What ever happened to Jai Maharaj?

[Mike Bandy]

What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
or dead? Those are the rumors, but I did Google news searches of Jai
Maharaj, Jay Stevens, Mantra Corporation, and Mantra Corp. to no
avail.

For that matter, what ever happened to Miss Cleo? The charges against
her were widely publicized, but I haven't been able to learn about any
disposition of the cases. Are they ongoing?

--
Mike Bandy

[Dena Jo]

On 01 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:

> What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
> or dead?

Where have you heard those rumors?

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Don Aitken]

On 1 Oct 2003 16:59:20 GMT, Dena Jo
<TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On 01 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:
>
>> What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
>> or dead?
>
>Where have you heard those rumors?

It's only four days since he last posted here: Message-ID:
<writing-***@news.mantra.com>

--
Don Aitken

[John Hall]

>>On 01 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:
>>
>>> What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
>>> or dead?

He's locked away in my killfile.

--
John W Hall <***@telus.net>
Cochrane, Alberta, Canada.
"Helping People Prosper in the Information Age"

[Mike Bandy]

John Hall <***@telus.net> wrote in message news:<***@4ax.com>...
> >>On 01 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:
> >>
> >>> What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
> >>> or dead?
>
> He's locked away in my killfile.

He's is in numerous kill files, but not mine. I've only kill filed
two or three individuals.

I don't have any technological abilities. I now use words like
"website" and "online," but I'm still holding out by typing "kill
file" as two words.

Gotta go. The World Poker Tour is playing on the Travel Channel. I'm
enthralled, even though I've already seen this episode and know the
results.

--
Mike Bandy

[Mark Browne]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, in alt.usage.english, Mike Bandy
<***@hotmail.com> writes
>John Hall <***@telus.net> wrote in message
>news:<***@4ax.com>...
>> >>On 01 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:
>> >>
>> >>> What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
>> >>> or dead?
>>
>> He's locked away in my killfile.
>
>He's is in numerous kill files, but not mine. I've only kill filed
>two or three individuals.

And he was not the first? I'm stunned!
--
Mark Browne
If replying by email, please use the "Reply-To" address, as the
"From" address will be rejected

[Dena Jo]

On 01 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:

> Gotta go. The World Poker Tour is playing on the Travel Channel.
> I'm enthralled, even though I've already seen this episode and
> know the results.

That wouldn't happen to be the one where Alan Cunningham was playing,
would it?

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Mike Bandy]

Dena Jo <TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<***@130.133.1.4>...
> On 01 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:
>
> > Gotta go. The World Poker Tour is playing on the Travel Channel.
> > I'm enthralled, even though I've already seen this episode and
> > know the results.
>
> That wouldn't happen to be the one where Alan Cunningham was playing,
> would it?

No, I was watching the Bellagio event. Offhand, I can't remember in
which one Alan Cunningham played.

--
Mike Bandy

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:

> No, I was watching the Bellagio event. Offhand, I can't remember in
> which one Alan Cunningham played.

It was Paris or Monte Carlo, I think.

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Mike Bandy]

Dena Jo <TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<***@130.133.1.4>...
> On 01 Oct 2003, Mike Bandy posted thus:
>
> > What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
> > or dead?
>
> Where have you heard those rumors?

I received an email. I rechecked Google news with this search: "Jai
Maharaj" OR "Jay Stevens" OR "Mantra Corporation" OR "Mantra Corp."
There were no relevant results. However, a Google group search sorted
by date reveals that someone else posted this before I did. It's
found here: http://snurl.com/JaiJay.

--
Mike Bandy

[Wes Groleau]

Mike Bandy wrote:
> What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized

My killfile log says he's hitting
alt.support.diabetes many times a day.

--
Wes Groleau
Can we afford to be relevant?
http://www.cetesol.org/stevick.html

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 23:28:54 -0500, Wes Groleau
<***@freeshell.org> wrote:

>Mike Bandy wrote:
>> What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
>
>My killfile log says he's hitting
>alt.support.diabetes many times a day.

You have a killfile log? And you read it?

I don't killfile people. There are posts, generally written by the
same people, that I simply mark "read" without opening. Very few of
them are people that irritate me (although Jai is on that list, and he
does irritate me). Most of them are just people that post on subjects
that don't interest me.

If I had a killfile, it would seem that the objective would be to not
clutter the screen with posts from people that I don't choose to read.
The idea of keeping a log of the posts that I don't choose to read is
absolutely alien to me. The idea of checking that log to see how many
times people that I don't choose to read do post is absolutely
ludicrous to me.

You seem to be a reasonably normal person. Why do you keep this log
and read it?

[Peter H.M. Brooks]

"Tony Cooper" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 23:28:54 -0500, Wes Groleau
> <***@freeshell.org> wrote:
> If I had a killfile, it would seem that the objective would be to not
> clutter the screen with posts from people that I don't choose to read.
> The idea of keeping a log of the posts that I don't choose to read is
> absolutely alien to me. The idea of checking that log to see how many
> times people that I don't choose to read do post is absolutely
> ludicrous to me.
>
> You seem to be a reasonably normal person. Why do you keep this log
> and read it?
>
There is some logic to this seemingly peculiar behaviour. The rules you set
up for killing messages can be generic. This means that, if you have set the
rule too wide, it is possible that you kill things you didn't wish to -
keeping a log allows you to check, from time to time, that this is not the
case, and adjust your filters appropriately.

The other, less reasonable, reason for people doing this is that putting
somebody in a killfile is seen by some simple-minded folk as an aggressive
act to be revealed to the person so enkillfiled as a debating point [vide
'Yah, boo, sucks']. Such people are, in my experience, terrified that they
have thus lost the last word, so they peek at entries that they have
pretended to hold in distain to check what they have said - a log file is
perfect for such ignoble purposes. The funny part is when such marvelously
clear-headed fellows burst out from behind their alledged killfile to
respond to some or other post that they shouldn't have been able to read. If
you find the teasing of the simple funny, that is...


--
Men don't pay you to sleep with them. They pay you to go home - Philip Roth
'The Human Stain' pg 236

[Wes Groleau]

Peter H.M. Brooks wrote:
> rule too wide, it is possible that you kill things you didn't wish to -
> keeping a log allows you to check, from time to time, that this is not the
> case, and adjust your filters appropriately.

Hmm. I hadn't thought of that. Maybe I _should_ read the log?
Naah, I already spend FAR too much time in Usenet.

> perfect for such ignoble purposes. The funny part is when such marvelously
> clear-headed fellows burst out from behind their alledged killfile to
> respond to some or other post that they shouldn't have been able to read. If

Problem with this is that if you have killfiled them,
you have to fire up google or some other Usenet access
method to find the post. Not only is that a lot of trouble,
you'd have to be a major moron not to realize you are
pointing out you lied about killfiling.

I don't publicly "plonk" any more either. At one time,
I thought that a silent change to the killfile is best
in most cases, but that an occasional comment was so heinous
it deserved a public "plonk" But one day it dawned on me
that those are precisely the persons who feel the greatest
need to change their e-mail address every time someone
filters it.

--
Wes Groleau
-----------
Daily Hoax: http://www.snopes2.com/cgi-bin/random/random.asp

[david56]

***@freeshell.org spake thus:

> Peter H.M. Brooks wrote:
> > rule too wide, it is possible that you kill things you didn't wish to -
> > keeping a log allows you to check, from time to time, that this is not the
> > case, and adjust your filters appropriately.
>
> Hmm. I hadn't thought of that. Maybe I _should_ read the log?
> Naah, I already spend FAR too much time in Usenet.
>
> > perfect for such ignoble purposes. The funny part is when such marvelously
> > clear-headed fellows burst out from behind their alledged killfile to
> > respond to some or other post that they shouldn't have been able to read. If
>
> Problem with this is that if you have killfiled them,
> you have to fire up google or some other Usenet access
> method to find the post. Not only is that a lot of trouble,
> you'd have to be a major moron not to realize you are
> pointing out you lied about killfiling.
>
> I don't publicly "plonk" any more either. At one time,
> I thought that a silent change to the killfile is best
> in most cases, but that an occasional comment was so heinous
> it deserved a public "plonk" But one day it dawned on me
> that those are precisely the persons who feel the greatest
> need to change their e-mail address every time someone
> filters it.

Gravity (which bizarrely refers to the killfile as the "bozo bin"),
doesn't remove posts from bozos, but quietly marks them as read.
This means you can usually see them go past in the thread and decide
whether the kill was appropriate.

--
David
=====
Does exactly what it says on the tin.

[Wes Groleau]

david56 wrote:
> Gravity (which bizarrely refers to the killfile as the "bozo bin"),
> doesn't remove posts from bozos, but quietly marks them as read.
> This means you can usually see them go past in the thread and decide
> whether the kill was appropriate.

Usenet itself has a feature that often makes
this irrelevant: The ones you most want to
NOT read are the ones most likely to be quoted
in their entirety by others.

--
Wes Groleau
When all you have is a perl, everything looks like a string.

[Wes Groleau]

Tony Cooper wrote:
> You seem to be a reasonably normal person. Why do you keep this log
> and read it?

I don't keep this log, Mozilla does.

I don't really read it, I just glance at it
when I clear it to keep it from wasting disk space.

Occasionally I look at it to see whether someone
in it is starting to act less like a troll.

As for skipping messages instead of killfiling--
I do a LOT of that. But there are a few persons
whose output of blather is such that the killfile
is a _tremendous_ time saver. And occasionally
there is someone whose attitude is such that
I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
on one of their messages.

--
Wes Groleau
When all you have is a perl, everything looks like a string.

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau <***@freeshell.org>
wrote:

>Tony Cooper wrote:
>> You seem to be a reasonably normal person. Why do you keep this log
>> and read it?
>
>I don't keep this log, Mozilla does.
>
>I don't really read it, I just glance at it
>when I clear it to keep it from wasting disk space.
>
>Occasionally I look at it to see whether someone
>in it is starting to act less like a troll.
>
>As for skipping messages instead of killfiling--
>I do a LOT of that. But there are a few persons
>whose output of blather is such that the killfile
>is a _tremendous_ time saver. And occasionally
>there is someone whose attitude is such that
>I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
>on one of their messages.

That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling, and I have 5
long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE, occasionally crossposted in
AEU) in there. The other criterion is those people who spam groups with
adverts for sex sites etc. Over the years I must have added hundreds of
those.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[R F]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Dr Robin Bignall wrote:

> That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling, and I have 5
> long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE, occasionally crossposted in
> AEU) in there.

Rey, that Areff fellow from down by Washington Square, and who else?

[Simøn R. Hüghes]

Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:
> On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau <***@freeshell.org>
> wrote:

> >And occasionally
> >there is someone whose attitude is such that
> >I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
> >on one of their messages.
>
> That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling, and I have 5
> long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE, occasionally crossposted in
> AEU) in there.

Long termers? You were replying to me in February this year.

Let me see who else have you got on your little list?

Rey Aman, Bob Cunningham, Charles Riggs, Martin Ambuhl, Jai Maharaj,
Me.

That's six you have boasted of killfiling.

Do we have any more volunteers?

Your list is strange. I did nothing to you before you called me
names ("dog shit", "stupid") and declared that you were killfiling
me (but not to my face, you yellow toad!). RF, on the other hand,
gets away with calling you a "doofus".

I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
haven't turned your brain on since 1967.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[Mark Wallace]

Simøn R. Hüghes wrote:
> Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:
>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau
>> <***@freeshell.org> wrote:
>
>>> And occasionally
>>> there is someone whose attitude is such that
>>> I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
>>> on one of their messages.
>>
>> That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling, and I
>> have 5 long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE, occasionally
>> crossposted in AEU) in there.
>
> Long termers? You were replying to me in February this year.
>
> Let me see who else have you got on your little list?
>
> Rey Aman, Bob Cunningham, Charles Riggs, Martin Ambuhl, Jai Maharaj,
> Me.
>
> That's six you have boasted of killfiling.
>
> Do we have any more volunteers?
>
> Your list is strange. I did nothing to you before you called me
> names ("dog shit", "stupid") and declared that you were killfiling
> me (but not to my face, you yellow toad!). RF, on the other hand,
> gets away with calling you a "doofus".
>
> I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
> haven't turned your brain on since 1967.

Get a life, Sy.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Simon R. Hughes]

Thus spake Mark Wallace:
> Simøn R. Hüghes wrote:
> > Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:
> >> On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau
> >> <***@freeshell.org> wrote:
> >
> >>> And occasionally
> >>> there is someone whose attitude is such that
> >>> I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
> >>> on one of their messages.
> >>
> >> That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling, and I
> >> have 5 long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE, occasionally
> >> crossposted in AEU) in there.
> >
> > Long termers? You were replying to me in February this year.
> >
> > Let me see who else have you got on your little list?
> >
> > Rey Aman, Bob Cunningham, Charles Riggs, Martin Ambuhl, Jai Maharaj,
> > Me.
> >
> > That's six you have boasted of killfiling.
> >
> > Do we have any more volunteers?
> >
> > Your list is strange. I did nothing to you before you called me
> > names ("dog shit", "stupid") and declared that you were killfiling
> > me (but not to my face, you yellow toad!). RF, on the other hand,
> > gets away with calling you a "doofus".
> >
> > I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
> > haven't turned your brain on since 1967.
>
> Get a life, Sy.

Thanks for that, but he saw it anyway: I changed my headers
slightly.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Simon R. Hughes posted thus:

> Thanks for that, but he saw it anyway: I changed my headers
> slightly.

Changing headers to avoid someone's kill-file is classic troll
behavior, and it should be beneath you, Simon. Don't make me have to
come back there.

--
Mom

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Simon R. Hughes]

Thus spake Dena Jo:
> On 03 Oct 2003, Simon R. Hughes posted thus:
>
> > Thanks for that, but he saw it anyway: I changed my headers
> > slightly.
>
> Changing headers to avoid someone's kill-file is classic troll
> behavior, and it should be beneath you, Simon. Don't make me have to
> come back there.

I'm sorry if I evaded your killfile, Dena.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 08:15:06 +0200, "Mark Wallace" <***@dse.nl> wrote:

>Simøn R. Hüghes wrote:
>> Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:
>>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau
>>> <***@freeshell.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> And occasionally
>>>> there is someone whose attitude is such that
>>>> I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
>>>> on one of their messages.
>>>
>>> That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling, and I
>>> have 5 long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE, occasionally
>>> crossposted in AEU) in there.
>>
>> Long termers? You were replying to me in February this year.
>>
>> Let me see who else have you got on your little list?
>>
>> Rey Aman, Bob Cunningham, Charles Riggs, Martin Ambuhl, Jai Maharaj,
>> Me.
>>
>> That's six you have boasted of killfiling.
>>
>> Do we have any more volunteers?
>>
>> Your list is strange. I did nothing to you before you called me
>> names ("dog shit", "stupid") and declared that you were killfiling
>> me (but not to my face, you yellow toad!). RF, on the other hand,
>> gets away with calling you a "doofus".
>>
>> I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
>> haven't turned your brain on since 1967.
>
>Get a life, Sy.

Thanks for quoting that, Mark. I wouldn't have seen it otherwise.

I'd like to see a quote of the reply I'm supposed to have made to him. He
can send it directly if he likes. I don't try to munge my address.

For his info, neither Bob nor Martin are killfiled. The Marjoram doesn't
appear to be of the human race, so doesn't count. I thought that
*everybody* had zapped him. I doubt that I've called anyone 'dog shit' in
my life. 'Stupid', maybe. More likely, a cheap and nasty imitation of his
idol. RF lives in a universe of his own, I'm still not sure if it overlaps
with the one I'm living in (but research continues), and being called a
'doofus' is not the end of the world by any means.

At least I have a brain to turn on occasionally. When I'm in the mood.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Dr Robin Bignall posted thus:

> I doubt that I've called anyone 'dog shit' in
> my life.

Actually, it was by implication.

Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>


--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On 3 Oct 2003 16:09:55 GMT, Dena Jo
<TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On 03 Oct 2003, Dr Robin Bignall posted thus:
>
>> I doubt that I've called anyone 'dog shit' in
>> my life.
>
>Actually, it was by implication.
>
>Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>

I stand corrected, Deej, and don't regret a word.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Simon R. Hughês]

Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:
> On 3 Oct 2003 16:09:55 GMT, Dena Jo
> <TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On 03 Oct 2003, Dr Robin Bignall posted thus:
> >
> >> I doubt that I've called anyone 'dog shit' in
> >> my life.
> >
> >Actually, it was by implication.
> >
> >Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>
>
> I stand corrected, Deej, and don't regret a word.

So "scum bag" is worse, in your book, than "dog shit". You would
never call me and only two pals at that time "scum bags", you
claimed.

Fickle bugger, aren't you?
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[R F]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Dr Robin Bignall wrote:

> RF lives in a universe of his own, I'm still not sure if it overlaps
> with the one I'm living in (but research continues), and being called a
> 'doofus' is not the end of the world by any means.

That still leaves Brother Areff down there in Washington Square. (Say,
where *is* that fellow?) You're right about 'doofus'; I myself aspire to
being a "hipster doofus", but I'm not quite there yet.

[Mark Wallace]

Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 08:15:06 +0200, "Mark Wallace" <***@dse.nl>
> wrote:
>
>> Simøn R. Hüghes wrote:
>>> Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:
>>>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau
>>>> <***@freeshell.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> And occasionally
>>>>> there is someone whose attitude is such that
>>>>> I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
>>>>> on one of their messages.
>>>>
>>>> That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling, and I
>>>> have 5 long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE, occasionally
>>>> crossposted in AEU) in there.
>>>
>>> Long termers? You were replying to me in February this year.
>>>
>>> Let me see who else have you got on your little list?
>>>
>>> Rey Aman, Bob Cunningham, Charles Riggs, Martin Ambuhl, Jai Maharaj,
>>> Me.
>>>
>>> That's six you have boasted of killfiling.
>>>
>>> Do we have any more volunteers?
>>>
>>> Your list is strange. I did nothing to you before you called me
>>> names ("dog shit", "stupid") and declared that you were killfiling
>>> me (but not to my face, you yellow toad!). RF, on the other hand,
>>> gets away with calling you a "doofus".
>>>
>>> I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
>>> haven't turned your brain on since 1967.
>>
>> Get a life, Sy.
>
> Thanks for quoting that, Mark. I wouldn't have seen it otherwise.

I've got this thing about back-stabbers.
If someone can't call me an arsehole to my face, he doesn't even rate high
enough to be called an arsehole in return; and cowards can be dissuaded from
their backstabbing if they are made aware that their whispers will be heard.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Simon R. Hughes]

Thus spake Mark Wallace:
> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 08:15:06 +0200, "Mark Wallace" <***@dse.nl>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Simøn R. Hüghes wrote:
> >>> Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:
> >>>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau
> >>>> <***@freeshell.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> And occasionally
> >>>>> there is someone whose attitude is such that
> >>>>> I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
> >>>>> on one of their messages.
> >>>>
> >>>> That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling, and I
> >>>> have 5 long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE, occasionally
> >>>> crossposted in AEU) in there.
> >>>
> >>> Long termers? You were replying to me in February this year.
> >>>
> >>> Let me see who else have you got on your little list?
> >>>
> >>> Rey Aman, Bob Cunningham, Charles Riggs, Martin Ambuhl, Jai Maharaj,
> >>> Me.
> >>>
> >>> That's six you have boasted of killfiling.
> >>>
> >>> Do we have any more volunteers?
> >>>
> >>> Your list is strange. I did nothing to you before you called me
> >>> names ("dog shit", "stupid") and declared that you were killfiling
> >>> me (but not to my face, you yellow toad!). RF, on the other hand,
> >>> gets away with calling you a "doofus".
> >>>
> >>> I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
> >>> haven't turned your brain on since 1967.
> >>
> >> Get a life, Sy.
> >
> > Thanks for quoting that, Mark. I wouldn't have seen it otherwise.
>
> I've got this thing about back-stabbers.
> If someone can't call me an arsehole to my face, he doesn't even rate high
> enough to be called an arsehole in return; and cowards can be dissuaded from
> their backstabbing if they are made aware that their whispers will be heard.

I agree wholeheartedly. When he called me "dog shit", it was in
reply to someone else. When he called me stupid, he was talking
about me to someone else. He has never had the common decency, or
the guts, to address me directly. He is a coward, as I told him
directly in the post you quoted.

I did my best to get past his killfile, short of emailing him, even
incurring the wrath of Dena Jo; if he chooses not to read what I
write to him, that's his business.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Simon R. Hughes posted thus:

> even incurring the wrath of Dena Jo

People Are Dumb Department: The son-in-law of my best friend was
sitting at her dining room table, drawing. In the middle of his
drawing, he'd written the word God, then surrounded it with intricate
doodling. Around the perimeter of the doodling, he written the words
Love, Charity, some other good-quality kind of word, and then the word
"Rath" at the bottom of the drawing.

I said, "What is rath?"

He hesitated a moment, then said, "Well, the way I've always heard it
used is 'the rath of God.'"

So I explained to him what it meant and how it was correctly spelled
and suggested he might want to choose a different quality of God's for
his drawing.

Though he's HATED me ever since, I luckily escaped his wrath.

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Simon R. Hughes]

Thus spake Dena Jo:
> On 03 Oct 2003, Simon R. Hughes posted thus:
>
> > even incurring the wrath of Dena Jo
>
> People Are Dumb Department: The son-in-law of my best friend was
> sitting at her dining room table, drawing. In the middle of his
> drawing, he'd written the word God, then surrounded it with intricate
> doodling. Around the perimeter of the doodling, he written the words
> Love, Charity, some other good-quality kind of word, and then the word
> "Rath" at the bottom of the drawing.
>
> I said, "What is rath?"
>
> He hesitated a moment, then said, "Well, the way I've always heard it
> used is 'the rath of God.'"
>
> So I explained to him what it meant and how it was correctly spelled
> and suggested he might want to choose a different quality of God's for
> his drawing.
>
> Though he's HATED me ever since, I luckily escaped his wrath.

You hate me. OK.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[John Dean]

Dena Jo wrote:
> On 03 Oct 2003, Simon R. Hughes posted thus:
>
>> even incurring the wrath of Dena Jo
>
> People Are Dumb Department: The son-in-law of my best friend was
> sitting at her dining room table, drawing. In the middle of his
> drawing, he'd written the word God, then surrounded it with intricate
> doodling. Around the perimeter of the doodling, he written the words
> Love, Charity, some other good-quality kind of word, and then the word
> "Rath" at the bottom of the drawing.
>
> I said, "What is rath?"
>
> He hesitated a moment, then said, "Well, the way I've always heard it
> used is 'the rath of God.'"
>
> So I explained to him what it meant and how it was correctly spelled
> and suggested he might want to choose a different quality of God's for
> his drawing.
>
> Though he's HATED me ever since, I luckily escaped his wrath.

But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply

[Skitt]

John Dean wrote:
> Dena Jo wrote:
>> Simon R. Hughes posted thus:
>>> even incurring the wrath of Dena Jo

>> People Are Dumb Department: The son-in-law of my best friend was
>> sitting at her dining room table, drawing. In the middle of his
>> drawing, he'd written the word God, then surrounded it with intricate
>> doodling. Around the perimeter of the doodling, he written the words
>> Love, Charity, some other good-quality kind of word, and then the
>> word "Rath" at the bottom of the drawing.
>>
>> I said, "What is rath?"
>>
>> He hesitated a moment, then said, "Well, the way I've always heard it
>> used is 'the rath of God.'"
>>
>> So I explained to him what it meant and how it was correctly spelled
>> and suggested he might want to choose a different quality of God's
>> for his drawing.
>>
>> Though he's HATED me ever since, I luckily escaped his wrath.
>
> But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath

Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:

> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?

Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched it,
but there isn't.

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Skitt]

Dena Jo wrote:
> On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:
>
>> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>
> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched it,
> but there isn't.

I really didn't think about it right now -- I'm watching the Giants/Marlins
game. That is why I have made a few errors in my other recent posts.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:

> I'm watching the Giants/Marlins game.

Oh. That's sports, isn't it?

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[John Dean]

Dena Jo wrote:
> On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:
>
>> I'm watching the Giants/Marlins game.
>
> Oh. That's sports, isn't it?

No, Dena, it's a show about huge men catching fish. Here's your sign.
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply

[Mark Wallace]

Skitt wrote:
> Dena Jo wrote:
>> On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:
>>
>>> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>>
>> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
>> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
>> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched it,
>> but there isn't.
>
> I really didn't think about it right now

Nor the timing of your verbs, aparrently.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Skitt]

Mark Wallace wrote:
> Skitt wrote:
>> Dena Jo wrote:
>>> Skitt posted thus:

>>>> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>>>
>>> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
>>> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
>>> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched it,
>>> but there isn't.
>>
>> I really didn't think about it right now
>
> Nor the timing of your verbs, aparrently.

Exactly. It was a stressful time, it was. The Giants were losing. Then
they lost.

I see that you too were distracted as you typed the above. What game were
*you* watching?
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

[mUs1Ka]

"Skitt" <***@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:blmu4f$e858e$***@ID-61580.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> > Skitt wrote:
> >> Dena Jo wrote:
> >>> Skitt posted thus:
>
> >>>> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
> >>>
> >>> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
> >>> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
> >>> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched it,
> >>> but there isn't.
> >>
> >> I really didn't think about it right now
> >
> > Nor the timing of your verbs, aparrently.
>
> Exactly. It was a stressful time, it was. The Giants were losing. Then
> they lost.
>
> I see that you too were distracted as you typed the above. What game were
> *you* watching?

He was probably watching a hororr film and dying for a pee.
m.

[Mark Wallace]

Skitt wrote:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
>> Skitt wrote:
>>> Dena Jo wrote:
>>>> Skitt posted thus:
>
>>>>> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>>>>
>>>> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
>>>> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
>>>> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched
>>>> it, but there isn't.
>>>
>>> I really didn't think about it right now
>>
>> Nor the timing of your verbs, aparrently.
>
> Exactly. It was a stressful time, it was. The Giants were losing.
> Then they lost.
>
> I see that you too were distracted as you typed the above. What game
> were
> *you* watching?

No games. It's the *LAW*.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[John Holmes]

Mark Wallace wrote:
> Skitt wrote:
>> Dena Jo wrote:
>>> On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>>>
>>> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
>>> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
>>> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched it,
>>> but there isn't.
>>
>> I really didn't think about it right now
>
> Nor the timing of your verbs, aparrently.

The problem is probably not the tense, but rather the different American
meaning of 'right'.

There was a thread a while back in which it was discovered that US
'right off the road' means 'right next to the road' instead of the
'really rather a long way off the road' that you or I might expect.
Therefore, I guess that Skitt's 'right now' should be translated as
'just a moment ago', or something like that. It doesn't mean 'right
now', apparently, so the past tense is not inappropriate.

--
Regards
John

[Mark Wallace]

John Holmes wrote:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
>> Skitt wrote:
>>> Dena Jo wrote:
>>>> On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:
>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>>>>
>>>> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
>>>> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
>>>> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched
>>>> it, but there isn't.
>>>
>>> I really didn't think about it right now
>>
>> Nor the timing of your verbs, aparrently.
>
> The problem is probably not the tense, but rather the different
> American meaning of 'right'.
>
> There was a thread a while back in which it was discovered that US
> 'right off the road' means 'right next to the road' instead of the
> 'really rather a long way off the road' that you or I might expect.
> Therefore, I guess that Skitt's 'right now' should be translated as
> 'just a moment ago', or something like that. It doesn't mean 'right
> now', apparently, so the past tense is not inappropriate.

There must be a modern US dialectical idiom which fits the bill, here...

Ah, yes.

*As if*!

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Woody Wordpecker]

On Sun, 5 Oct 2003 17:57:24 +1000, "John Holmes"
<***@smart.net.au> said:

> Mark Wallace wrote that Skitt wrote:

[ . . . ]

> >> I really didn't think about it right now

[ . . . ]

> Therefore, I guess that Skitt's 'right now' should
> be translated as 'just a moment ago', or something
> like that.

As Skitt said it, it doesn't seem to be good idiomatic
American English. I would assume he didn't say what he
meant to say, and I would take his intended meaning to be
what I would mean if I said "just now". Any of the
following would seem acceptable to me, depending upon the
intended meaning:

I am not thinking about it right now.
I will begin thinking about it right now.
I didn't think about it just now.
I didn't think about it right then.
I hadn't thought about it just then.
I wasn't thinking about it right then.

> It doesn't mean 'right now', apparently, so the past
> tense is not inappropriate.

Your definition of "right now" seems to be the same as mine.

[Skitt]

Woody Wordpecker wrote:
> "John Holmes" said:
>> Mark Wallace wrote that Skitt wrote:

> [ . . . ]
>
>>>> I really didn't think about it right now
>
> [ . . . ]
>
>> Therefore, I guess that Skitt's 'right now' should
>> be translated as 'just a moment ago', or something
>> like that.
>
> As Skitt said it, it doesn't seem to be good idiomatic
> American English. I would assume he didn't say what he
> meant to say, and I would take his intended meaning to be
> what I would mean if I said "just now". Any of the
> following would seem acceptable to me, depending upon the
> intended meaning:
>
> I am not thinking about it right now.
> I will begin thinking about it right now.
> I didn't think about it just now.
> I didn't think about it right then.
> I hadn't thought about it just then.
> I wasn't thinking about it right then.

OK, since I was the one who said it, I'll select the one I meant:
It is number four.

My idiolect certainly allows what I originally said, but if one wants to be
perfect ...

Besides, I was still in the moment. Figuratively. Maybe that's the reason
I wrote it.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

[Wes Groleau]

Dena Jo wrote:
> On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:
>>Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>
> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.
> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched it,
> but there isn't.

It's been a long time, but I believe in the
explanation of Jabberwocky, it became clear
that "outgrabe" is a verb.




--
Wes Groleau
"Lewis's case for the existence of God contains fallacies."
"You mean like circular reasoning?"
"He believes in God. Therefore he's illogical."

[John Varela]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 23:00:34 UTC, Dena Jo
<TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 03 Oct 2003, Skitt posted thus:
>
> > Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>
> Now, that's interesting. I've always assumed it was an adjective.

No, it is a pronoun.

> You've clearly assumed it was verb. If there'd been a comma after
> raths ("And the mome raths, outgrabe"), that would have clinched it,
> but there isn't.

Humpty Dumpty explains it:

"And then 'mome raths'?" said Alice. "I'm afraid I'm giving you a great deal
of trouble."

"Well a rath is a sort of green pig: but 'mome' I'm not certain about. I
think it's short for 'from home'--meaning that they'd lost their way, you
know"

"And what does 'outgrabe' mean?"

"Well, 'outgribing' is something between bellowing and whistling, with a kind
of sneeze in the middle: however, you'll hear it done, maybe--down in the wood
yonder--and, when you've once heard it, you'll be quite content..."

--
John Varela

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 15:49:28 -0700, "Skitt" <***@comcast.net> wrote:

>John Dean wrote:
>> Dena Jo wrote:
>>> Simon R. Hughes posted thus:
>>>> even incurring the wrath of Dena Jo
>
>>> People Are Dumb Department: The son-in-law of my best friend was
>>> sitting at her dining room table, drawing. In the middle of his
>>> drawing, he'd written the word God, then surrounded it with intricate
>>> doodling. Around the perimeter of the doodling, he written the words
>>> Love, Charity, some other good-quality kind of word, and then the
>>> word "Rath" at the bottom of the drawing.
>>>
>>> I said, "What is rath?"
>>>
>>> He hesitated a moment, then said, "Well, the way I've always heard it
>>> used is 'the rath of God.'"
>>>
>>> So I explained to him what it meant and how it was correctly spelled
>>> and suggested he might want to choose a different quality of God's
>>> for his drawing.
>>>
>>> Though he's HATED me ever since, I luckily escaped his wrath.
>>
>> But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath
>
>Yeah, but did it outgrabe?

I always said (at least) two things:
- great minds think alike (not original, but apposite)
- I should spend more time online so's I can keep up

I shall probably make a New Year's resolution come the end of December,
when it's too cold to go out much.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Robert Lieblich]

Skitt wrote:
>
> John Dean wrote:
[ ... ]

> > But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath
>
> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?

Oy!

Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.

<http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>

--
Bob Lieblich
Carrollite

[Skitt]

Robert Lieblich wrote:
> Skitt wrote:
>> John Dean wrote:

> [ ... ]
>
>>> But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath
>>
>> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?
>
> Oy!
>
> Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
>
> <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>

Hey! I'm watching a playoff ballgame that is tied after nine innings!
Sssh! (At least, I was right that it is a verb!)
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:

> Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
>
> <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>

Wow. I guess I'd better read Through the Looking Glass.

--
Dena Jo, who's only read Alice in Wonderland

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Robert Lieblich]

Dena Jo wrote:
>
> On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:
>
> > Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
> >
> > <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>
>
> Wow. I guess I'd better read Through the Looking Glass.

Damn straight. I'm not sure we'd have allowed you to post here had
we known of this serious omission from your education.

It's not too late. The complete text is at several locations on the
Web, there are cheap paperback editions for sale, and of course your
library will have it.

> --
> Dena Jo, who's only read Alice in Wonderland

Only read it, never *seen* it? (Many film versions. Disney's is a
severe disappointment.)

--
Bob Lieblich
Mimsy tove

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Robert Lieblich <***@Verizon.net> writes:

> Dena Jo wrote:
> > Dena Jo, who's only read Alice in Wonderland
>
> Only read it, never *seen* it? (Many film versions. Disney's is a
> severe disappointment.)

I'm partial to the Kristine DeBell musical version

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074113/

although it takes some liberties with the text.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Feeling good about government is like
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |looking on the bright side of any
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |catastrophe. When you quit looking
|on the bright side, the catastrophe
***@hpl.hp.com |is still there.
[phone] | P.J. O'Rourke

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:

> It's not too late. The complete text is at several locations on the
> Web, there are cheap paperback editions for sale, and of course your
> library will have it.

I have The Annotated Alice.

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On 3 Oct 2003 23:40:47 GMT, Dena Jo
<TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:
>
>> Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
>>
>> <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>
>
>Wow. I guess I'd better read Through the Looking Glass.

All I can see in my looking glass is my face, plus whatever's behind me.
Try reading "Through the Looking Glass".
--

wrmst rgrds
Robin "I'm so vain" Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Chris Malcolm]

Dr Robin Bignall <***@ntlworld.com> writes:

>On 3 Oct 2003 23:40:47 GMT, Dena Jo
><TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:

>>> Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
>>>
>>> <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>

>>Wow. I guess I'd better read Through the Looking Glass.

>All I can see in my looking glass is my face, plus whatever's behind me.
>Try reading "Through the Looking Glass".

Your mistake is confronting the looking glass. Try sneaking up on it
from the side. It's difficult reading a book in a looking glass
because it turns the words backwards. It's no problem, however, with
two looking glasses.
--
Chris Malcolm ***@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk [phone] DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:

> Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
>
> <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>

P.S. Are you sure you can believe Humpty Dumpty?

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Robert Lieblich]

Dena Jo wrote:
>
> On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:
>
> > Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
> >
> > <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>
>
> P.S. Are you sure you can believe Humpty Dumpty?

He hasn't lied to me yet.

[John Dean]

Dena Jo wrote:
> On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:
>
>> Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
>>
>> <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>
>
> P.S. Are you sure you can believe Humpty Dumpty?

Did he tell you three times?
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply

[John Varela]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 23:42:06 UTC, Dena Jo
<TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 03 Oct 2003, Robert Lieblich posted thus:
>
> > Outgribe is a strong verb. Outgrabe is the past tense form.
> >
> > <http://www76.pair.com/keithlim/jabberwocky/poem/humptydumpty.html>

Oops. I went to the trouble of typing the quotation before I saw this
subthread..

> P.S. Are you sure you can believe Humpty Dumpty?

With respect to "outgrabe", I believe you can. No less an authority than
Martin Gardner appears to accept Humpty Dumpty's explanation of "outgrabe" as
correct, going so far as to cite Humpty Dumpty in his footnote (in _The
Annotated Snark_) to Fit 5, Verse 10 of _The Hunting of the Snark_, where
"outgrabe" recurs.

--
John Varela

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

"Skitt" <***@comcast.net> writes:

> John Dean wrote:
> > But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath
>
> Yeah, but did it outgrabe?

"Outgribe".

"And what does 'outgrabe' mean?"

"Well, 'outgribing' is something between bellowing and whistling,
with a kind of sneeze in the middle: however, you'll hear it done,
maybe -- down in the wood yonder -- and when you've once heard it
you'll be quite content. Who's been repeating all that hard stuff
to you?"

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The reason that we don't have
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |"bear-proof" garbage cans in the
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |park is that there is a significant
|overlap in intelligence between the
***@hpl.hp.com |smartest bears and the dumbest
[phone] |humans.
| Yosemite Park Ranger
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, John Dean posted thus:

> But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath

But they were outgrabe, so it didn't matter.

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[John Varela]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 22:55:33 UTC, Dena Jo
<TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 03 Oct 2003, John Dean posted thus:
>
> > But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath
>
> But they were outgrabe, so it didn't matter.

I believe you meant to say that they were outgribing.

--
John Varela

[Skitt]

John Varela wrote:
> Dena Jo wrote:
>> John Dean posted thus:

>>> But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath
>>
>> But they were outgrabe, so it didn't matter.
>
> I believe you meant to say that they were outgribing.

That, or outgribben.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 23:47:47 +0100, "John Dean" <john-***@frag.lineone.net>
wrote:

>Dena Jo wrote:
>> On 03 Oct 2003, Simon R. Hughes posted thus:
>>
>>> even incurring the wrath of Dena Jo
>>
>> People Are Dumb Department: The son-in-law of my best friend was
>> sitting at her dining room table, drawing. In the middle of his
>> drawing, he'd written the word God, then surrounded it with intricate
>> doodling. Around the perimeter of the doodling, he written the words
>> Love, Charity, some other good-quality kind of word, and then the word
>> "Rath" at the bottom of the drawing.
>>
>> I said, "What is rath?"
>>
>> He hesitated a moment, then said, "Well, the way I've always heard it
>> used is 'the rath of God.'"
>>
>> So I explained to him what it meant and how it was correctly spelled
>> and suggested he might want to choose a different quality of God's for
>> his drawing.
>>
>> Though he's HATED me ever since, I luckily escaped his wrath.
>
>But you didn't escape his rath. Especially his mome rath

Next, Deej will complain of being outgrabed.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Dena Jo]

On 03 Oct 2003, Dr Robin Bignall posted thus:

> Next, Deej will complain of being outgrabed.

Never.

--
Dena Jo

(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On 3 Oct 2003 23:06:00 GMT, Dena Jo
<TPUBGTH.don'***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On 03 Oct 2003, Dr Robin Bignall posted thus:
>
>> Next, Deej will complain of being outgrabed.
>
>Never.

It's usually considered to be impossible after closing escrow, so you've
had a narrow escape.

("How to Avoid an Accidental Outgribement", J B Wocky, 1904, pp 27-31.)

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Mark Wallace]

Simon R. Hughes wrote:
> Thus spake Mark Wallace:
>> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>>> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 08:15:06 +0200, "Mark Wallace" <***@dse.nl>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Simøn R. Hüghes wrote:
>>>>> Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:
>>>>>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau
>>>>>> <***@freeshell.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> And occasionally
>>>>>>> there is someone whose attitude is such that
>>>>>>> I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
>>>>>>> on one of their messages.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That final point is exactly my main criterion for killfiling,
>>>>>> and I have 5 long-termers (all of whom post mainly in AUE,
>>>>>> occasionally crossposted in AEU) in there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Long termers? You were replying to me in February this year.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me see who else have you got on your little list?
>>>>>
>>>>> Rey Aman, Bob Cunningham, Charles Riggs, Martin Ambuhl, Jai
>>>>> Maharaj, Me.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's six you have boasted of killfiling.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we have any more volunteers?
>>>>>
>>>>> Your list is strange. I did nothing to you before you called me
>>>>> names ("dog shit", "stupid") and declared that you were killfiling
>>>>> me (but not to my face, you yellow toad!). RF, on the other hand,
>>>>> gets away with calling you a "doofus".
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
>>>>> haven't turned your brain on since 1967.
>>>>
>>>> Get a life, Sy.
>>>
>>> Thanks for quoting that, Mark. I wouldn't have seen it otherwise.
>>
>> I've got this thing about back-stabbers.
>> If someone can't call me an arsehole to my face, he doesn't even
>> rate high enough to be called an arsehole in return; and cowards can
>> be dissuaded from their backstabbing if they are made aware that
>> their whispers will be heard.
>
> I agree wholeheartedly. When he called me "dog shit", it was in
> reply to someone else. When he called me stupid, he was talking
> about me to someone else. He has never had the common decency, or
> the guts, to address me directly. He is a coward, as I told him
> directly in the post you quoted.

He is aware that he is not in your kill-file, so he is not sneaking around
casting nasturtiums behind your back.


> I did my best to get past his killfile, short of emailing him, even
> incurring the wrath of Dena Jo; if he chooses not to read what I
> write to him, that's his business.

Precisely.
However, since all you seem to write to the group these days is insults
aimed at the Doc, I'm not surprised he can't be arsed to listen.
You are aware that he will not see what you write, so you should not write
it.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Simon R. Hughes]

Thus spake Mark Wallace:


> However, since all you seem to write to the group these days is insults
> aimed at the Doc, I'm not surprised he can't be arsed to listen.

All you read from me in your precious newsgroup is directed at
Bignall because that inconsiderate idiot crossposts all his personal
shit to both newsgroups. Most of what I direct at him addresses his
incessant stream of boring, whining, irrelevant, disgusting,
repetitive personalia. He is ALWAYS off topic. That kind of
behaviour is a legitimate target, and always has been, on Usenet.

And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
lot should learn not to crosspost.

> You are aware that he will not see what you write, so you should not write
> it.

Absolute bollocks, and you know it! He goes around insulting me--
apparently for no reason. It deserves answering. If he doesn't read
it, it's because he has a yellow streak running down his gelatinous
spine.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[Tony Cooper]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 21:01:33 +0200, Simon R. Hughes
<***@yahoo.no> wrote:

>Thus spake Mark Wallace:
>
>
>> However, since all you seem to write to the group these days is insults
>> aimed at the Doc, I'm not surprised he can't be arsed to listen.
>
>All you read from me in your precious newsgroup is directed at
>Bignall because that inconsiderate idiot crossposts all his personal
>shit to both newsgroups. Most of what I direct at him addresses his
>incessant stream of boring, whining, irrelevant, disgusting,
>repetitive personalia. He is ALWAYS off topic. That kind of
>behaviour is a legitimate target, and always has been, on Usenet.
>
>And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
>lot should learn not to crosspost.

By God, Simon, when you're right you're right. If Mark would just
read aue, he'd find that only half your posts are insults aimed at the
Doc. The other half are insults aimed at me.

Mark just doesn't know what he's missing, or when he's well off, does
he?

[Padraig Breathnach]

Tony Cooper <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 21:01:33 +0200, Simon R. Hughes
><***@yahoo.no> wrote:
>
>>Thus spake Mark Wallace:
>>
>>
>>> However, since all you seem to write to the group these days is insults
>>> aimed at the Doc, I'm not surprised he can't be arsed to listen.
>>
>>All you read from me in your precious newsgroup is directed at
>>Bignall because that inconsiderate idiot crossposts all his personal
>>shit to both newsgroups. Most of what I direct at him addresses his
>>incessant stream of boring, whining, irrelevant, disgusting,
>>repetitive personalia. He is ALWAYS off topic. That kind of
>>behaviour is a legitimate target, and always has been, on Usenet.
>>
>>And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
>>lot should learn not to crosspost.
>
>By God, Simon, when you're right you're right. If Mark would just
>read aue, he'd find that only half your posts are insults aimed at the
>Doc. The other half are insults aimed at me.
>
Not true. I get some too, all to myself.

PB

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 20:46:38 GMT, Tony Cooper <***@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 21:01:33 +0200, Simon R. Hughes
><***@yahoo.no> wrote:
>
>>Thus spake Mark Wallace:
>>
>>
>>> However, since all you seem to write to the group these days is insults
>>> aimed at the Doc, I'm not surprised he can't be arsed to listen.
>>
>>All you read from me in your precious newsgroup is directed at
>>Bignall because that inconsiderate idiot crossposts all his personal
>>shit to both newsgroups. Most of what I direct at him addresses his
>>incessant stream of boring, whining, irrelevant, disgusting,
>>repetitive personalia. He is ALWAYS off topic. That kind of
>>behaviour is a legitimate target, and always has been, on Usenet.
>>
>>And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
>>lot should learn not to crosspost.
>
>By God, Simon, when you're right you're right. If Mark would just
>read aue, he'd find that only half your posts are insults aimed at the
>Doc. The other half are insults aimed at me.
>
I feel a bit better after that, Coop. I though that maybe he'd got
obsessed, or something.


--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Simon R. Hughes]

Thus spake Dr Robin Bignall:


> I feel a bit better after that, Coop. I though that maybe he'd got
> obsessed, or something.

Now you are being disgusting again.

Someone should take your computer away from you.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[Mark Wallace]

Simon R. Hughes wrote:

<snip>

> And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
> lot should learn not to crosspost.

I do not crosspost.
You seem to be very good at saying the wrong things about the wrong people.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Marc]

On Sun, 5 Oct 2003 13:10:55 +0200, Mark Wallace wrote:

> Simon R. Hughes wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
>> lot should learn not to crosspost.
>
> I do not crosspost.
> You seem to be very good at saying the wrong things about the wrong people.

You just did crosspost.
--
Marc
05/10/2003 11:33:26
http://www.marcmywords.com

[Mark Wallace]

Marc wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2003 13:10:55 +0200, Mark Wallace wrote:
>
>> Simon R. Hughes wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
>>> lot should learn not to crosspost.
>>
>> I do not crosspost.
>> You seem to be very good at saying the wrong things about the wrong
>> people.
>
> You just did crosspost.

No, I did not.
I replied to a posting.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Marc]

On Sun, 5 Oct 2003 19:03:57 +0200, Mark Wallace wrote:

>
> No, I did not.
> I replied to a postin

Correct, and your reply was CROSSPOSTED.
--
Marc
05/10/2003 17:01:48
http://www.marcmywords.com

[Mark Wallace]

Marc wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2003 19:03:57 +0200, Mark Wallace wrote:
>
>>
>> No, I did not.
>> I replied to a postin
>
> Correct, and your reply was CROSSPOSTE

No. My reply was posted.
I did not crosspost the thread, and nor did I add or subtract anything from
the To line.

Once someone has crossposted a thread, it is unpardonably rude to remove
groups (marzipanic groups notwithstanding). However, I did not crosspost
the thread; I merely replied to a posting.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Simon R. Hughes]

Thus spake Mark Wallace:
> Simon R. Hughes wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
> > lot should learn not to crosspost.
>
> I do not crosspost.
> You seem to be very good at saying the wrong things about the wrong people.

Since you read only AEU, everything I read from you, you have
crossposted. Whether you want to blame it on someone else or not.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[Mark Wallace]

Simon R. Hughes wrote:
> Thus spake Mark Wallace:
>> Simon R. Hughes wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
>>> lot should learn not to crosspost.
>>
>> I do not crosspost.
>> You seem to be very good at saying the wrong things about the wrong
>> people.
>
> Since you read only AEU, everything I read from you, you have
> crossposted. Whether you want to blame it on someone else or not.

No.
"~~ everything I read from you, *has been* crossposted." would be correct
(except for that awfully misplaced comma, but I'm not here to work on your
punctuation problems).

*I* do not crosspost, except on very rare occasions (usually so that defs
can be added to the AWD).

Think hard about subject-verb relationships before repeating your error.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Ross Howard]

On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 11:17:53 +0200, "Mark Wallace" <***@dse.nl>
wrought:

>Simon R. Hughes wrote:
>> Thus spake Mark Wallace:
>>> Simon R. Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
>>>> lot should learn not to crosspost.
>>>
>>> I do not crosspost.
>>> You seem to be very good at saying the wrong things about the wrong
>>> people.
>>
>> Since you read only AEU, everything I read from you, you have
>> crossposted. Whether you want to blame it on someone else or not.
>
>No.
>"~~ everything I read from you, *has been* crossposted." would be correct
>(except for that awfully misplaced comma, but I'm not here to work on your
>punctuation problems).

That comma is not misplaced even mildly, let alone awfully.

Without it it looks like a typo -- like that.

>*I* do not crosspost, except on very rare occasions (usually so that defs
>can be added to the AWD).
>
>Think hard about subject-verb relationships before repeating your error.

You may not be the *original* crossposter, but crossposting you are.

[De-crossposted on the assumption that, since you are voluntarily
crossposting in this thread, you will read it in AUE (the only one of
the two groups that my current server -- like many others --
carries).]

***********
Ross Howard

[Simon R. Hughes]

Thus spake Mark Wallace:
> Simon R. Hughes wrote:
> > Thus spake Mark Wallace:
> >> Simon R. Hughes wrote:
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >>> And if you don't want to see it in your precious newsgroup, then you
> >>> lot should learn not to crosspost.
> >>
> >> I do not crosspost.
> >> You seem to be very good at saying the wrong things about the wrong
> >> people.
> >
> > Since you read only AEU, everything I read from you, you have
> > crossposted. Whether you want to blame it on someone else or not.
>
> No.
> "~~ everything I read from you, *has been* crossposted." would be correct

As I said, whether you blame others or not, you are crossposting.

> (except for that awfully misplaced comma, but I'm not here to work on your
> punctuation problems).

Redirection. Not kosher.

> *I* do not crosspost, except on very rare occasions (usually so that defs
> can be added to the AWD).
>
> Think hard about subject-verb relationships before repeating your error.

Redirection again.

I made no error. Three people are telling you that you are
crossposting (assuming you read both groups), plus the headers are
there for all to see. Let's see if you can find someone to support
your claim that you are not crossposting.

I remain unabated of breath.
--
Simon R. Hughes <!-- Kill "Kenny" for email. -->
<!-- http://www.mirrorproject.com/mirror?id=17972 -->

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 13:10:25 +0200, "Mark Wallace" <***@dse.nl> wrote:


[..]
>Precisely.
>However, since all you seem to write to the group these days is insults
>aimed at the Doc, I'm not surprised he can't be arsed to listen.

Is that what he does? "Get a life" seems appropriate.

>You are aware that he will not see what you write,

Except by your good graces, for which I am truly thankful, old fiend...
er... friend.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Mark Wallace]

Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 13:10:25 +0200, "Mark Wallace" <***@dse.nl>
> wrote:
>
>
> [..]
>> Precisely.
>> However, since all you seem to write to the group these days is
>> insults aimed at the Doc, I'm not surprised he can't be arsed to
>> listen.
>
> Is that what he does? "Get a life" seems appropriate.
>
>> You are aware that he will not see what you write,
>
> Except by your good graces, for which I am truly thankful, old
> fiend... er... friend.

Is this "fiber"/"fibre" all over again?

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Wes Groleau]

Sim������������������������������������ wrote:
> I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
> haven't turned your brain on since 1967.

Or maybe by the fact that this is the third
e-mail address you've used here in the past
month?

--
Wes Groleau

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 19:20:33 -0500, Wes Groleau <***@freeshell.org>
wrote:

>Sim???????????????????????????????????? wrote:
>> I suppose your inconsistency may be explained by the fact that you
>> haven't turned your brain on since 1967.
>
>Or maybe by the fact that this is the third
>e-mail address you've used here in the past
>month?

Somebody quoted that. If that's what he spends his time doing, he needs
medical treatment, IMO.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Wes Groleau]

Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
> AEU) in there. The other criterion is those people who spam groups with
> adverts for sex sites etc. Over the years I must have added hundreds of

But doesn't the latter group use
a different moniker/address per offense?

--
Wes Groleau
Alive and Well
http://freepages.religions.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau/

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 19:17:02 -0500, Wes Groleau <***@freeshell.org>
wrote:

>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>> AEU) in there. The other criterion is those people who spam groups with
>> adverts for sex sites etc. Over the years I must have added hundreds of
>
>But doesn't the latter group use
>a different moniker/address per offense?

They do in emails. Mailwasher finds about 100 a day, all from addresses
that it has not recognised before, not just on my system, but also on the
automatic spam address servers to which it is connected. One click of the
mouse takes care of them automatically, however, and they never appear
again. If I could be bothered to refine the keywords in my filters I'd
probably see fewer, but it's hardly worth the time.

I should imagine that they also do in Usenet posts, too, but for some
reason that I don't understand, I see very few. Maybe a couple a week
across all 16 newsgroups I'm subscribed to. (The XP ones, in particular,
receive over 1000 posts daily between them, and I can do little more than
lurk these days, skipping from thread to thread until I see one that seems
not to have been addressed previously. Since I am usually a day or two
behind, they are very rare! I see few, if any, 'spams'.)

My Usenet filter 'file' contains 218 filters, amassed over almost exactly
five years to the day. From a quick glance, I see that:

- about 20 or so are from about 10 spammers, or other people I do not wish
to see, who have tried multiple address changes to try to get past. I
filter on multiple fields, so don't see their posts.

- most of the others have probably only ever made one post to one group
from one address. Far fewer than I would have thought until I just counted
them.

It is, to my mind, perfectly useless for Usenet spammers to make themselves
completely anonymous when generating insults against one particular person.
I only remember one such attempt. Their vanity usually requires that at
least someone knows who they are, unless it's truly a "visit my site and
enlarge your penis/tits" or a porn site as a 'one-off'.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:10:37 -0500, Wes Groleau
<***@freeshell.org> wrote:

>Tony Cooper wrote:
>> You seem to be a reasonably normal person. Why do you keep this log
>> and read it?
>
>I don't keep this log, Mozilla does.

I buy Playboy for the stories, too.


>I don't really read it, I just glance at it
>when I clear it to keep it from wasting disk space.
>
>Occasionally I look at it to see whether someone
>in it is starting to act less like a troll.
>
>As for skipping messages instead of killfiling--
>I do a LOT of that. But there are a few persons
>whose output of blather is such that the killfile
>is a _tremendous_ time saver. And occasionally
>there is someone whose attitude is such that
>I don't even care to risk _accidentally_ clicking
>on one of their messages.

I admit that I skipped over all of the SDC postings. Even a wild
guess resulting in a sheep at the door wouldn't compensate for opening
15 posts a day that so effectively destroy any self-confidence I might
have.

What I really, really dislike about the SDC is that the clues are
rarely explained. A totally baffling - to me - question is posed, six
people rush in correct answers, and no one explains how they got
there. I can't even figure out how the people that were wrong got
there.

[david56]

***@yahoo.com spake thus:

> I admit that I skipped over all of the SDC postings. Even a wild
> guess resulting in a sheep at the door wouldn't compensate for opening
> 15 posts a day that so effectively destroy any self-confidence I might
> have.
>
> What I really, really dislike about the SDC is that the clues are
> rarely explained. A totally baffling - to me - question is posed, six
> people rush in correct answers, and no one explains how they got
> there. I can't even figure out how the people that were wrong got
> there.

I have lost at least a brace of sheep while composing an erudite
Totally Official and Complete response to SDC questions. It is
fundamentally important to post the answer as soon as you know it. I
suppose one should expand on it later, but there are more questions
to answer, don't you know.

There is a list of Totally Official answers online somewhere, but I
can _never_ find the site. And I was rather disappointed by the
subject of this apparently aptly-named jpeg
http://www.totally-official.com/SDC2003/cooper_flame.jpg

--
David
=====
Does exactly what it says on the tin.

[rastignak]

> My killfile log says he's hitting

What is a killfile log?

An Indian but an anti-fascist.

[Mark Wallace]

rastignak wrote:
>> My killfile log says he's hitting
>
> What is a killfile log?
>
> An Indian but an anti-fascist.

No, that's not the definition. It's a cake that you eat at Killfiletide.

--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://earth.prohosting.com/mwal/
-----------------------------------------------------

[Steve Hayes]

On 1 Oct 2003 09:56:34 -0700, ***@hotmail.com (Mike Bandy) wrote:

>What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
>or dead? Those are the rumors, but I did Google news searches of Jai
>Maharaj, Jay Stevens, Mantra Corporation, and Mantra Corp. to no
>avail.
>
>For that matter, what ever happened to Miss Cleo? The charges against
>her were widely publicized, but I haven't been able to learn about any
>disposition of the cases. Are they ongoing?

Miss Cleo the notorious spammer?

The one in my spam filter?




--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Mike Bandy]

***@yahoo.com (Steve Hayes) wrote in message news:<***@news.saix.net>...
> On 1 Oct 2003 09:56:34 -0700, ***@hotmail.com (Mike Bandy) wrote:
>
> >For that matter, what ever happened to Miss Cleo? The charges against
> >her were widely publicized, but I haven't been able to learn about any
> >disposition of the cases. Are they ongoing?
>
> Miss Cleo the notorious spammer?
>
> The one in my spam filter?

That's the one. She claimed to read the future with Tarot cards.
Spamming wasn't the corporation's only method of advertisement. It
also produced numerous television commercials starring Miss Cleo -- an
actress with a bad imitation of a Haitian accent. The legal charges
involved billing irregularities and fraud. I suspect she's in jail,
but I'd like to know. I'm also confused about something else: It
seemed that the prosecution was directed more against her than against
the principals of the corporation.

This doesn't really relate to Jai. I understand he claims to be a
psychic so I was reminded of Miss Cleo.

--
Mike Bandy

[Steve Hayes]

On 2 Oct 2003 09:13:08 -0700, ***@hotmail.com (Mike Bandy) wrote:

>***@yahoo.com (Steve Hayes) wrote in message news:<***@news.saix.net>...
>> On 1 Oct 2003 09:56:34 -0700, ***@hotmail.com (Mike Bandy) wrote:
>>
>> >For that matter, what ever happened to Miss Cleo? The charges against
>> >her were widely publicized, but I haven't been able to learn about any
>> >disposition of the cases. Are they ongoing?
>>
>> Miss Cleo the notorious spammer?
>>
>> The one in my spam filter?
>
>That's the one. She claimed to read the future with Tarot cards.
>Spamming wasn't the corporation's only method of advertisement. It
>also produced numerous television commercials starring Miss Cleo -- an
>actress with a bad imitation of a Haitian accent. The legal charges
>involved billing irregularities and fraud. I suspect she's in jail,
>but I'd like to know. I'm also confused about something else: It
>seemed that the prosecution was directed more against her than against
>the principals of the corporation.

I just discovered that a lot of spam I was getting had "Miss Cleo" in it, so I
put "Miss Cleo" in my filters.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Dr Robin Bignall]

On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 03:15:24 GMT, ***@yahoo.com (Steve Hayes)
wrote:

>On 2 Oct 2003 09:13:08 -0700, ***@hotmail.com (Mike Bandy) wrote:
>
>>***@yahoo.com (Steve Hayes) wrote in message news:<***@news.saix.net>...
>>> On 1 Oct 2003 09:56:34 -0700, ***@hotmail.com (Mike Bandy) wrote:
>>>
>>> >For that matter, what ever happened to Miss Cleo? The charges against
>>> >her were widely publicized, but I haven't been able to learn about any
>>> >disposition of the cases. Are they ongoing?
>>>
>>> Miss Cleo the notorious spammer?
>>>
>>> The one in my spam filter?
>>
>>That's the one. She claimed to read the future with Tarot cards.
>>Spamming wasn't the corporation's only method of advertisement. It
>>also produced numerous television commercials starring Miss Cleo -- an
>>actress with a bad imitation of a Haitian accent. The legal charges
>>involved billing irregularities and fraud. I suspect she's in jail,
>>but I'd like to know. I'm also confused about something else: It
>>seemed that the prosecution was directed more against her than against
>>the principals of the corporation.
>
>I just discovered that a lot of spam I was getting had "Miss Cleo" in it, so I
>put "Miss Cleo" in my filters.

That's probably worse for her than being in jail.
I have put 'Penis' and 'penis' in my filter, but it doesn't work. The
filter, that is.

--

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall

Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/homepage.htm

[Mr. 4X]

***@hotmail.com (Mike Bandy) wrote in message
news:***@posting.google.com:

> What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
> or dead? Those are the rumors, but I did Google news searches of Jai
> Maharaj, Jay Stevens, Mantra Corporation, and Mantra Corp. to no
> avail.

Maybe he uses a sockpuppet. Did you search for the sender only? Several
kooks use sockpuppets, but often they post their real name (or their
primary online alias) in the signature part.

> For that matter, what ever happened to Miss Cleo? The charges against
> her were widely publicized, but I haven't been able to learn about any
> disposition of the cases. Are they ongoing?
>

[Mike Bandy]

"Mr. 4X" <***@fids.invalid.com> wrote in message news:<***@195.228.240.20>...
> ***@hotmail.com (Mike Bandy) wrote in message
> news:***@posting.google.com:
>
> > What ever happened to Jai Maharaj? Is he imprisoned or hospitalized
> > or dead? Those are the rumors, but I did Google news searches of Jai
> > Maharaj, Jay Stevens, Mantra Corporation, and Mantra Corp. to no
> > avail.
>
> Maybe he uses a sockpuppet. Did you search for the sender only? Several
> kooks use sockpuppets, but often they post their real name (or their
> primary online alias) in the signature part.

Good point. I searched Google news and searched the text of Google groups.

--
Mike Bandy