--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > It's possible your memory has conflated articles > > > > about Girl Scouts getting college scholarships, on > > > > the one hand, and Girl Scouts selling cookies, on > > > > the other. Or perhaps there were articles that > > > > mentioned both, but again, without connecting the > > > > two. > > > > > > And, given your history of wanting to prove me > > > wrong, in any circumtance possible, about the > > > tiniest of tiny nitpicks, it's possible that the > > > dozen or so sites you "spot checked" out of the > > > 6690 just weren't the right ones. Get back to > > > me after you've checked them all, Ok? :-) > > > > Actually, no, you made the claim, then supplied > > the purported documentation as "proof" of that > > claim, so you get to find the "right ones" if > > you want them found. > > Ahem. Let us drift back to the *start* of this > whole gulag in a girl scout troop and remember > the post that we're talking about. I posted a > thing we call in the writing business a JOKE: > > >> The real secret of the girl scout cookie drive > >> success is that it's a contest -- the girls are > >> earning college money for selling the most cookies, > >> that sorta thang. So to really make it a success, > >> you'd have to come up with some sort of TM contest. > >> > >> Maybe the "poor" recerts could earn their way to > >> Raja status. "Bring in 108 new initiates and > >> earn your robe! Bring in 300 and get the crown > >> that goes with it." > > Because I know you're not familiar with the concept, > a JOKE is a thing you're supposed to laugh at, and > in this case, use to laugh at the TM movement, which > sorely needs it. You had to go and turn it into some > kind of inquisition. Go figure.
As you usually do when you find yourself on the wrong end of a dispute, you misrepresent what happened. It's never clear with you whether you genuinely don't remember what happened and make stuff up to fill in the blanks to your own advantage, or whether your misrepresentations are deliberate. There was no inquisition of *any* kind on my part, not at the start nor at any time throughout the entire exchange. In fact, in two of my posts I agreed with you, in one case defending what you had said against a challenge by someone else. Our exchange got ugly only after I had pointed out that the Google search you had come up with in response to the other person's challenge didn't show what you wanted it to show. (You had already gotten ugly with the other person for having dared to challenge you.) You don't like to be challenged, Barry. You almost invariably get ugly when that happens, especially when you're in the wrong. <snip> > And YOU should have laughed. And how do you know I didn't? Are you so insecure about whether you've managed to be funny that you need to see a big HAHAHAHAHAHA? > Or gotten offended > about me poking fun at the Recerts and their door- > to-door initiation drive. I *should* have gotten offended?? Why on earth would you think I'd have reason to be offended? > Instead you focused on > the nitpick of all nitpicks, Girl Scout Cookies. No, I didn't "focus" on it. I merely pointed out, very briefly, that the Girl Scouts didn't operate the way you said. And you agreed, saying the contests you remembered might have been locally sponsored. Then I posted a little essay on how the Girl Scouts ran the cookie drive, because I thought *it* might be a good model for the TMO. No "nitpicking" there either, just a constructive suggestion for the TMO. If there was any preoccupation with nits, it was yours, in feeling you had to defend yourself from the other person's challenge, and then from *my* challenge to the bogus Google search you had cited in defending yourself from the first challenge. <snip> > I have nothing at stake in this silly non-sequitur, > Judy. I know what I read. If YOU want to flog the > non-sequitur, and in public no less, go right ahead. :-) Actually, as noted, you're the one flogging it. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
