--- In [email protected], ruthsimplicity <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > > My apologies for leaving her off the list earlier, > > > > > but I wasn't sure that she had claimed in the past > > > > > to have been a regular practitioner of TM for many > > > > > years. Now that she has complained about being left > > > > > off the list and proudly wants to be, I oblige. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pompous Ass List: > > > > Barry > > > > Doug > > > > Vaj > > > > > > > > Chime in folks. > > > > > > Sal, of course (although she's more stupid than > > > pompous *per se*). > > > do.rkflex > > > Bhairitu, at times > > > Ruth, at times > > > Edg, at times > > > geezerfreak > > > sattvadude > > > > > > > Yikes! My spam filter is about to explode. > > > > Stupid list: > > Sal > > > Sal's not stupid, she just doesn't play be the same rules of engagement that > some others play by. > > For example, I may see a post and maybe a word or two makes me think of > something else maybe only slightly related and I post that in response. I > have seen Sal do the same. > > We do have a variety of styles here and it is interesting to see how they > mesh. From stream of consciousness to debate team. No one is stupid, some > are careless, but who cares? >
Good point Ruth. However, I hope you do not miss the reason I posted such a list was to point out the absurdity of posting lists.
