In [email protected], "danfriedman2002" <danfriedman2002@...> wrote: > > Curtis, > > In reply to your first paragraph: You are not "seconding the motion", but > rather introducing your own "motion", as your charactarization of my > suggestion as "outing of people against their will" is incorrect.
You pressed Rick to reveal names of people who don't want their names used. He responded that he was not going to do it. If that isn't what you meant it also isn't what you said. > > Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them to be support for > your critisism of my suggestion, which you mischaracterized anyway (see > above). It might be hard to describe what I was doing there since you seen unfamiliar with the basic underlying concept in play. > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > Hey Rick, > > > > I just want to second the motion for more restrictions on posters here and > > more outing of people against their will. Our need to know who is posting > > is much more important than their privacy. > > > > Also I would like to see a lot less of posters using passive construction > > in their writing. We need MORE action verbs, not less. Any chance you can > > include that demand in your new rules? > > > > And (last thing) how about a total ban on anyone referring to Guru Dev as > > "that homeless guy who hit the lottery." It is offensive to dwelling > > impaired Americans. > > > > Oh yeah (seriously, last thing) and I'm getting a little sick of the phrase > > UFO when we know damn well who these aliens are and where they are from. > > (I'm talking to you El Salvador) > > > > Oops (I promise last last last) If you wouldn't mind, I would like to see a > > shot of female posters in a wet T-shirt. Not to be sexist but in the > > spirit of the fullest possible dis-clothes-her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > > > On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:55 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> , "danfriedman2002" > > > <danfriedman2002@> wrote: > > > > > > > > This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this > > > non-Member are questioned. > > > > > > > > Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your > > > Sources need to be protected? > > > > > > > > More transparency, please. > > > > > > You must be joking ! Rick's motto is the wilder the rumor the better, at > > > least if it aims at a saint. > > > No transparency please ! > > > > > > So says Nabby, whose real name none of us know, and who delights in > > > stories > > > of UFOs (which I happen to believe in myself), mysterious world saviors, > > > etc. > > > > > >
