely cliquey and filled with stupid rituals. I hate to say it, but
> this whole "Peevetown" thing has more than a faint aroma of "stupid ritual"
> to it. It's a bit cliquey. A fun idea at first but it's got out of hand and
> somewhat tired. Sticking a reference to it at the end of a peeve was all
> very well, but when discussion of "Peevetown" becomes the principal topic
> of conversation, something has gone wrong.
Yes, Peevetown is a nice analogy, but is in danger of taking control.
I mean, if one of us had been told six months ago that in a few
months' time we would be calling ourselves "peevetown" and fighting
over imaginary jobs, we would probably react with derision. We have also
started using too many Ob-words. The threat of becoming cliquey and
resembling talk.bizarre is a dire one. And I find that some of the best
articles here come from newcomers.
But I cannot accept that *all* (or even too many) newcomers are flamed.
Even in my short time here I have seen maiden peeves which have not
been flamed, such as my own. I have faith in the discrimination of
this community. Most flame victims have only themselves to blame.
An exception is the undeserved flaming of Joy and Jenni, but even
there the end result was unaffected: Jenni is now an established
peever, and Joy also held out until her current Usenet exile, which is
for reasons unconnected with this newsgroup.
After all, what would you expect from a newsgroup with the remit of
alt.peeves? Every newsgroup attracts a community which has its own
distinct character and culture, and an experienced usenet junkie might
well be able to guess that alt.peeves is also likely to be
alt.we.don't.suffer.fools.gladly. The reason for our excellent S/N
ratio is that if someone shits in our metaphorical garden, the charter
of alt.peeves makes it ligitimate for someone to flame the offender.
Oh yes, and I don't think that killfiles are the answer to the problem
of newsgroup clutter. This is analogous to using an anaesthetic as a
defense against injury. People who say "if you don't like what I say,
put me in your killfile" deserve to be run over with a combine-harvester.
One thing that annoys me is when flames come attached with an
"ObPeeve" which merely refer to whatever the flamer was attacking. A
flame should be of high quality and be worth reading in its own right,
and these pseudo-justifications peeve me greatly.
[...]
> > Where did Ryan Franklin go? I thought he had the makings of a good
> > peever, with a bit of practice. No, another victim. Shame.
>
> Agreed. That's the one recent case where somebody did seem to have a bit of
> potential, even if he did go on a bit (and coming from me, that means he
> *really* went on a bit :-)) and had a monomaniacal obsession with one
> particular peeve.
Well, that explains it. He probably ran out of peeves.
[...]
> It's the rain, yep. Puts out all known flames. I think one problem with
> this newsgroup, though, is that there are only a finite number of peeves on
> the planet and we're running out fast.
This I have to object to. I for one believe that we live in an
infinite Peeviverse, and that the unending inventiveness of real life
in causing irritation will ensure a constant supply. (Anybody still
got a copy of those "Peeves from the year 2100" that were posted a
while ago?)
Final thought: Peevetown undoubtedly needs immigration, since it is
clear that the average birthrate is nowhere near replacement level.
Paul.
Voltaire to Rousseau, on reading Rousseau's "Ode a la Poste'rite'":
"Mon ami, voila une lettre qui ne sera jamais recue a son addresse"
Rick Gordon
>And lo, do...@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) spake unto the masses saying:
>> [ ... ]
>> I don't think this is THAT exclusive of a news group. I was able to
>> trundle in and get my green card pretty easy, last year.
Oh, dear. Revisionism rears its ugly head and speaks with the voice of
authority. If the pummeling, flaming, and pissing-on-the-ashes treatment
you got on your initial, ill-conceived search-and-self-detruct mission
into the newsgroup was "pretty easy", Don, I don't want to see *anybody*
have a hard time.
>> Or maybe time to encourage peeve conservation and recycling?
>
>Nah, recycling is one of the problems I'm trying to avoid. For someone who
>is, reputedly at least, of above average intelligence, I have a truly
>cruddy memory. Which leads me to post the same peeves more than once
>sometimes. Can't be very entertaining for those who've already read it and
>can actually remember it.
Yeah, right, Crawford. And where have I heard *that* before, eh?
Incidentally, I was sorry to see peevist-in-the-larval-stage Ryan Franklin
disappear so quickly, as has been noted by others. My recollection,
though, is that he took a few shots from Dr. Bogroll and maybe one or two
others, but also gathered a few *compliments* for his excellent efforts,
and was actually welcomed to the newsgroup. Perhaps it was the cognitive
dissonance of appreciation from the a.p crowd which drove him away. The
only instance I can recall of massive flamage in response to an *initial*
post is that meted out to Jenni's short-lived inamorata, and we'd have
to agree that was a special case.
> Not Al Crawford - Not_Al_...@ed.ac.uk
--
Rick Gordon | "What hath God wrought? Lately, I mean."
ri...@netcom.com | -- Samuel F.B.I. Morse
Dan Sorenson -- Love Rhino
>
>Or maybe time to encourage peeve conservation and recycling?
Fine with me. I've peeved on this before, but never quite to
this extent or for this particular reason.
It's genetic. Women cannot, despite years of the finest
education and over a decade of on-the-job training, operate a
gas grill. Genetics are the only explanation.
April is quite intelligent, no doubt about it. She just
seems to have some sort of mental block when it comes to operating
new machinery. This certainly doesn't apply to sewing machines, but
I digress.
I find this trait in most women I know, and I cannot for the
life of me figure out how intuition can just leave them when they are
confronted with something new that operates on the same principles as
something they are familiar with.
First, she couldn't make the connection with the long wheelbase
of my truck and the need for wide turns. I patiently explained that
the reason the right rear wheel was continually being run over the curb
was because she was turning the corners too tightly. This was at odds
with her experiences in the little econobox Sunbird she was used to
driving, but eventually my reasoned responses convinced her, and I am
happy to note that she does not have this problem anymore. The latest
manifestation of this phenomena involves not making the connection between
a stove and a typical suburbanite-type gas grill. Let me elaborate.
We were to eat grilled chicken last night. I, being the
thoughtful and considerate person that I am, lit the grill and headed off
to the store to purchase some last-minute items. Both were done at the
bequest of April. Upon my return, April was watching a movie. "Is
the chicken cooked already, dear?" "No. You'll have to show me how to
light the grill." <sigh!> "I did that half an hour ago, dear, just like
you asked." I should have known that something annoying was about to
happen, but the subtlties of the situation were lost on me. "How
difficult can it be to grill chicken?" I thought.
I retired to the den for a short time. When I emerged and walked
past the kitchen window, the flames leaping from the grill reminded me
of the lengends of Vulcan's forge. "Dear," I asked sweetly, "are there
*supposed* to be flames leaping from the grill?" With infinite patience
that was no doubt given by nature for such situations as this and
pregnancy, she stopped her movie and trundled on out to quench the flames,
pausing only to berate me for not seeing to the situation immediately or
having the forsight to prvide her with adequate training in the highly
technical field of Gas Grill Operation. I suddenly wasn't so hungry, the
sinking feeling of an unknown but impending doom having replaced hunger
in my stomach.
Suprisingly, the chicken was tender and juicy. I suspect the
charring served to seal in the juices and also provided some insulation.
Something was still quite certain to happen, but I couldn't think of
just what it might be.
This morning it hit me like a backhand from a blacksmith, still
holding his hammer. "Dear, did you happen to turn off the grill last
night?" I queried, the inherent consequences of each possible answer
flitting through my mind. "Uh, no. I'd better go and turn it off."
<sigh!> "Oh, don't bother," I replied. "Why not?" she asked, innocent
as the day she was born. I knew a short lecture on flow rates, the noble
gas laws, and how these relate to the operating parameters of a gas grill
would not be met with intense interest, to say the least, so I quickly
summed up the salient points and stated them in a succinct and
eloquent manner: "It's empty."
This wouldn't be much of a peeve had I not refilled the gas
cylinder *the day before.* Life does indeed exist solely to annoy me.
--
<Dan Sorenson, z1...@exnet.iastate.edu, vik...@iastate.edu, Dod #1066>
< Iowa State University and I have agreed to disagree on most things.>
< The problem with the Danegeld is that the Danes keep coming back. >
Steve Bougerolle
>I've long since added most of these folk to my trusty killfile.
Oh, who are you trying to kid, Al? Does "most" refer to two out of three
individuals? I don't believe you would have any more of a killfile than
that.
What is with this new fad of loudly announcing that people are going in your
killfile? I'm positive that most of the time it's just a bluff. I'd be
willing to bet that most other people are equally sure of this. So why don't
you all just save us reading time and quit saying this?
Personally, I scan EVERYTHING in alt.peeves (except for a short period of time
when Dac was in my killfile). I only respond to things which grab my
attention, though. And really, it doesn't take much time. Certainly nowhere
near as much time as !Al must spend posting.
And hey, you Brits: if you're so concerned about getting over-organised,
why don't you just go your own way (like me) instead of spending kilobytes
posting stodgy bitching and pompous protests?
>It's *one* way of
>moderating the group, but personally speaking I'd prefer to see people
>being given a chance before a full barrage is leased on them.
Personally, I try to flame in proportion to the degree to which I am
annoyed. So I ignore most people. Slight deviance from people like
Denise Caire or Ryan Franklin gets mild flames. Gross deviance (in the
form of their responses) gets more flames. Only complete fools like Brian
Redman get the heat treatment.
Actually, I was surprised that Mr. Franklin left so quickly. I thought I
was rather mild in my criticisms of him. This does cause me to wonder if he
only had one peeve in his bag. Either that or he can't take the heat, so
he might as well leave...
--
_|\ |V| /|_ Steve Bougerolle, U. of British Columbia Physics Dept.
\ \| |/ /
>_______< STE...@TRIUMFER.BITNET
! STE...@ERICH.TRIUMF.CA
Elaine Richards
>
> It's genetic. Women cannot, despite years of the finest
>education and over a decade of on-the-job training, operate a
>gas grill. Genetics are the only explanation.
>
> April is quite intelligent, no doubt about it. She just
>seems to have some sort of mental block when it comes to operating
>new machinery. This certainly doesn't apply to sewing machines, but
>I digress.
>
> I find this trait in most women I know, and I cannot for the
>life of me figure out how intuition can just leave them when they are
>confronted with something new that operates on the same principles as
>something they are familiar with.
This is the Principle of the Selective Boycott. Its strategy, not genetics.
"Honey," (We always call them honey when we want them to get off their
fannies),"could you please [mow the lawn|take out the garbage|see
what Junior is screaming about|walk the dog|...]?" The response is
frequently, "Grunt." or "I'm BUSY, dear" (they always call us "dear"
when they are busy).
So, in order to get the Male to take a little responsibility, we boycott
things. Anyone who has met me will know that I can go without food for
three days, and I do so frequently. As a result, bandy is a very good
cook, specializing in Indian and Chinese cuisine. Since his departure,
stock in Stouffer's (the company that makes frozen dinners) has risen
precipitously. I won't talk about the toilet. That is one of the two
reasons why I keep the lid down - I want to keep the colonies from
getting out and attacking the cats.
> First, she couldn't make the connection with the long wheelbase
>of my truck and the need for wide turns. I patiently explained that
>the reason the right rear wheel was continually being run over the curb
No, she was telling you she wanted a cute, sporty Miata, not some bohunk
penismobile thinly disguised as a utility vehicle.
>manifestation of this phenomena involves not making the connection between
>a stove and a typical suburbanite-type gas grill. Let me elaborate.
[ Visions of hellfire and high temperatures.]
> Suprisingly, the chicken was tender and juicy. I suspect the
So? You have a problem?
[She left it going all night, just like you would with a charcoal grill.]
>
> This wouldn't be much of a peeve had I not refilled the gas
>cylinder *the day before.* Life does indeed exist solely to annoy me.
Dan, ever since the Dawn of Time, it has been the job of the scruffy
one with the beard (no, not your mother-in-law), to stand by a
scorching and mildly uncontrolled conflagration and watch dead, raw,
meat cook. It is the woman's job to provide the potato salad. It is
the guests' job to provide the beer. It is your job, dictated by
tradition and anthropology to man the grill. This is NOT a job to be
left to a disinterested woman who would rather ride around in a cute
and sporty Miata or eat out at Chez Frenchy. Take command. Get your
"BORN TO RAISE HELL" chef's apron and BBQ tools and get out there and
MAN the grill. I will let you know when I am in town and be there with
my paper plate and a six-pack.
Peeve: Haven't had time to hit Everette & Jones lately for some ribs.
ER
Geoff Miller
In article <1992Jun7.1...@cc.ic.ac.uk> j....@ic.ac.uk (James Kew)
writes:
>...and this makes me think a bit. I have mixed feelings about the
>"firewall" policy that seems so strong at the moment.
>Peeves is what this group is for. Peeves. That's what I'm here for,
>that's what most of us are here for, that's what the silent majority
>are here for. And if a newcomer has a worthy and well-expressed
>peeve, I for one would like to see it posted without a subsequent
>barrage of flamage followed by the swift exit of a proto-peevester,
>never to return. Let the new talent in!
[...]
>Peeve: Peevetown. What a comfortable little clique. It's like
>small children playing. "I wanna be the doctor this time! You be
>the patient!"
You're missing the point, James. Like booter pointed out, the concept of
Peevetown is really just a parlor game of sorts. The Flamewall exists
not to exclude, but to filter. Most of us endured similar treatment
upon our arrival, perhaps in part because our respective styles hadn't
evolved to the point that they deserved acceptance. But these newbies
a) had strong enough constitution to stick it out, b) liked the idea of
alt.peeves well enough to *want* to stick it out, and c) sooner or later
evolved styles of their own, with sufficiently interesting content, to
help them fit in to the virtual community.
If someone can't survive the Flamewall, then they'd probably be better
off elsewhere. If they can, then they're more likely to be able to
contribute to the quality of the newsgroup.
Geoff
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller + + + + + + + + Sun Microsystems
geo...@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM + + + + + + + + Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Andrew Clayton
> In article <1992Jun7.1...@cc.ic.ac.uk> j....@ic.ac.uk (James Kew)
> writes:
>
> >...and this makes me think a bit. I have mixed feelings about the
> >"firewall" policy that seems so strong at the moment.
>
> >Peeves is what this group is for. Peeves. That's what I'm here for,
> >that's what most of us are here for, that's what the silent majority
> You're missing the point, James. Like booter pointed out, the concept of
> Peevetown is really just a parlor game of sorts. The Flamewall exists
> not to exclude, but to filter. Most of us endured similar treatment
Feh.
> If someone can't survive the Flamewall, then they'd probably be better
> off elsewhere. If they can, then they're more likely to be able to
> contribute to the quality of the newsgroup.
What about when the newsgroup's members cannot put up with the
rebuttals?
Fifteen posters leap upon the newbie, and if the newbie responds
with anything other than snivelling obsequiousness, and responds
comprehensively, then the GROUP retreats from the 'flamewall' and
erects killfile filters quicker than you can say 'gutless
fucksticks'
Perhaps there is something a little more stylistic about a.p.
articles in general [the much touted 'signal to noise ratio], but
really, it's just a clique engaged in the business of being a
clique. No different to a mens smoking club getting ultra
irritated over the presence of women in their sandbox, or the
snout-in-the-air toffynosed dweebitry that greets people
wondering into *.mensa.*
Not really that different at all..
Not by much.
Peeve: It's the general ``pats on the back all round'' attitude
that really peeves me about alt.peeves. One or two
people will do a comprehensive character assasination,
and the rest of the froup leaps up and down shouting
'nyah, nyah, happy nazi(*)? or do you want some more?',
without actually having done anything themselves, other
than to keep their noses clean.
Dac
--
munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac David Andrew Clayton. // _| _ _
prolix!dac%ey...@labtam.oz.au Canberra, Australia \X/ (_](_](_
d...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au I post .
prolix!d...@sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au . . I am. +61 6 290 2215
Rick Gordon
> [ ... ]
>Perhaps there is something a little more stylistic about a.p.
>articles in general [the much touted 'signal to noise ratio], but
>really, it's just a clique engaged in the business of being a
>clique. No different to a mens smoking club getting ultra
>irritated over the presence of women in their sandbox, or the
>snout-in-the-air toffynosed dweebitry that greets people
>wondering into *.mensa.*
>
>Not really that different at all..
>
>Not by much.
>
>Peeve: It's the general ``pats on the back all round'' attitude
> that really peeves me about alt.peeves. One or two
> people will do a comprehensive character assasination,
> and the rest of the froup leaps up and down shouting
> 'nyah, nyah, happy nazi(*)? or do you want some more?',
> without actually having done anything themselves, other
> than to keep their noses clean.
Hear, hear! Well spoken, Clayton! That'll put the jackals in their
place, eh? Oh, my: the time.
Port and cigars in the War Room, gentlemen?
>Dac
Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way
[...]
If someone can't survive the Flamewall, then they'd probably be better
off elsewhere. If they can, then they're more likely to be able to
contribute to the quality of the newsgroup.
Yeh. Ya gotta EARN them wings, Buster! (So sit down and shutup.)
UnRelated-UnPeeve:
Barney Rawson's Beechcraft G17S (Staggerwing) *MODEL* [R/C, with
6 HP Zenoah engine, and scale retractable gear]. Authentic yellow with
blue Beech trim. 22 pounds, 10 kg. Two years in construction. Gorgeous.
You should have seen it, Geoff. If a little jet noise makes you horny,
full ejaculation would have been assured.
The only thing cooler would have to be the real ship.
Peeve: Folks who never built anything themselves. And thought they could
just BUY something like that.
<Sorry bout that, Dave.. Another whole CLASS of people just written off,
without further exploration.>
L.
"Yeh, Buddy.. | la...@psl.nmsu.edu (Larry Cunningham)| _~~_
I've got your COMPUTER! | % Physical Science Laboratory | (O)(-)
Right HERE!!" | New Mexico State University | /..\
(computer THIS!) | Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA 88003 | <>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are CORRECT, mine, and not PSLs or NMSUs..
Staggerwing and me.. Ole Evil's bad mood is leaving now.
Dave Munroe
>Fifteen posters leap upon the newbie, and if the newbie responds
>with anything other than snivelling obsequiousness, and responds
>comprehensively, then the GROUP retreats from the 'flamewall' and
>erects killfile filters quicker than you can say 'gutless
>fucksticks'
On the contrary, the regular members of this group enjoy a well thought
out rebuttal. It's when the rebuttal is no rebuttal at all, as in the
case of Jeff Mortensen flailing around calling everyone a twit. When
numerous people pointed out to him exactly *why* his flaming was so
lacking in substance, he still didn't get it. The fact that killfiles
are being mentioned is because it's so unusual to have them here and
the cascaders played some part in that.
>... it's just a clique engaged in the business of being a
>clique. No different to a mens smoking club getting ultra
>irritated over the presence of women in their sandbox
I don't know who it is that's irritated. It seems that Reykja, Nomi Harris,
and Barbara La Scala came into the group without anyone torching their
tushes. As I remember, the three J's only had to endure some playful tussling
(it's been so long and my mind is going...).
>Peeve: It's the general ``pats on the back all round'' attitude
> that really peeves me about alt.peeves.
Hear, hear! Well said, old chap!
-Dave
Jenni Sheehey
>
>I don't know who it is that's irritated. It seems that Reykja, Nomi Harris,
>and Barbara La Scala came into the group without anyone torching their
>tushes. As I remember, the three J's only had to endure some playful tussling
>(it's been so long and my mind is going...).
I dunno, I think it's really the responses to the flamage that determine
whether a newbie gets lambasted. The way I see it, if someone new
posts, it's at least a 50% shot that *someone* will flame them. If they
respond to the flaming like a half-wit, calling everyone twits, they'll
become a barbecue. However, if they aren't so hot at flaming, and they
know that, they also have the option of just ignoring the flame, and
posting again when they have another peeve. Eventually, the flamers
will get tired and pick up their toys and go home. It's the people who
feel like they have to *respond* to every followup to their post that
are running the risks.
ObPeeve: That stupid dog across the hall again. Last night, the
following was heard: *bark* *bark* *bark* *wooof* *ruff* *ruff*
*whimper* *bark* *hoooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwllll* *bark* *bark*
*bark*... (repeat for 5 hours or so.)
You would think that there couldn't be anything more annoying than a dog
barking from about 9:30pm to about 2:30am, but you would be wrong. To
add to the torture we have:
a) an owner who is either not home, or refuses to answer the door,
b) occasional stretches of 2 or 3 minutes with no barking, just so
you can remember why you prefer silence, and so that you can
miss it again when the dog starts barking.
I think that eventually the dog just got tired (wouldn't you?) and fell
asleep, thus letting the rest of us go to sleep as well.
Why am I not sure that the note we left under the door will do anything
at all? What I *am* sure of is that I'm lucky the person who lives in
that apartment didn't come home before I went to bed, because I'd hate
to go to jail.
ObHoney: Honey, you either shut that dog up, or I'm going to rip your
genitals off and use them as a gag for it.
Geoff Miller
In article <1b2b7ebb...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au> munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac writes:
>> You're missing the point, James. Like booter pointed out, the concept of
>> Peevetown is really just a parlor game of sorts. The Flamewall exists
>> not to exclude, but to filter. Most of us endured similar treatment
>Feh.
"Feh," my ass. *You* sure as hell did. And it never entirely stopped,
because the loathesomely tiresome drivel emanating from your keyboard
has never demonstrated much improvement.
>> If someone can't survive the Flamewall, then they'd probably be better
>> off elsewhere. If they can, then they're more likely to be able to
>> contribute to the quality of the newsgroup.
>What about when the newsgroup's members cannot put up with the
>rebuttals?
Oh, we can happily put up with them as long as they're worth our while.
It's lame, insipid tripe like what's-her-tits from Tektronix kept posting
that we have no tolerance for. As a group, we have a lot of appreciation
for a well-written counterflame. A worthy rebuttal commands our respect,
since it demonstrates that the person who wrote is has a certain amount
of spunk -- above and beyond whatever's dripping off his or her chin, of
course.
>Fifteen posters leap upon the newbie, and if the newbie responds
>with anything other than snivelling obsequiousness, and responds
>comprehensively, then the GROUP retreats from the 'flamewall' and
>erects killfile filters quicker than you can say 'gutless
>fucksticks'
Oh, horseshit. Denise was the first newbie ever to generate this response
on anything even resembling a significant scale -- although you came close.
The "comprehensiveness" of her retorts was tiresome not because of its
length, but because it lacked style, content and imagination. We see
comprehensive responses here all the time, and nobody bitches about them
because they're usually worthwhile -- your own vapid, jejune responses to
Andy being a glaring exception.
>Perhaps there is something a little more stylistic about a.p.
>articles in general [the much touted 'signal to noise ratio], but
>really, it's just a clique engaged in the business of being a
>clique. No different to a mens smoking club getting ultra
>irritated over the presence of women in their sandbox, or the
>snout-in-the-air toffynosed dweebitry that greets people
>wondering into *.mensa.*
Clearly spoken from the point of view of one who, despite all his efforts,
has not managed to earn a whole lot of respect around these parts.
Dave Munroe
this is a vigilant peever equipped with a flame thrower...
O
^|--<
v|
/ \
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this is a clueless pinhead with hands on hips...
. <-- small head
/|\
`|'
/ \
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this is the peever flaming the pinhead...
~~(~~+~"~*~~~o~~~~)~)
O FWOOOOOOM! - ~'~~~>~+~~o~~^o~~o~~o~~o~)~)~)
^|--<========================>=*===="*==o)=o=%o=/o\o==)o)~)o~)
v| ``o~~>~~~~o~~~~o~~ `o'~~o~)~)~)
/ \ ~(~"~+~`~o~)~/ \~)o~~))
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
o
any questions? +
O o +
^|--< ~ ~ +
v| ,.
/ \ ,*#@x.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way
Can I have mine scrambled?
L.
"Yeh, Buddy.. | la...@psl.nmsu.edu (Larry Cunningham)| _~~_
I've got your COMPUTER! | % Physical Science Laboratory | (O)(-)
Right HERE!!" | New Mexico State University | /..\
(computer THIS!) | Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA 88003 | <>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are CORRECT, mine, and not PSLs or NMSUs..
I saw God. He rides a motorcycle. He's coming back soon, and He's real pissed.
Eric Minch
z1...@exnet.iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson -- Love Rhino) writes:
> thoughtful and considerate person that I am, lit the grill and headed
off
> to the store to purchase some last-minute items. Both were done at
the
> bequest of April.
Allow me to extend to you my sincerest sympathy on the loss of your
wife. That you would rush off to the store, in such a time of grief,
simply to fulfill her last wishes, speaks volumes of your devotion.
> Upon my return, April was watching a movie.--
Oh, excuse me. All a terrible misunderstanding. You must have meant
"behest".
ObPeeve: using "obtuse" to mean something between "obscure" and
"abstruse". It doesn't; it means DULL or STUPID!
Eric Minch Any resemblance to the opinions of persons
Epistemic Artisan or organizations other than myself--living,
Stanford Genetics dead, or imaginary--is purely fortuitous.
Andrew Clayton
> In article <1b2b7ebb...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au> munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac writes:
>
> >> You're missing the point, James. Like booter pointed out, the concept of
> >> Peevetown is really just a parlor game of sorts. The Flamewall exists
> >> not to exclude, but to filter. Most of us endured similar treatment
>
> >Feh.
>
> "Feh," my ass. *You* sure as hell did. And it never entirely stopped,
> because the loathesomely tiresome drivel emanating from your keyboard
> has never demonstrated much improvement.
Please, leave aside the tiresome, overbearing, pompous dweebitry,
iherent in your claims about *my* acceptability within the group,
Indicate whether or not you agree with the following scenario:
Newbie enters a peeve in alt.peeves. Newbie is shot at
by various autoposting ackack generators. Newbie
responds to ackack with flames of a similar standard.
Hackles rise within the peeves clique, and killfiles are
erected accordingly - but not before each active member
gets to lob a scud or two of derision at the newbie.
Wayfuckingcool Geoff! Antagonise someone with ill-deserved fury,
then retreat within the confines of the clique, to further
discuss how much more capable the group is than was the
newly blackballed newcomer.
> >What about when the newsgroup's members cannot put up with the
> >rebuttals?
>
> Oh, we can happily put up with them as long as they're worth our while.
Another black mark against your spotty hide. #You# are not the
spokesperson for alt.peeves, and if you were, nobody would take
the least bit of notice. Your opinion is worth the photons it is
displayed with - not a lot.
> >Fifteen posters leap upon the newbie, and if the newbie responds
> >with anything other than snivelling obsequiousness, and responds
> >comprehensively, then the GROUP retreats from the 'flamewall' and
> >erects killfile filters quicker than you can say 'gutless
> >fucksticks'
>
> Oh, horseshit. Denise was the first newbie ever to generate
> this response on anything even resembling a significant scale --
> although you came close.
You are leaping to specific examples, Geoff, whereas I am
discussing the ongoing raison d'etre [almost] for alt.peeves.
*Generally* speaking, the clique is a bunch of social
pincushions, bristling with their own inflated ego, and glowing
with a sense of purpose *so* vain, that it is surely against the
law in most civilised countries!
> >Perhaps there is something a little more stylistic about a.p.
> >articles in general [the much touted 'signal to noise ratio], but
> >really, it's just a clique engaged in the business of being a
> >clique. No different to a mens smoking club getting ultra
> Clearly spoken from the point of view of one who, despite all
> his efforts, has not managed to earn a whole lot of respect
> around these parts.
In your vapid opinion.
Justification for ones existence within any newsgroup is not
wholly dependant upon public displays of grovelling sycophantry.
Indeed, if I wanted hoards of 'fans' then I would go about
posting articles with a whole different slant.
It takes input from many people to keep a newsgroup from going
stale. You are as guilty as anyone else within alt.peeves of
pointing your dainty finger of derision at anyone who dares to
vent their opinion, without your overt acceptance of them into
the group.
Take your higher-ground cliquism, and shove it in your
megapowerful killfile.
Rick Gordon
>In article <l3hufs...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>, Geoff Miller writes:
>> [ ... ]
>Indicate whether or not you agree with the following scenario:
>
> Newbie enters a peeve in alt.peeves. Newbie is shot at
> by various autoposting ackack generators. Newbie
> responds to ackack with flames of a similar standard.
> Hackles rise within the peeves clique, and killfiles are
> erected accordingly - but not before each active member
> gets to lob a scud or two of derision at the newbie.
The clique and its killfiles: the horror!
>Wayfuckingcool Geoff! Antagonise someone with ill-deserved fury,
>then retreat within the confines of the clique, to further
>discuss how much more capable the group is than was the
>newly blackballed newcomer.
The damnable clique, the odious, contemtible, *unfair* clique. What
bullies they are!
>> >What about when the newsgroup's members cannot put up with the
>> >rebuttals?
>>
>> Oh, we can happily put up with them as long as they're worth our while.
>
>Another black mark against your spotty hide. #You# are not the
>spokesperson for alt.peeves, and if you were, nobody would take
>the least bit of notice. Your opinion is worth the photons it is
>displayed with - not a lot.
Translation: Nobody listens to your opinions, and even if they did,
they wouldn't, really.
>> >Fifteen posters leap upon the newbie, and if the newbie responds
>> >with anything other than snivelling obsequiousness, and responds
>> >comprehensively, then the GROUP retreats from the 'flamewall' and
>> >erects killfile filters quicker than you can say 'gutless
>> >fucksticks'
More killfiles: O dastardly, cowardly clique!
> [ ... ]
>*Generally* speaking, the clique is a bunch of social
>pincushions, bristling with their own inflated ego, and glowing
>with a sense of purpose *so* vain, that it is surely against the
>law in most civilised countries!
Civilised countries? Name two.
>> >Perhaps there is something a little more stylistic about a.p.
>> >articles in general [the much touted 'signal to noise ratio], but
>> >really, it's just a clique engaged in the business of being a
>> >clique. No different to a mens smoking club getting ultra
The clique with so little shame it flaunts its cliqueness brazenly.
What cheek, this clique.
> [ ... ]
>Justification for ones existence within any newsgroup is not
>wholly dependant upon public displays of grovelling sycophantry.
>Indeed, if I wanted hoards of 'fans' then I would go about
>posting articles with a whole different slant.
Can't wait.
>It takes input from many people to keep a newsgroup from going
>stale. You are as guilty as anyone else within alt.peeves of
>pointing your dainty finger of derision at anyone who dares to
>vent their opinion, without your overt acceptance of them into
>the group.
>
>Take your higher-ground cliquism, and shove it in your
>megapowerful killfile.
The words for today are "clique" and "killfile". What I can't figure out
is what power a killfile has over anybody. The expression "That's it,
pal, you're going in my killfile" doesn't even mean anything interesting
anymore, it's been overused so much.
Let's move on.
Brian Scearce
> [The alt.peeves] clique is a bunch of social pincushions, bristling
> with their own inflated ego, and glowing with a sense of purpose *so*
> vain, that it is surely against the law in most civilised countries!
Given that the majority of said posters are from the United States and
Scotland, I don't think that the opinions of civilised countries enter
into the matter.
---
Brian Scearce b...@sector7g.eng.sun.com
The above does not necessarily represent Sun policy.
It's easier to get forgiveness than permission.
Andrew Scott Beals -- KC6SSS
+In article <l3hufs...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>, Geoff Miller writes:
+> In article <1b2b7ebb...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au> munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac writes:
+> >What about when the newsgroup's members cannot put up with the
+> >rebuttals?
+>
+> Oh, we can happily put up with them as long as they're worth our while.
+Another black mark against your spotty hide.
Pinhead, how many times do we have to tell you? Geoff doesn't have spots.
Andy Banta doesn't have spots, *I* have spots.
--
Andrew Scott Beals abe...@autodesk.com, kc6sss@n6ldl.#nocal.ca.usa.na
50.115MHz
Vivu libere a>u mortu!
Elaine Richards
>In article ARN...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au, d...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au (Andrew Clayton)
>> [The alt.peeves] clique is a bunch of social pincushions, bristling
>> with their own inflated ego, and glowing with a sense of purpose *so*
>> vain, that it is surely against the law in most civilised countries!
>
>Given that the majority of said posters are from the United States and
>Scotland, I don't think that the opinions of civilised countries enter
>into the matter.
I think it was Ghandi who said that Western Civilization was a good idea.
I'd like to know what an Australian knows about civilization. I mean,
really, one big soprano and that's it. (Damn, I wish I could remember
her name.) Oh, yeah, and then there's Paul Hogan.
I do think that our Aussie has hit the pin on the cushion. Yes, we are
all social pincushions, bristling with our own egos. I take exception
with the notion that our clique should be outlawed. There are too many
laws already and if they did legislate against prickly egotists who
are, by the way, generally quite correct in their perceptions, the
cream of "civilization" would be banging out license plates.
Andy Rooney would be complaining from Attica, Tom Wolfe would pen a novel
called "Bonfire of the Bunkmates", Hunter S. Thompson would write columns
to be put in a book called "Fear and Loathing in the Chow Line", and
the mundanes who drool happily at whatever miserable fate God hands
them would be at liberty to screw up the world with poorly designed
automobiles, bad food, bad music, and undisciplined drooling mundane
children. (Try reading *that* sentence out loud.)
Besides, there are too many damned laws already. "Family values" laws,
laws against harmless garden vegetables, speeding laws, and obsolete
laws about not letting your mule sleep in a bathtub abound.
So, my fine 'roo, drop your sword of legal tomfoolery and bluster,
come join us in the roiling inferno of peevetown. You have nothing to
lose but your pincushion.
ER
Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide
>I'd like to know what an Australian knows about civilization. I mean,
>really, one big soprano and that's it. (Damn, I wish I could remember
>her name.) Oh, yeah, and then there's Paul Hogan.
I always think of Jacko Jackson when I read a dac post.
Come on, dac, show us your teeth!
Andrew Clayton
> d...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au (Andrew Clayton) writes:
>
> +In article <l3hufs...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>, Geoff Miller writes:
>
> +> In article <1b2b7ebb...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au> munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac writes:
>
> +> >What about when the newsgroup's members cannot put up with the
> +> >rebuttals?
> +>
> +> Oh, we can happily put up with them as long as they're worth our while.
>
> +Another black mark against your spotty hide.
>
> Pinhead, how many times do we have to tell you? Geoff doesn't have spots.
> Andy Banta doesn't have spots, *I* have spots.
Beals, you spotty vulgarian, fuck right off.
[Banta may not have spots: More likely large pulsing wens and
other sundry excresences filled to almost bursting, with
solidified pus, and vile bile. But I didn't call him spotty, el
stupido, I called G{e}oofy 'Spotty', capische?]
Andrew Clayton
> In article <1b32148c...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au> dac writes:
>
> >In article <l3hufs...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>, Geoff Miller writes:
> >> [ ... ]
> >Indicate whether or not you agree with the following scenario:
> >
> > Hackles rise within the peeves clique, and killfiles are
> > erected accordingly - but not before each active member
> > gets to lob a scud or two of derision at the newbie.
>
> The clique and its killfiles: the horror!
The banality, the churlishness, the unmitigated oozing
unctuousness of a few tens of slugs, leaving their snot-trails,
and envisaging themselves as rightful leaders in a psuedo
electorate.
> >then retreat within the confines of the clique, to further
> >discuss how much more capable the group is than was the
> >newly blackballed newcomer.
>
> The damnable clique, the odious, contemtible, *unfair* clique. What
v
The clueless clique. The spelling-flame-aware clique. The
clapped-out clique.
Please, do go on. You seem, for some strange reason, to be
enjoying yourself ...
> >the least bit of notice. Your opinion is worth the photons it is
> >displayed with - not a lot.
>
> Translation: Nobody listens to your opinions, and even if they did,
> they wouldn't, really.
My Deduction Re Your Translation: A pithy attempt at
observation, by the human equivalent of a blind paraplegic kipper
with herpes and a bad case of gill-rot.
> >> >erects killfile filters quicker than you can say 'gutless
> >> >fucksticks'
>
> More killfiles: O dastardly, cowardly clique!
Custardly clique, lamentably soft and runny clique.
> >*Generally* speaking, the clique is a bunch of social
> >pincushions, bristling with their own inflated ego, and glowing
> >with a sense of purpose *so* vain, that it is surely against the
> >law in most civilised countries!
>
> Civilised countries? Name two.
Er, Australia and New Zealand. :-)
> >> >Perhaps there is something a little more stylistic about a.p.
> >> >articles in general [the much touted 'signal to noise ratio], but
> >> >really, it's just a clique engaged in the business of being a
> >> >clique. No different to a mens smoking club getting ultra
>
> The clique with so little shame it flaunts its cliqueness brazenly.
> What cheek, this clique.
But not a chic clique, more a mob of Hells Angels armed with a
dictionary, thesaurus, soft putty for brains, and a cut-rate
brand of litotes in vinegar aspic on the side!
> >Take your higher-ground cliquism, and shove it in your
> >megapowerful killfile.
>
> The words for today are "clique" and "killfile".
"This message was brought to you by the letters Zed and Ay."
> What I can't figure out is what power a killfile has over anybody.
Precisely.
Killfiles are for impatient goons and attocebraic hooligans.
> Rick Gordon | "What hath God wrought? Lately, I mean."
grok nordic?
Andrew Clayton
> In article <l3v2ni...@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> b...@sector7g.Eng.Sun.COM writes:
> >In article ARN...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au, d...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au (Andrew Clayton)
> >> [The alt.peeves] clique is a bunch of social pincushions, bristling
> >> with their own inflated ego, and glowing with a sense of purpose *so*
> >> vain, that it is surely against the law in most civilised countries!
> >
> >Given that the majority of said posters are from the United States and
> >Scotland, I don't think that the opinions of civilised countries enter
> >into the matter.
>
> I think it was Ghandi who said that Western Civilization was a good idea.
Would be, Elaine, would be.
> I'd like to know what an Australian knows about civilization.
The expurgated version?
How about the Australian National Gallery getting together the
definitive collection of Ruben's paintings and having an Italian
Renaissance exhibition that was superb?
Tell me more about American knowledge about ``civilisation.'' I
challenge you to grab the attention of the nearest American
teenager, and interrogate them as to where Athens is, or who
Helen of Troy was. I bet the results are less than spectacular,
at least in terms of correctness.
WARNING: Teenagers are clueless. This is an unfair challenge!
> I mean, really, one big soprano and that's it. (Damn, I wish I
> could remember her name.) Oh, yeah, and then there's Paul Hogan.
Joan "I'm really retiring this time" Sutherland? Dame Margo
Fontaine. Dame Nellie Melba. Errol Flynn. INXS. Vegemite. Fosters.
Gene Shears. Over the Horizon Radar. ILS aircraft landing system.
Kangaroos.
> I do think that our Aussie has hit the pin on the cushion. Yes, we are
> all social pincushions, bristling with our own egos. I take exception
> with the notion that our clique should be outlawed.
WHOA! There was no suggestion of changing the current mechanisms
used by alt.peevers, only a suggestion that they be rightfully
recognised for what they are, instead of being hailed as some
sort of overt cleverness. Okay?
> So, my fine 'roo, drop your sword of legal tomfoolery and
bluster,
Legalese is not the Australian Way, my fine American friend. LA
Law adequately shows us the stupidity of the American Legal
System. One wouldn't want anything to do with it, really, hmm?
> come join us in the roiling inferno of peevetown. You have nothing to
> lose but your pincushion.
And you your sense of purpose ...
Don't you worry about me _not_ being here, Elaine. Worry more
about how to get rid of someone who is truly a pest, when
traditional models drop their flaming vorpal swords, and fall
flat on their tummies, to squeal 'quick, the killfile!'
Have a nice diurnal cycle.
Andrew Clayton
> In article <16...@autodesk.COM>, Elaine Richards writes:
> >I'd like to know what an Australian knows about civilization. I mean,
> I always think of Jacko Jackson when I read a dac post.
"Bastard, bastard, bastard."
Dac
--
242 lbs before cooking
>[Banta may not have spots: More likely large pulsing wens and
>other sundry excresences filled to almost bursting, with
>solidified pus, and vile bile. But I didn't call him spotty, el
>stupido, I called G{e}oofy 'Spotty', capische?]
Oh, Dac. <sniff> That's one of the sweetest things anyone has ever
said about me.
<ahem>. Now, what are we going to do about this loss of memory you're
demonstrating. Do you deny you made a faltering attempt to apply
rhetoric with the line:
>Did the nasty man BORE you to death with your own insipid
>arguments thrust back into your spotty face, hmm?
Do you further deny that you addressed the above in my general
direction?
el stupido, indeed. Tu puta madre trabajaba en los ferrocarriles
canadienses. Bambozo.
drew
ba...@abingdon.sun.com
--
"When PETA starts trying to toss red paint on motorcycle riders wearing
leather jackets, things will get more interesting (and I hope someone's
there with a camera)."
-- James Jones
Bill Berbenich
>I'd like to know what an Australian knows about civilization. I mean,
>really, one big soprano and that's it. (Damn, I wish I could remember
>her name.) Oh, yeah, and then there's Paul Hogan.
Don't forget Jacko! Oy!
ObAcronym: BOHICA - Bend Over, Here It Comes Again.
--
"Take me down where the love honey flows,
kiss you nice, nibble your toes." -B-52s, Good Stuff
Geoff Miller
In article <1b32148c...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au>
munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolicks!dac writes:
>Please, leave aside the tiresome, overbearing, pompous dweebitry,
>iherent in your claims about *my* acceptability within the group,
Why? It's entirely relevant to the matter at hand, you know. If your
reading comprehension was anywhere close to comparable with your
bellicosity, you'd be able to grasp that. But I suppose you have to
be cautious about straining your brainlet.
------
>Wayfuckingcool Geoff! Antagonise someone with ill-deserved fury,
>then retreat within the confines of the clique, to further
>discuss how much more capable the group is than was the
>newly blackballed newcomer.
You still don't get it, do you? [I always wanted to say that!]
People aren't "blackballed" unless they truly deserve it -- in which
case, why would you care? Oh, I understand; you're just resentful
about never being accepted yourself, so you're attempting to cloak
your petulance in righteous indignation as you charge theatrically,
yet ridiculously, for the moral high ground.
------
>> Oh, we can happily put up with them as long as they're worth our while.
>Another black mark against your spotty hide. #You# are not the
>spokesperson for alt.peeves, and if you were, nobody would take
>the least bit of notice. Your opinion is worth the photons it is
>displayed with - not a lot.
A cheap shot, trickledick. But then, how could one reasonably expect any
more from you?
Let's review the fundamentals, shall we? One isn't a self-proclaimed
spokesman because he states the obvious. Or at least, something that
would be obvious to anyone who wasn't preoccupied with spanking load
after viscous load of textual spoogie onto his keyboard, in an
embarrasingly lame attempt to salvage the shards and fragments of his
shattered dignity.
------
>> >Fifteen posters leap upon the newbie, and if the newbie responds
>> >with anything other than snivelling obsequiousness, and responds
>> >comprehensively, then the GROUP retreats from the 'flamewall' and
>> >erects killfile filters quicker than you can say 'gutless
>> >fucksticks'
>> Oh, horseshit. Denise was the first newbie ever to generate
>> this response on anything even resembling a significant scale --
>> although you came close.
>You are leaping to specific examples, Geoff, whereas I am
>discussing the ongoing raison d'etre [almost] for alt.peeves.
Oh, Ghod, *surely* even you can do better than that in the way of a
rejoinder! Any "ongoing raison d'etre" would be the result of such
specific examples. Stop, take a few deep breaths, and -- I know
this is asking a lot -- think: How did this subject even come up?
It grew out of your veritable alter-ego Denise's puerile antics.
------
>*Generally* speaking, the clique is a bunch of social
>pincushions, bristling with their own inflated ego, and glowing
>with a sense of purpose *so* vain, that it is surely against the
>law in most civilised countries!
So why do you stick around if this "clique" is so distasteful to you?
You know what I think the explanation for your continued presence is?
Hero worship. You want badly to be accepted by what you derisively
refer to as our "clique," but you can't bring yourself to admit it.
Why else would you be so persistent about hanging around while
simultaneously deriding the rest of us?
Then again, it might be penis envy.
------
>> Clearly spoken from the point of view of one who, despite all
>> his efforts, has not managed to earn a whole lot of respect
>> around these parts.
>In your vapid opinion.
Oh yeah, right; I'm clearly the only one who's ever flamed you. All
those other examples must have been imaginary.
------
>Justification for ones existence within any newsgroup is not
>wholly dependant [sic] upon public displays of grovelling sycophantry.
>Indeed, if I wanted hoards of 'fans' then I would go about
>posting articles with a whole different slant.
Neither is it wholly dependent upon maintaining a tiresomely petulant
presence such as yours.
------
>It takes input from many people to keep a newsgroup from going
>stale. You are as guilty as anyone else within alt.peeves of
>pointing your dainty finger of derision at anyone who dares to
>vent their opinion, without your overt acceptance of them into
>the group.
How about providing some examples? I thought not.
------
>Take your higher-ground cliquism, and shove it in your
>megapowerful killfile.
Give it up, pindick. You're way out of your depth. But from what I've
seen, you'd be out of your depth anywhere the sidewalk was wet.
Geoff
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
"George Bush is 68 years old and Dan Quayle is an idiot. In '96, George Bush
will be 72 and Dan Quayle will *still* be an idiot." -- Jim Hunt
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Andrew Clayton
> munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac brachiates:
> >[Banta may not have spots: More likely large pulsing wens and
> >other sundry excresences filled to almost bursting, with
> >solidified pus, and vile bile.
>
> Oh, Dac. <sniff> That's one of the sweetest things anyone has ever
> said about me.
Stop Press: Net.thug gets off on rebarbative descriptions. Vomitus at 11.
> >Did the nasty man BORE you to death with your own insipid
> >arguments thrust back into your spotty face, hmm?
>
> Do you further deny that you addressed the above in my general
> direction?
... And you have the gall to accuse me of bearing grudges.
You soft pillock!
> el stupido, indeed. Tu puta madre trabajaba en los ferrocarriles
> canadienses. Bambozo.
Is this the Spanish equivalent of "I suddenly came over all
esuriant for some cheesy comestibles?", which roughly translated
sez "e-by-gum, ah' wan' sum cheese!"
Don't forget to close the door behind you when you leave, thugette.
> drew
> ba...@abingdon.sun.com
bang on a dumb antic, no?
Andrew Clayton
> In article <1b32148c...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au>
>
> >Please, leave aside the tiresome, overbearing, pompous dweebitry,
> >iherent in your claims about *my* acceptability within the group,
>
> Why? It's entirely relevant to the matter at hand, you know.
Entirely. Fer Sure. With you breaking the discombobulation
barrier without nary a sqeal, and heading off in high dudgeon
with both flamethrowers sputtering napalm-past-its-best-by-date,
in a hasty rear-guard action masquerading as an attack!
Who do you think you're fooling? The Clue Loan Arranger isn't
home, so you'll have to think fast to get out of this one before
the next serial is due to screen!
> If your reading comprehension was anywhere close
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. You are SO godawful literal! Have you
NO sense of adventure with the language? Does absolutely
everybloodything have to be staked down within a paragraph, in
some quasi "this goes with this goes with this" B-O-R-I-N-G,
sequential, "even-``Jack Sees Jane Run''-readers-could-comprehend
-this-paragraph" style?.
If you used your pitiful excuse for a noggin, perhaps the trials
and tribulations of being a little cog in a very large machine
would be less tiresome for you? Hmm?
Or is your reading time so limited that you're struggling to get
past an obtuse 'why', and an underexclaimed wherefore?
Take your limitations and hone them to a fine point, before
shoving them up your nostrils and auto_lobotomising yourself!
Ascribing your limitations to me is just plain lame!
> >newly blackballed newcomer.
>
> People aren't "blackballed" unless they truly deserve it -- in which
> case, why would you care?
You haven't got the foggiest notion, dreary. The operative term
is 'truly deserve it'. The dissection of 'it' is what you're
wanking on about. When is a flame not a flame? When it's a
boring melange of "Oh, why can't you grow up you insouciant cow?"
mixed with multiple occurences of outright indignation ... No
actual flaming, just a dull wall of 'we can't be bothered so
please fuck off at your earliest convenience'.
It == No Flames, just squodgy mountains of congealed ejaculate!
> >> Oh, we can happily put up with them as long as they're worth our while.
>
> >Another black mark against your spotty hide. #You# are not the
> >spokesperson for alt.peeves, and if you were, nobody would take
> A cheap shot, trickledick. But then, how could one reasonably expect any
> more from you?
More claims of retromingency? How sweet. How unoriginal. How you!
> Let's review the fundamentals, shall we? One isn't a self-proclaimed
> spokesman because he states the obvious.
But, dearest hindbrain eructor, one cannot 'state the obvious'
about the *opinions* of a loose amalgamation of peevers and
flamers under the cover of one newsgroup *Unless* you are given
the official mandate of the masses.
You are not authorised to wave around conjunctions of 'we think'
and 'we know', and 'we don't care'.
Or is that simple piece of logic too convoluted for your
flatlined brain to comprehend, THICKIE? DOES SINGLE CASE HELP
*YOUR* READING COMPREHENSION?
> >You are leaping to specific examples, Geoff, whereas I am
> >discussing the ongoing raison d'etre [almost] for alt.peeves.
>
> Oh, Ghod, *surely* even you can do better than that in the way of a
> rejoinder! Any "ongoing raison d'etre" would be the result of such
> specific examples. Stop, take a few deep breaths, and -- I know
> this is asking a lot -- think: How did this subject even come up?
> It grew out of your veritable alter-ego Denise's puerile antics.
This subject came up after a few 'select' peevers decided that
they had done a jolly good job of turning back another player,
and were hinting that they didn't even have to resort to their
individual killfiles, this time.
In other words, the clique couldn't wait to shove their tongues
right up their neighbouring clique-members bottom, and
congratulate each other with unrestrained brown-nosing vigour!
Viva la clique!
Gives a whole new meaning to the term 'tongue in cheek
response!'
> >*Generally* speaking, the clique is a bunch of social
> >pincushions, bristling with their own inflated ego, and glowing
> >with a sense of purpose *so* vain, that it is surely against the
> >law in most civilised countries!
>
> So why do you stick around if this "clique" is so distasteful to you?
Er, showing off your proud non-comprehender badge again, Geoffy -
I have no qualms about the use of weapons shown in this area. I
am specifically pointing out the back-slapping "we zorched them
good eh?' attitude is the actions of a fawning mob of,
sycophantic, and intrinsically unsound, retarded geeks with
Attitude!. Capische?
Oh, Geoff, you're so marvellously free of the ravages of
intelligence; here, let me explain it in BIFFSPEAK for you:
-BEING PR0UD 0F BEING A PEEVER SUX-
Specifically, it sucks rocks through small children, which is
considered by me to be a distasteful concept, and I dare any of
you to consider it otherwise!
> You know what I think the explanation for your continued presence is?
> Hero worship.
Bwahahaha. You made a funny. Good boy. Here, have a macaroon!
> >In your vapid opinion.
>
> Oh yeah, right; I'm clearly the only one who's ever flamed you. All
> those other examples must have been imaginary.
___
\)i == -1.
> >Justification for ones existence within any newsgroup is not
> >wholly dependant [sic] upon public displays of grovelling sycophantry.
> Neither is it wholly dependent upon maintaining a tiresomely petulant
> presence such as yours.
Who said it was? C'mon Mr Superlame - show me where I've stated
that petulance is the one true way? Show everyone what a clever
little boy you are, Geoffy! Then go stand in the corner and
recite "I will not make unfounded assumptions" a googolplex
times!
> >pointing your dainty finger of derision at anyone who dares to
> >vent their opinion, without your overt acceptance of them into
> >the group.
>
> How about providing some examples? I thought not.
Sure thang, pardner: Two examples out of many;
///
Message-ID: <l15sa4...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>
In <WHITL...@vaxb.gbus.virginia.edu> WHIT...@vaxb.gbus.virginia.edu (Reid E
. Whitlock) writes:
>I ask you fellow readers of this group --- is Mr. Bougerolle allowing you to
>judge for yourselves whether I have positions of merit to offer to this
>august body, or is he prejudicing your consideration of my, presumably, very
>valid peeves, with the background information he has so unabashedly shared
>here?
Not at all. I read your original postings after Steve mentioned them in
alt.peeves, and I think he's right about you. You deserve to be locked
in the cellar with a rutting bull elk on acid.
///
Message-ID: <l2nu7b...@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>
In article <92154.140...@psuvm.psu.edu> jenni's fiance
<JMS...@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>hey, chill out, i've never flamed you. youre not worth the effort.
I got news for you, Binker: nobody *needs* a reason to flame anyone here
in Peevetown. Not that you've left us without any, of course...
------
>i prostate [sic] myself before your infinite wisdom.
Bend over and grab your ankles while I put on my latex glove. Now hold
still while I grasp both your shoulders; this won't hurt a bit.
///
Care to eat your words? No. Thought not.
Russ Kepler
>el stupido, indeed. Tu puta madre trabajaba en los ferrocarriles
>canadienses. Bambozo.
Didn't you mean los Britanos? No love lost there...
--
Russ Kepler, Basis International Ltd. ru...@bbx.basis.com phone: 505-345-5232
Do not throw rocks at this signature
Sheepdogs 'R' Us
> Errol Flynn.
Homo child molester.
>INXS.
You call *that* a rock band?
>Vegemite.
Vile stuff, suitable for lubricating driveshafts with.
>Fosters.
Kangaroo piss.
>Over the Horizon Radar.
The Sovs had it first.
>Kangaroos.
So they crossed the original prisoners with Kangaroos and got the citizens
of today's Oz.
--
real address: ba...@catnip.berkeley.ca.us
last choice: lll-winken!catnip.berkeley.ca.us!bandy
"Excuse me, I'd like to have that Ferrari in the window."
"Certainly, sir. Cash or charge? Oh! Aryan Express. That will
do *nicely* sir. Would you also like to wipe your feet on my
mouth?"
- Mick Washbrook
Sheepdogs 'R' Us
>In article <16...@autodesk.COM>, Elaine Richards writes:
>> I think it was Ghandi who said that Western Civilization was a good idea.
>Would be, Elaine, would be.
Then again, Indian civilization would be a very good idea, too.
Curtis Yarvin
>
>So why do you stick around if this "clique" is so distasteful to you?
>You know what I think the explanation for your continued presence is?
>Hero worship. You want badly to be accepted by what you derisively
>refer to as our "clique," but you can't bring yourself to admit it.
>Why else would you be so persistent about hanging around while
>simultaneously deriding the rest of us?
>
>Then again, it might be penis envy.
I don't know, Geoff. It might just be just a zinc deficiency.
c
(the shameless plagiarist)
242 lbs before cooking
>> >[Banta may not have spots: More likely large pulsing wens and
>> >other sundry excresences filled to almost bursting, with
>> >solidified pus, and vile bile.
Exemplary editting. Just to jog my memeory, didn't you finish off
by saying:
> I didn't call him spotty, el
> stupido, I called G{e}oofy 'Spotty', capische?]
Let me jog your memory: yes, you did.
>> >Did the nasty man BORE you to death with your own insipid
>> >arguments thrust back into your spotty face, hmm?
>> Do you further deny that you addressed the above in my general
>> direction?
>... And you have the gall to accuse me of bearing grudges.
No grudges, sonny. Just complete archives. (Oh wait. You're a
dac: Bandy said "Banta's not spotty." You said "I didn't call him
spotty." I said "Yes you did. Here it is." Sufficiently clear?)
Now don't you have a few spots of your own to generate?
>> el stupido, indeed. Tu puta madre trabajaba en los ferrocarriles
>> canadienses. Bambozo.
>Is this the Spanish equivalent of "I suddenly came over all
>esuriant for some cheesy comestibles?",
Damn. You figured it out. Now call home and find out how Scearce's
bachelor party went.
>Don't forget to close the door behind you when you leave, thugette.
That's "Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out," snuggles.
And I wasn't leaving. I paid to see you spill your seed on your
lap, and the show isn't over yet.
Andrew Clayton
> d...@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au (Andrew Clayton) shows examples of Oz civilization:
>
> > Errol Flynn.
>
> Homo child molester.
Yep.
> >INXS.
>
> You call *that* a rock band?
Yep.
> >Vegemite.
>
> Vile stuff, suitable for lubricating driveshafts with.
Vegemite, being vitamin B + salt, is a very bad lubricant indeed.
> >Fosters.
>
> Kangaroo piss.
Could be, could be. Popular kangaroo piss though.
> >Kangaroos.
>
> So they crossed the original prisoners with Kangaroos and got the citizens
> of today's Oz.
Insert sarcastic 'guffaw' here.
Peeve: -5C in the mornings.
Dac
--
Andrew Clayton
I don't know Geoff either.
Does that constitute a zinc deficiency too?
"Zinc deficiency 2 - the return of the non-performer."
``In space, nobody can hear you wank!''
3
Peeve: Alien
Dac
--
"He'll never go away"
Andrew Clayton
> munnari!labtam!eyrie!prolix!dac writes:
> >> >[Banta may not have spots: More likely large pulsing wens and
>
> Exemplary editting. Just to jog my memeory, didn't you finish off
> by saying:
You are no exemplar. 'Editting'. Sheesh.
> > I didn't call him spotty, el
> Let me jog your memory: yes, you did.
...
> >... And you have the gall to accuse me of bearing grudges.
>
> No grudges, sonny. Just complete archives. (Oh wait. You're a
> dac: Bandy said "Banta's not spotty." You said "I didn't call him
> spotty." I said "Yes you did. Here it is." Sufficiently clear?)
My archives don't include me stating my opinion about you having
[or not having] spots. Exemplary evidence of not so complete
archives.
Peeve: Not so complete archives.
> Now don't you have a few spots of your own to generate?
Wet ones.
> That's "Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out," snuggles.
Yer. Vis a vis "lets not be too obvious out there boys and girls."
> And I wasn't leaving. I paid to see you spill your seed on your
> lap, and the show isn't over yet.
Eruption at 11. I wish. :-)
Allan Evans
> >
> > Civilised countries? Name two.
>
> Er, Australia and New Zealand. :-)
What the hell is this?
>
> Dac
Watch it Dac, you're getting soft.
Al
_______________________________________________________________________________
| Allan H. Evans * School of Geography * UNSW * PO Box 1 Kensington 2033 Aust.|
| all...@earth.gas.unsw.OZ.AU Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Systems |