On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:10:31 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:53:49 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
|
| I don't know, nor do I care.
|
|I understand, integrity means nothing to you?

After having assessed both sides of this childish, stupid, inane,
decade long discussion of the substance of a Zimmerman like lobster
boat, If you feel it collectively describes adherence to some sort of
code of moral values....... I guess your definition of "integrity" and
mine differ greatly.

That is, unless your are the netcops judge, jury, and executioner.
Then we'd probably need to define authority..... HOWEVER, I'm no more
inclined to join in that ridiculous repartee than I am the one about
some boat, of which I have absolutely NO personal knowledge (and
neither do you). What a wonderfully solid basis for a system of
"integrity."

I suggest you address all of those concerns at
rec.authority.on.integrity.via.the.unkown and leave those interested
boating to fend for themselves, here......

We share the same opinion Gene and I've said it more than once.

Well said my friend.

Most excellent.

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:33:43 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 21:56:22 -0400, HK penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

wrote:
| On Jul 7, 2:53 pm, BAR wrote:
| Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
| I don't know, nor do I care.
| I understand, integrity means nothing to you?
|
| I agree with Gene on this one.. We all care, we just know that WAFA
| doesn't so it's useless going over and over it.. Not to mention, that
| is Chucks place, it is moderated and has rules and if you are
| intellectually honest yourself about what you percieve Loogies post to
| mean, you will admit he broke the rules, period....
|
|
|
|You Dwarf Boys ought to get together and get a group rate for help with
|your obsession.

You know..... that isn't a very good way to get this stopped....
assuming you want to.....

Gene, I don't know where you've been, but that "...assuming you want to..."
sure doesn't apply in this case. It's hard for me to believe that you would
think Harry *doesn't* want this group to disappear.

If you don't think the three of them are in fairly constant communication
about what to do next to make the place worse, then I think you're very
naive.

As you can see from Harry's response to your post, he will use anything as
a means to drop some more crap in the group. Those who continue responding
to him simply give him the means to do so.

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:33:43 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 21:56:22 -0400, HK penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

wrote:
| On Jul 7, 2:53 pm, BAR wrote:
| Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
| I don't know, nor do I care.
| I understand, integrity means nothing to you?
|
| I agree with Gene on this one.. We all care, we just know that WAFA
| doesn't so it's useless going over and over it.. Not to mention, that
| is Chucks place, it is moderated and has rules and if you are
| intellectually honest yourself about what you percieve Loogies post to
| mean, you will admit he broke the rules, period....
|
|
|
|You Dwarf Boys ought to get together and get a group rate for help with
|your obsession.

You know..... that isn't a very good way to get this stopped....
assuming you want to.....

Gene, I don't know where you've been, but that "...assuming you want to..."
sure doesn't apply in this case. It's hard for me to believe that you would
think Harry *doesn't* want this group to disappear.

If you don't think the three of them are in fairly constant communication
about what to do next to make the place worse, then I think you're very
naive.

As you can see from Harry's response to your post, he will use anything as
a means to drop some more crap in the group. Those who continue responding
to him simply give him the means to do so.


The reality is, this newsgroup has disappeared as a venue for boaters,
in no small part because of the posts of you and your fellow dwarfs. And
despite your wet dream, I am in communication with no one regarding ways
to "make the place worse."

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:28:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:10:31 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:53:49 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
|
| I don't know, nor do I care.
|
|I understand, integrity means nothing to you?

After having assessed both sides of this childish, stupid, inane,
decade long discussion of the substance of a Zimmerman like lobster
boat, If you feel it collectively describes adherence to some sort of
code of moral values....... I guess your definition of "integrity" and
mine differ greatly.

That is, unless your are the netcops judge, jury, and executioner.
Then we'd probably need to define authority..... HOWEVER, I'm no more
inclined to join in that ridiculous repartee than I am the one about
some boat, of which I have absolutely NO personal knowledge (and
neither do you). What a wonderfully solid basis for a system of
"integrity."

I suggest you address all of those concerns at
rec.authority.on.integrity.via.the.unkown and leave those interested
boating to fend for themselves, here......

We share the same opinion Gene and I've said it more than once.

Well said my friend.

Most excellent.

The lobsta boat is old news, agreed. Loogy is about the only one using it
now, and he should know better.

However, I hope you'll read my response to Gene. I can't understand why
folks continue to give Harry opportunities to trash the group.

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:28:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:10:31 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:53:49 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
|
| I don't know, nor do I care.
|
|I understand, integrity means nothing to you?

After having assessed both sides of this childish, stupid, inane,
decade long discussion of the substance of a Zimmerman like lobster
boat, If you feel it collectively describes adherence to some sort of
code of moral values....... I guess your definition of "integrity" and
mine differ greatly.

That is, unless your are the netcops judge, jury, and executioner.
Then we'd probably need to define authority..... HOWEVER, I'm no more
inclined to join in that ridiculous repartee than I am the one about
some boat, of which I have absolutely NO personal knowledge (and
neither do you). What a wonderfully solid basis for a system of
"integrity."

I suggest you address all of those concerns at
rec.authority.on.integrity.via.the.unkown and leave those interested
boating to fend for themselves, here......
We share the same opinion Gene and I've said it more than once.

Well said my friend.

Most excellent.

The lobsta boat is old news, agreed. Loogy is about the only one using it
now, and he should know better.

However, I hope you'll read my response to Gene. I can't understand why
folks continue to give Harry opportunities to trash the group.




Perhaps if you and your fellow dwarfs spent some time putting up
original boating content posts instead of spending 97% of your time here
insulting those you don't like...

Nah...that will never happen.

"John H." wrote in message
...
snip..
If you don't think the three of them are in fairly constant communication
about what to do next to make the place worse, then I think you're very
naive.

snip...


Johnny...are you overdosing on Twinkies again?

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
. com...

After having assessed both sides of this childish, stupid, inane,
decade long discussion of the substance of a Zimmerman like lobster
boat, If you feel it collectively describes adherence to some sort of
code of moral values....... I guess your definition of "integrity" and
mine differ greatly.

That is, unless your are the netcops judge, jury, and executioner.
Then we'd probably need to define authority..... HOWEVER, I'm no more
inclined to join in that ridiculous repartee than I am the one about
some boat, of which I have absolutely NO personal knowledge (and
neither do you). What a wonderfully solid basis for a system of
"integrity."

I suggest you address all of those concerns at
rec.authority.on.integrity.via.the.unkown and leave those interested
boating to fend for themselves, here......



Well said. Anyone here longer than a month and with half a brain knows...
A/ After all the harassment over the years, Harry will never disclose any
additional information on any Lobster boat
B/ Those who keep bringing the Lobster boat up only do it as a way to jab
and agitate Harry

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:28:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:10:31 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:53:49 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that
question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the
asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
|
| I don't know, nor do I care.
|
|I understand, integrity means nothing to you?

After having assessed both sides of this childish, stupid, inane,
decade long discussion of the substance of a Zimmerman like lobster
boat, If you feel it collectively describes adherence to some sort of
code of moral values....... I guess your definition of "integrity" and
mine differ greatly.

That is, unless your are the netcops judge, jury, and executioner.
Then we'd probably need to define authority..... HOWEVER, I'm no more
inclined to join in that ridiculous repartee than I am the one about
some boat, of which I have absolutely NO personal knowledge (and
neither do you). What a wonderfully solid basis for a system of
"integrity."

I suggest you address all of those concerns at
rec.authority.on.integrity.via.the.unkown and leave those interested
boating to fend for themselves, here......

We share the same opinion Gene and I've said it more than once.

Well said my friend.

Most excellent.

The lobsta boat is old news, agreed. Loogy is about the only one using it
now, and he should know better.

However, I hope you'll read my response to Gene. I can't understand why
folks continue to give Harry opportunities to trash the group.


John...seems to me that you loosly control an army of Sevan Dwarfs...plus
have an additional 6 or 7 associates and hangers on.
If you really wanted all the foolishness to stop... you'd learn to
effectively control your minions for the benefit of the group.
The bottom line is...too many want to roll in the gutter here and as much as
you blame Harry, Jimh and me, you can't even control your own motley crew.

Don White wrote:
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
. com...
After having assessed both sides of this childish, stupid, inane,
decade long discussion of the substance of a Zimmerman like lobster
boat, If you feel it collectively describes adherence to some sort of
code of moral values....... I guess your definition of "integrity" and
mine differ greatly.

That is, unless your are the netcops judge, jury, and executioner.
Then we'd probably need to define authority..... HOWEVER, I'm no more
inclined to join in that ridiculous repartee than I am the one about
some boat, of which I have absolutely NO personal knowledge (and
neither do you). What a wonderfully solid basis for a system of
"integrity."

I suggest you address all of those concerns at
rec.authority.on.integrity.via.the.unkown and leave those interested
boating to fend for themselves, here......



Well said. Anyone here longer than a month and with half a brain knows...
A/ After all the harassment over the years, Harry will never disclose any
additional information on any Lobster boat
B/ Those who keep bringing the Lobster boat up only do it as a way to jab
and agitate Harry



Attempts here and elsewhere to "jab and agitate" me will not work, a
fact the stupidos who try it never seem to understand.

wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 09:51:27 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:28:37 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:10:31 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:53:49 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|Gene Kearns wrote:
| On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:48:39 -0400, BAR penned the following well
| considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
| |Gene Kearns wrote:
| | Because someone knew, before they asked, that there would be no
| | helpful answer. There never HAS been a helpful answer to that question
| | and one would reasonably conclude then, as did Chuck, that the asking
| | of the question was clearly inflammatory in nature.
| |
| |Does said boat in questions exist?
|
| I don't know, nor do I care.
|
|I understand, integrity means nothing to you?

After having assessed both sides of this childish, stupid, inane,
decade long discussion of the substance of a Zimmerman like lobster
boat, If you feel it collectively describes adherence to some sort of
code of moral values....... I guess your definition of "integrity" and
mine differ greatly.

That is, unless your are the netcops judge, jury, and executioner.
Then we'd probably need to define authority..... HOWEVER, I'm no more
inclined to join in that ridiculous repartee than I am the one about
some boat, of which I have absolutely NO personal knowledge (and
neither do you). What a wonderfully solid basis for a system of
"integrity."

I suggest you address all of those concerns at
rec.authority.on.integrity.via.the.unkown and leave those interested
boating to fend for themselves, here......
We share the same opinion Gene and I've said it more than once.

Well said my friend.

Most excellent.
The lobsta boat is old news, agreed. Loogy is about the only one using it
now, and he should know better.

However, I hope you'll read my response to Gene. I can't understand why
folks continue to give Harry opportunities to trash the group.


Why not? You are still talking about him in your posts. That makes you
part of the problem, John. You are feeding it, even though you are not
addressing Harry directly. It's all the same. If you want to talk
about him in response to someone else's post, please do so in private
email or not at all. Doing it here is counterproductive, no matter the
form it takes. Maintain radio silence means COMPLETE SILENCE.




You don't get it. If the Seven Dwarfs (Herring is co-leader)don't bitch
about me, directly or indirectly, or about Chuck's discussion group,
they really don't have much reason to post here, as several of them are
not boaters and the ones that have a boat have little to say about them.

When have you read something here that was specific and informative
about the boats allegedly owned by Reggie, DK, Florida Jim, Mike, Loogy,
et al?

The last time hell froze over?