On topic/off topic

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Bill Davidson

unread,
Apr 26, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/26/99
to
I get comments about what's on or off topic. What *is* 'on topic' for this
group? If all this NG is only about locating ex-mates, announcing reunions,
etc, we can do that on Channel 4. As I see it, we are all civilians now, but
civilians with a difference: we've all been through the military machine, so
that gives us something in common - service breakfasts, Snowdrops, Redcaps,
Chunkies, Rock Apes, RSMs, NAAFI, Drill Squares, Arms Drill, etc, etc - what
do 'ordinary' civilians know of these things?

On the other hand, we now live in the civilian world. We should be able to
express ourselves, from the point of view as ex-servicemen/women, on any
topic we choose. I don't think there can be any: "yes, provided that..."
about this; either this NG is about making contact with ex-comrades/reunions
and nothing else, or it's open season on anything. Your comments please.


Bill Davidson in Hackney

Philip J West

unread,
Apr 26, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/26/99
to

Bill Davidson wrote in message <7g2mpc$53t$1...@supernews.com>...
I can sympathise with your view to a point, Bill, and have been scanning
this group almost since its inception. It is a useful forum for locating
buddies and announcing reunions - even if this can be achieved elsewhere -
so let's not try and quash that aspect of this ng. I can't be bothered with
hunting down the groups' charter to see what is considered 'on topic' but I
agree with your sentiments. What really gets up my nose is the amount of
spam that gets dropped into this ng - but then I suspect that every group
gets its fair share of that!

What do 'ordinary' people know of a lot of things? I've been out of the RN
for about 8 years and I still find it hard to say no to someone in
authority! Mind you, I suprise myself sometimes!!!
--
Philip J West
http://www.westfamily.demon.co.uk
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!


Kathy Kantypowicz

unread,
Apr 26, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/26/99
to

Philip J West wrote in message
<925166657.11182.1...@news.demon.co.uk>...

>
>Bill Davidson wrote in message <7g2mpc$53t$1...@supernews.com>...
>>I get comments about what's on or off topic. What *is* 'on topic' for this
>>group? If all this NG is only about locating ex-mates, announcing
>reunions,
>>etc, we can do that on Channel 4. As I see it, we are all civilians now,
>but
>>civilians with a difference: we've all been through the military machine,
>so
>>that gives us something in common - service breakfasts, Snowdrops,
Redcaps,
>>Chunkies, Rock Apes, RSMs, NAAFI, Drill Squares, Arms Drill, etc, etc -
>what
>>do 'ordinary' civilians know of these things?
>>
>>On the other hand, we now live in the civilian world. We should be able to
>>express ourselves (SNIP) . . . Your comments please.

>>
>I can sympathise with your view to a point, Bill, and have been scanning
>this group almost since its inception. It is a useful forum for locating
>buddies and announcing reunions - even if this can be achieved elsewhere -
>so let's not try and quash that aspect of this ng. I can't be bothered
with
>hunting down the groups' charter to see what is considered 'on topic' but I
>agree with your sentiments. (SNIP)

>--
>Philip J West
>http://www.westfamily.demon.co.uk
>If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
>
And even though you rejected my fried bread recipe, Bill, so do I! Many
things evoke strictly Forces memories and many of our views are influenced
by our Forces experiences, so what may not seem immediately relevant to some
people will be *instantly* "Forces evocative* to others.

It seems very sad, to me, that there are those who would wish. . .very
selfishly, in my view. . .to spoil other people's enjoyment of a news
group - and it's *not* just confined to this one, either. What happened to
that word "tolerance"? Has someone removed it from the English dictionary
when I wasn't looking?

We don't have to all actually *like* each other, but please. . . can't we
at least respect each other's right to free speech and leave it to our own
conciences what is "on" or "off" topic? I'm sure that whoever drafted the
Charter assumed that we were all intelligent enough to exercise common
sense, so let's *all* try showing some & cease all this wretched bickering &
backbiting.

Being femal myself, I think I'm probably the one who's got the most right to
say this. . . we're all starting to sound like a bunch of Old Women rather
than Old Servicepeople, so for pete's sake let's stop squabbling!

Kathy

Michael `Mike` Crowe

unread,
Apr 27, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/27/99
to
In article <7g2rbh$njm$1...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>, Kathy Kantypowicz
<Ka...@kantypowicz.freeserve.co.uk> writes

>
>
>Being femal myself, I think I'm probably the one who's got the most right to
>say this. . . we're all starting to sound like a bunch of Old Women rather
>than Old Servicepeople, so for pete's sake let's stop squabbling!
>
>Kathy

On the Lower Deck in the Royal Navy, those would have been the words of
the Killick of the Grot. So come on, I agree with Kathy and I feel sure
that many others do, get back on talking Service Life. THAT, is what
Alec had in mind when he set the group up.

Mike :-))

Michael `Mike` Crowe R.N. Ship...@mikecrowe.demon.co.uk
H.M.S.Collingwood Assoc...@mikecrowe.demon.co.uk
All Ex-servicemen should look at the newsgroup:- uk.people.ex-forces
Ex Royal Navy? Read NAVY NEWS, monthly from H.M.S.Nelson, Portsmouth PO1 3HH

N.Elk...@lboro.ac.uk

unread,
Apr 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/29/99
to
Ahhhhhhhh
That explains a lot does that.(:-)
--
Folding Norman


Kathy Kantypowicz <Ka...@kantypowicz.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in article
snip>
> Being femal myself,

Kathy Kantypowicz

unread,
Apr 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/29/99
to
<s> And just *what* do you mean by that?!?

Please *do* explain. . . . . I *love* to watch people squirm. . . . . <lol>!

Kathy

N.Elk...@lboro.ac.uk wrote in message
<01be9239$66351aa0$0ed6...@pc95-adne.lboro.ac.uk>...

Philip J West

unread,
Apr 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/29/99
to
Kathy Kantypowicz wrote in message <7g2rbh$njm$1...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>...

>
>Being femal myself, I think I'm probably the one who's got the most right
to
>say this. . . we're all starting to sound like a bunch of Old Women rather
>than Old Servicepeople, so for pete's sake let's stop squabbling!
>
>Kathy
>
Here, here. Now about that fried bread.... My dad, an ex steward, used to
make the bread slightly damp before dropping it into a hot (that H O T)
frying pan. Apparently that makes it nice and crisp on the outside. I'm
not too keen on fried slice myself, though!

Graeme Stevens

unread,
Apr 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/30/99
to
I meet quite regularly with some old Army mates. While we do reminisce about
the good old days we also spend time putting the world to rights. We cover
every topic from house prices to harlots. (OK, so we dont spend alot of time
on house prices) The point is we dont just talk about service life but what
we do talk about we discuss with a viewpoint often different to our civvy
friends. We dont always agree even so. When we dont it sometimes becomes
heated, but two parties vehemently opposed on one subject will often find
themselves back to back against the world on another. (Stops to draw breath)
I like this group the way it is. Wide and varied.
Just my opinion.

Graeme Stevens in bed


Bill Davidson wrote in message <7g2mpc$53t$1...@supernews.com>...
>I get comments about what's on or off topic. What *is* 'on topic' for this
>group
>

>On the other hand, we now live in the civilian world. We should be able to

>express ourselves, from the point of view as ex-servicemen/women, on any
>topic we choose. I don't think there can be any: "yes, provided that..."
>about this; either this NG is about making contact with
ex-comrades/reunions
>and nothing else, or it's open season on anything. Your comments please.
>
>

>Bill Davidson in Hackney
>
>
>

Hardman

unread,
Apr 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/30/99
to
This is the initial charter for the newsgroup uk.people.ex-forces as issued
in the newgroup message. For further information on the newsgroup creation
process in the UK and current charters please look at
http://www.usenet.org.uk/

uk.people.ex-forces - ex-members of HM Forces
CHARTER:
uk.people.ex-forces is for the discussion of all topics related to
ex-members of HM Forces and its use as a method for contacting other
ex-members of HM Forces.

Advertising is forbidden, with the following exceptions:
Suppliers of subject-relevant goods and services may post a pointer to their
website or invitation to request details.
This may not exceed four lines and may be posted no more often than once
every three months.

All posts must be in plain text with NO binaries. HTML and other types of
formatted text are not permitted, however references to relevant FTP-able
material and web URLs are welcome.


N.Elk...@lboro.ac.uk

unread,
Apr 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/30/99
to
I might explain by exemplifying a typical anecdote regarding my missuse.(Sp
OK, I do missuse her).

She has never had a car accident in her life,( but was caught speeding a
couple of times in BAOR years ago by our MP).

However, the trail of devastation and frustrated drivers she leaves behind
astounds me.
She is oblivious to all this, and cannot understand why we men become
frustrated drivers.

Now for wife and car, insert any situation and female you so desire.

You are a lovely calm understanding lot you ladies.

(Enough squirming????????)(:-))))

--
Folding Norman


Kathy Kantypowicz <Ka...@kantypowicz.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in article

<7gaclm$jvq$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>...

Bill Davidson

unread,
Apr 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/30/99
to

Philip J West wrote in message
<925419604.26083.0...@news.demon.co.uk>...

>Kathy Kantypowicz wrote in message <7g2rbh$njm$1...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>...
>>
>>Being femal myself, I think I'm probably the one who's got the most right
>to
>>say this. . . we're all starting to sound like a bunch of Old Women rather
>>than Old Servicepeople, so for pete's sake let's stop squabbling!
>>
>>Kathy
>>
>Here, here. Now about that fried bread.... My dad, an ex steward, used
to
>make the bread slightly damp before dropping it into a hot (that H O T)
>frying pan. Apparently that makes it nice and crisp on the outside. I'm
>not too keen on fried slice myself, though!
>
>--

Well Philip you're totally off-topic here! Fried bread indeed! Don't you
know that that was an entirely different thread? Since the NG Thought Police
haven't roasted your arse already, I figured I'd do it for them. You've been
accused and found guilty of posting "off-topic" (I don't really know what
that means but I know it MUST be bad) and you are hereby sentenced to six
months cyber-limbo - BY ORDER. Let this be a stern warning to you my boy. We
cannot tolerate this kind of behaviour in a civilised society. You WILL
remain on-topic or suffer the consequences. If you do not understand what
'on-topic' means in the context of this NG, then that is your fault for not
being able to read my mind.

Bill (Vigilante) Davidson in Hackney
Cyber-Judge, Jury, Executioner.


Michael `Mike` Crowe

unread,
Apr 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/30/99
to
In article <7gcg1t$nfk$1...@supernews.com>, Bill Davidson
<billda...@saqnet.co.uk> writes

> Let this be a stern warning to you my boy.

`Stern` warning, does that mean `Off Caps` at Defaulters on the QD?

Tex Bennett

unread,
Apr 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/30/99
to
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999 18:27:41 +0100, Michael `Mike` Crowe
<mike...@mikecrowe.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>In article <7gcg1t$nfk$1...@supernews.com>, Bill Davidson
><billda...@saqnet.co.uk> writes
>> Let this be a stern warning to you my boy.
>
>`Stern` warning, does that mean `Off Caps` at Defaulters on the QD?
>

An interview without coffee?

Bill Davidson

unread,
Apr 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/30/99
to

kathy_ka...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
May 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/3/99
to
In article <01be92ec$18a116a0$0ed6...@pc95-adne.lboro.ac.uk>,

<N.Elk...@lboro.ac.uk> wrote:
> I might explain by exemplifying a typical anecdote regarding my missuse.(Sp
> OK, I do missuse her).
>
> She has never had a car accident in her life,( but was caught speeding a
> couple of times in BAOR years ago by our MP).
>
Great to know you guys are so superior, Norman but. . . . err. . . can you
explain one small thing to me?

If you're all so smart, *why* do you tie a noose around your own necks before
you go out in the mornings?!?!

Kathy

> However, the trail of devastation and frustrated drivers she leaves behind
> astounds me.
> She is oblivious to all this, and cannot understand why we men become
> frustrated drivers.
>
> Now for wife and car, insert any situation and female you so desire.
>
> You are a lovely calm understanding lot you ladies.
>
> (Enough squirming????????)(:-))))
>
> --
> Folding Norman


-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

Alec Powell

unread,
May 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/3/99
to
In article <7gj1gk$ttk$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, kathy_kantypowicz@my-
dejanews.com writes

>If you're all so smart, *why* do you tie a noose around your own necks before
>you go out in the mornings?!?!
Ouch! Kathy that hurt!
Alec, (who has worn a tie probably only a dozen times since leaving the
mob in '76:-)
--
Alec Powell Watlington Oxon. UK South Oxfordshire War Memorials
http://www.prole.demon.co.uk The Red Kite
mailto:al...@prole.demon.co.uk THE MIDDLESEX REGIMENT


Paul Giverin

unread,
May 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/3/99
to
In article <7gj1gk$ttk$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, kathy_kantypowicz@my-
dejanews.com writes
>If you're all so smart, *why* do you tie a noose around your own necks before
>you go out in the mornings?!?!
>
I have had a noose around my neck since my wedding day some twenty years
ago.

Come on Kathy, its a well documented fact that women's brains shrink
when they have kids, which is another reason why blokes don't have kids.
Of course women don't need large brains because they don't have to do
important jobs like men do. That does not mean to say that Mother nature
has been unkind to women. Another well documented fact is that women
have smaller feet to let them get closer to the kitchen sink (sorry, I
know that's an old one). But don't get too upset, it could be worse, you
could be blonde.

;-)

--
Paul Giverin

kathy_ka...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
May 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/4/99
to
In article <be0IjKAimUL3Ew$G...@giverin.demon.co.uk>,
Paul Giverin <pa...@giverin.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> I have had a noose around my neck since my wedding day some twenty years
> ago.
>
> Come on Kathy, its a well documented fact that women's brains shrink
> when they have kids, which is another reason why blokes don't have kids.
> Of course women don't need large brains because they don't have to do
> important jobs like men do. That does not mean to say that Mother nature
> has been unkind to women. Another well documented fact is that women
> have smaller feet to let them get closer to the kitchen sink (sorry, I
> know that's an old one). But don't get too upset, it could be worse, you
> could be blonde.
>
> ;-)
>
> --
> Paul Giverin

What makes you think I'm *not* blonde, Paul?! As for women's brains
shrinking, well, y'know, it's not the size of a thing that counts, but the
way that you use it. . . . or so you *men* always tell us. . . . .

As for doing less important jobs, this is as maybe - but I'd still bet I get
*paid* more than you, so Bbbbbttthhhhh! (betcha always wondered how you
spelled a raspberry, didn't you? It's we women's superior communication
skills. . . . )


Getouta *that* one without moving. . . !!!

Kathy

N.Elk...@lboro.ac.uk

unread,
May 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/4/99
to
Now now Kathy.
Never said we were smart did I?
I don't know, the fairer sex.
Always putting words into others mouths.
The noose; it gives those who really take objection a great
opportunity.(:-)
--
Folding Norman


kathy_ka...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
<7gj1gk$ttk$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...


> In article <01be92ec$18a116a0$0ed6...@pc95-adne.lboro.ac.uk>,
> <N.Elk...@lboro.ac.uk> wrote:

>
> If you're all so smart, *why* do you tie a noose around your own necks
before
> you go out in the mornings?!?!
>

> Kathy
>
>

N.Elk...@lboro.ac.uk

unread,
May 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/4/99
to


kathy_ka...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
<7gleu1$vs6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...


> In article <be0IjKAimUL3Ew$G...@giverin.demon.co.uk>,
> Paul Giverin <pa...@giverin.demon.co.uk> wrote:

snip

>
> As for doing less important jobs, this is as maybe - but I'd still bet I
get
> *paid* more than you, so Bbbbbttthhhhh! (betcha always wondered how you
> spelled a raspberry, didn't you? It's we women's superior communication
> skills. . . . )
>


Thats a complex you've got there, not a salary.

FN


Paul Giverin

unread,
May 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/4/99
to
In article <7gleu1$vs6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, kathy_kantypowicz@my-
dejanews.com writes

>
>What makes you think I'm *not* blonde, Paul?!

The photo on your web page! Or are you so embarrassed to be blonde that
you resort to colour in a bottle? :)

> As for women's brains
>shrinking, well, y'know, it's not the size of a thing that counts, but the
>way that you use it. . . . or so you *men* always tell us. . . . .
>

Did *I* say that? Oh yeah I remember now.

>As for doing less important jobs, this is as maybe - but I'd still bet I get
>*paid* more than you, so Bbbbbttthhhhh! (betcha always wondered how you
>spelled a raspberry, didn't you? It's we women's superior communication
>skills. . . . )
>

Oi! watch what your doing with those raspberries, I'm soaked here.
Besides, I never get to see my salary.


>
>Getouta *that* one without moving. . . !!!
>

No moving? That's going to be tricky.

--
Paul Giverin

kathy_ka...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
May 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/4/99
to
In article <01be9627$87e56000$0ed6...@pc95-adne.lboro.ac.uk>,

<N.Elk...@lboro.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> kathy_ka...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
> <7gleu1$vs6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> > In article <be0IjKAimUL3Ew$G...@giverin.demon.co.uk>,
> > Paul Giverin <pa...@giverin.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> snip
>
> >
> > As for doing less important jobs, this is as maybe - but I'd still bet I
> get
> > *paid* more than you, so Bbbbbttthhhhh! (betcha always wondered how you
> > spelled a raspberry, didn't you? It's we women's superior communication
> > skills. . . . )
> >
>
> Thats a complex you've got there, not a salary.
>
> FN
>
>

Oh, you've seen my pay cheques then? <G>

kathy_ka...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
May 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/4/99
to
In article <4ZLwSJAc...@giverin.demon.co.uk>,
Paul Giverin <pa...@giverin.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
> The photo on your web page! Or are you so embarrassed to be blonde that
> you resort to colour in a bottle? :)

Ever hear of bleach?! (Nah, not really. . . . tried it once, didn't like it.
. . it's just not *true* what they say about blondes having more fun. . . !!)

(SNIP)

> >
> Oi! watch what your doing with those raspberries, I'm soaked here.
> Besides, I never get to see my salary.

And I bet I know *why*. . . . . who bags the booty? The ladies, of course!
Still think men are smarter?!?! <roflol>

> >
> No moving? That's going to be tricky.


Game, set and match?

Bill Davidson

unread,
May 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/5/99
to

Barry Pascoe wrote in message <372A90F9...@tcp.co.uk>...
>
>
>
>also purveor of incipient sarcasm!!!!
>


Well, yes, Barry. It was intended to be sarcastic. I'm glad you noticed! You
are indeed to be congratulated on you insight. Sarcasm, in case you didn't
know, is a form of criticism. Now do you have anything useful, I mean
*really* useful, to contribute to this NG? No, I thought not. Goodbye!

Bill Davidson in Hackney

dab

unread,
May 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM5/5/99
to
Who cares. Nil Desperandum and all that Jazz.
Ok so I'm a new guy on the block but I've had 32 years sussing out the
civvi's and I'm still not impressed
The point being is Don't winge. It is a well known fact that the Social
security system penalises SERVICE TO ( but as you will notice not
employment BY) the CROWN It's nothing new.
For those who took the queens shilling and swore allegiance to Her Majesty
I can only point out that the Senior??? Service to use the Expression -
Does
not. It being maintained that ( and I'm going back a long way now ) that
no pressed man could be expected to swear allegience to the crown (The
press gangs have never been formally abolished in Parliament)

Remember in ZULU

The Private - "Why us Sir "

The Sergeant Major - " 'Cause we're 'ere lad "

As to Posting Pictures - the majority of a servicemans memories are locked
up in Pictures in an old box nurtured and brought out when someone shows the
SSSSSSSSlightest interest and that's not often. Is'nt it about time that
service groups agggggitated to have this priviledge. For goodness sake
(nautical expressions subdued) the Administration of the day is making it
expensive enough to meet face to face any more. Sorry about that outburst
but I hope I've made my point Even George ??? allowed the Chealsea
Pensioners to Salute with their left hand Because as he said
"They have served the CROWN well and I think they are entitled to see the
face of their MONARCH" - or words to that effect.


~~~~~~~~~~~
Bagsy
Ex C.P.O. /E.R.A.1 1954-1967
P/M 928903. SIR

Everyone's A Fruit and Nut case diddle-e dar

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages