"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
k.net...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:20:30 -0500, JimH penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

I will not post the latest one unless he asks me to as I will respect
his
privacy.

This is boy is indeed obsessed with me (even though I KF'd him and
previously asked him not to email me) and needs some serious
psychiatric
help.

Can you say 'Stalking'?

Harry.......can your wife suggest a therapist in his area?


Years ago, I had one poster accuse me of "stalking" because I had my
newsreader set to email as well as post....

... to each his own...

If you are offended by his communications, why not just kill file him.

I have..........yet he continues with his assault via email.

The only good thing out of all this is John has dropped all pretentions
of being a goody two-shoes sheriff concerned with improving the
newsgroup.
He shows his true vocation as an instigator and faciliator without
equal.


You are so full of ****, you probably have brown eyes because of it.
Wrong again...**** head!


My **** stock is not full, so not a **** head. You are full of ****,
because you can not avoid piling into a pile of **** on the newsgroup! And
you just keep absorbing more until now you are full of it.

On Feb 12, 5:34?pm, "JimH" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

oups.com...
On Feb 12, 4:42?pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III"




For what it is worth, it probably makes more sense if all of us used
email for silly fights, instead of cluttering up the NG. If JimH
doesn't want JohnH to email him, it would make more sense to make that
request via email, instead of using the NG.

Wise counsel.
+++++++++++

Indeed it is..............and indeed it was done so over 6 months ago.

Having done so..............it is now considered stalking.

Understanding this.........let me know if you condone of such stalking
tactics.


No, I don't condone stalking.

However, if I had a very poor relationship with somebody- or more
accurately if one of the somebodies I have a very poor relationship
with sent me an email and I saw it in the "in" box, I might or might
not open it.

If I did open it and if it were unpleasant, I would have to blame
myself for opening it almost as much as the other party for sending
it. Sure, I suppose that if you go poking around under a skunk's tail
enough times that eventually you might find a bottle of Chanel #5 back
there- but 999,999 times out of a million you already *know* what's
going to happen when you hoist that black and white striped
dustmop....Pee-yew!

At this juncture, the only thing in evidence is your claim that JohnH
sent you a disturbing or insulting email. Opening a thread to complain
about it is a lose-lose proposition for you. There are those who might
suspect you are making this up, as you haven't revealed the nature of
the email. If you *did* reveal the nature of the email, there are
others who would come down on you for that.
Still others will think this is a silly subject that doesn't concern
anybody except the two parties involved, and should be resolved
outside the group- otherwise it's a lot like the kid who raises his
hand immediately after a grade school recess to report, "Teacher, so-
and-so called me a name on the playground!".

In an effort to cast a bad light on somebody else, we often find we
have all but painted ourselves into a corner where more fingers will
be pointed at us than the party we complain against. Therefore, I
believe Reggie's comment about resolving this outside a public
discussion forum was sage advice. If you don't want to read emails
from JohnH, don't open 'em.

On Feb 12, 10:01�pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message


You are so full of ****, you probably have brown eyes because of it.
Wrong again...**** head!

My **** stock is not full, so not a **** head. *You are full of ****,
because you can not avoid piling into a pile of **** on the newsgroup! *And
you just keep absorbing more until now you are full of it.-

My eyes are "hazel" so I suppose I'm about half a quart low....

On Feb 12, 11:36?pm, "Tim" wrote:
On Feb 12, 10:01?pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message

You are so full of ****, you probably have brown eyes because of it.
Wrong again...**** head!

My **** stock is not full, so not a **** head. ?You are full of ****,
because you can not avoid piling into a pile of **** on the newsgroup! ?And
you just keep absorbing more until now you are full of it.-

My eyes are "hazel" so I suppose I'm about half a quart low....

Can't be. I once made eyes at Hazel and she told me I was full of
**it.....

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 12, 5:34?pm, "JimH" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

oups.com...
On Feb 12, 4:42?pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III"




For what it is worth, it probably makes more sense if all of us used
email for silly fights, instead of cluttering up the NG. If JimH
doesn't want JohnH to email him, it would make more sense to make that
request via email, instead of using the NG.
Wise counsel.
+++++++++++

Indeed it is..............and indeed it was done so over 6 months ago.

Having done so..............it is now considered stalking.

Understanding this.........let me know if you condone of such stalking
tactics.


No, I don't condone stalking.

However, if I had a very poor relationship with somebody- or more
accurately if one of the somebodies I have a very poor relationship
with sent me an email and I saw it in the "in" box, I might or might
not open it.

If I did open it and if it were unpleasant, I would have to blame
myself for opening it almost as much as the other party for sending
it. Sure, I suppose that if you go poking around under a skunk's tail
enough times that eventually you might find a bottle of Chanel #5 back
there- but 999,999 times out of a million you already *know* what's
going to happen when you hoist that black and white striped
dustmop....Pee-yew!

At this juncture, the only thing in evidence is your claim that JohnH
sent you a disturbing or insulting email. Opening a thread to complain
about it is a lose-lose proposition for you. There are those who might
suspect you are making this up, as you haven't revealed the nature of
the email. If you *did* reveal the nature of the email, there are
others who would come down on you for that.
Still others will think this is a silly subject that doesn't concern
anybody except the two parties involved, and should be resolved
outside the group- otherwise it's a lot like the kid who raises his
hand immediately after a grade school recess to report, "Teacher, so-
and-so called me a name on the playground!".

In an effort to cast a bad light on somebody else, we often find we
have all but painted ourselves into a corner where more fingers will
be pointed at us than the party we complain against. Therefore, I
believe Reggie's comment about resolving this outside a public
discussion forum was sage advice. If you don't want to read emails
from JohnH, don't open 'em.

Thank you Dr. Phil...er...Chuck. :)

Calif Bill wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
JimH wrote:
On Feb 12, 8:27 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 12, 4:42?pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III"

For what it is worth, it probably makes more sense if all of us used
email for silly fights, instead of cluttering up the NG. ?If JimH
doesn't want JohnH to email him, it would make more sense to make that
request via email, instead of using the NG.
Wise counsel.
But but...

It's funny...
Actually it isn't.
I'm sorry Jim, but it is hysterical.

Funny, not hysterical.

Hysterically funny?

JimH wrote:
On Feb 12, 8:42 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
JimH wrote:
On Feb 12, 8:27 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 12, 4:42?pm, "Reginald P. Smithers III"

For what it is worth, it probably makes more sense if all of us used
email for silly fights, instead of cluttering up the NG. ?If JimH
doesn't want JohnH to email him, it would make more sense to make that
request via email, instead of using the NG.
Wise counsel.
But but...
It's funny...
Actually it isn't.
I'm sorry Jim, but it is hysterical.

I understand...........but you will see it another way once John
Herring/JohnH/JLH, Reggie Smithers/EtAl or others decide to stalk
you. ;-)

And believe me...........it will happen someday,

Trust me - I'm not worried about it.

However, if you insist - here's my opinion on this little
contretemps.

You are both acting like two gay lovers breaking up in a gay
bar and putting on a show for all the other patrons.

There - I said it.

It is what it is.

Bob Smith wrote:
If you are offended by his communications, why not just kill file him.
I have..........yet he continues with his assault via email.


He's taking about killfiling his e-mail address. Just as easy as killfiling
a newsgroup poster.

If he morphs, just block the IP range that his ISP uses. Can't morph through
that.

The Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers could.

"It's Morphin' Time!!"

Tim wrote:
On Feb 12, 10:01�pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message

You are so full of ****, you probably have brown eyes because of it.
Wrong again...**** head!
My **** stock is not full, so not a **** head. �You are full of ****,
because you can not avoid piling into a pile of **** on the newsgroup! �And
you just keep absorbing more until now you are full of it.-

My eyes are "hazel" so I suppose I'm about half a quart low....

That's another thing about color vision which I just remembered.

Apparently, there is a correlation between eye color and night
vision. Folks with blue or green eyes have better night/color
vision that other colors.

Amazing huh?

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 12, 11:36?pm, "Tim" wrote:
On Feb 12, 10:01?pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
You are so full of ****, you probably have brown eyes because of it.
Wrong again...**** head!
My **** stock is not full, so not a **** head. ?You are full of ****,
because you can not avoid piling into a pile of **** on the newsgroup! ?And
you just keep absorbing more until now you are full of it.-
My eyes are "hazel" so I suppose I'm about half a quart low....

Can't be. I once made eyes at Hazel and she told me I was full of
**it.....

Witch Hazel?

From Wikipedia:

Witch-hazel (Hamamelis) is a genus of four species of flowering plants
in the family Hamamelidaceae, with two species in North America (H.
virginiana and H. vernalis), and one each in Japan (H. japonica) and
China (H. mollis).

They are deciduous shrubs or (rarely) small trees growing to 3-8 m tall,
rarely to 12 m tall. The leaves are alternately arranged, oval, 4-16 cm
long and 3-11 cm broad, with a smooth or wavy margin. The flowers are
produced on the leafless stems in winter, each flower with four slender
strap-shaped petals 1-2 cm long, pale to dark yellow, orange, or red.
The fruit is a two-parted capsule 1 cm long, containing a single 5 mm
glossy black seed in each of the two parts; the capsule splits
explosively at maturity in the autumn about 8 months after flowering;
the seeds are ejected with sufficient force to fly for distances of up
to 10 m.

Hamamelis species are used as food plants by the larvae of some
Lepidoptera species including Feathered Thorn.

The name Witch has its origins in Middle English wiche, from the Old
English wice, meaning "pliant" or "bendable". Hazel is derived from the
use of the twigs as divining rods, just as hazel twigs were used in England.

The Persian Ironwood, a closely related tree formerly treated as
Hamamelis persica, is now given a genus of its own, as Parrotia persica,
as it differs in the flowers not having petals. Other closely allied
genera are Parrotiopsis, Fothergilla and Sycopsis (see under
Hamamelidaceae). Witch-hazels are not closely related to the hazels.

Cultivation and uses

They are popular ornamental plants, grown for their clusters of rich
yellow to orange-red flowers which begin to expand in the autumn as or
slightly before the leaves fall, and continue throughout the winter.
Numerous cultivars have been selected for use as garden shrubs, many of
them derived from the hybrid H. × intermedia Rehder (H. japonica × H.
mollis).

The bark and leaves are astringent, the extract, also referred to as
Witch Hazel, is used medicinally. Extracts from its bark and leaves are
used in aftershave lotions and lotions for treating bruises. The seeds
contain a quantity of oil and are edible.

---------------

I use Witch Hazel for bumps and bruises seeing how's I bruise
easily. Works great and I love the smell.

I got the smell in my head, because my Great Grandfather who was
still alive when I was younger, was a barber and kept cutting hair
until the day he died. I remember the smell of Witch Hazel in
his shop - it's a very pleasant memory.

Oh, yes - sorry wandered off there for a minute.

Here a song about Hazel - Bob Dylan written in 2002.

Hazel, dirty blonde hair
I wouldn't be ashamed to be seen with you anywhere
You got something I want plenty of
A little touch of your love

Hazel, stardust in your eyes
You're going somewhere mama and so am I
I'd give you the stars high above
A little touch of your love

Chorus:
No, I don't need any reminders
To show how much I really care
But it's just making me blinder and blinder
Because I'm up on a hill
And still you're not there

Chorus

Hazel, you called and I came
Now don't you make me blameless, playing games
You got something I want plenty of
A little touch of your love
You got something I want plenty of
A little touch of your love

-----------------

Now here is something I didn't know about Hazel.

----------------------

What is Hazel Coppice?

Many British broad-leaved trees including hazel can be cut down to the
stump. They re-grow producing multiple stems called poles. These poles
can be harvested. In the case of hazel the poles are harvested
approximately every 8 years and converted into a wide range of products.

Facts about Hazel Coppice

- Coppicing is the oldest form of forestry; woven hazel screens used for
fishing have been dated back to 5,000 BC.

- Much of the South East of England’s ancient semi-natural woodland has
developed under the coppice management system.

- Hazel coppice products were an indispensable part of the rural economy.

- Coppice work is labour intensive employing ten times more labour than
modern forestry systems.

- Hazel coppice is a renewable source of wood.

- There are at least 400 gifted craftsmen working in the coppiced
woodlands of Great Britain.

- Good quality hazel coppice is a viable economic crop.

- Coppicing can offer rural employment.

- Coppicing is clean, quiet and environmentally friendly.

Landscape and Wildlife Conservation

- Many species of British flora and fauna have developed under the
coppice management system and are only found in working coppice.

- Coppice woodland offers a wide range of habitats.

- Long continuity of the coppice system has enabled many species to
adapt to this system.

- Coppice maintains close links with original ancient wildwood.

- Coppice is often appreciated for its magnificent displays of wild
spring flowers, some are almost entirely restricted to ancient coppice
e.g. Solomon’s Seal and the Early Purple Orchid.

- Woodlands are an important habitat for three-quarters of our 55
species of resident butterflies and the main habitat for 16 of them. In
rotation coppice gives diverse conditions and the numerous sunny
clearings are favoured by many species.

- The orange woodland fritillaries are almost extinct in the south and
east of England except in the coppice woodlands of Hampshire.

- Pearl bordered fritillaries are lost if coppice is out of rotation for
longer than 5 years.

- Nightingales and dormice can survive in derelict coppice for longer
periods but they need large areas of suitable habitat to sustain viable
breeding populations

Here is an example of things you can do with Hazel.

http://www.coppice.org.uk/oakandhazel.htm

And isn't this interesting - There is a Hazel tree in the Celtic
Zodiac!!!

http://www.novareinna.com/constellation/hazel.html