Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
ArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneous
Discussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK Scuba
DirectoryScuba Clubs

Scuba Forum / General / February 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

The Latest NRA Poll. Answer if you dare.

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Lee Bell - 19 Feb 2008 20:40 GMT
Here's the latest NRA Poll. I'm curious how the liberals will respond.
Before anyone says it, I'll admit it, the poll is biased. Considering the
source, that's not a surprise. Regardless, let's see how people respond.
I've included my responses in this message:

DEFENDING YOUR RIGHT TO DEFEND YOURSELF

1. Do you support NRA efforts to pass shall-issue right-to-carry laws in all
fifty states, so that law-abiding citizens have the right to protect
themselves against all violent predators, including criminal aliens? (Ten
states currently deny citizens this right). Choices are Yes, No, Don't Know.

My response: Yes

2. Do you support NRA efforts to pass a national reciprocity law, under
which a valid concealed carry permit issued in one state is valid in all
fifty states? Choices are Yes, No, Don't Know.

My response: Yes

3. Do you support NRA efforts to pass emergency powers laws in all 50
states, so that anti-gun politicians are prohibited from confiscating
firearms from law-abiding citizens in times of emergency? Choices are Yes,
No, Don't now

My response: Don't know. I thought there was a federal law that does the
same thing. If not, yes.

4. Do you support NRA efforts to pass "Castle Doctrine" laws that give
law-abiding citizens the right to defend their homes and families from
violent predators, foreign and domestic? Choices: Yes, No, Don't Know.

My response: Yes

DEFENDING OUR HOMELAND AGAINST CRIMINAL ALIENS

5. Do you believe Congress should pass crime legislation that sends the
message to criminals living outside the U.S. that if they attempt to break
into our country, they will do hard time? Choices: Yes, No, No Opinion.

My response: No. Any law that singles out individuals just because they come
from someplace else is a bad idea.

6. Federal prosecutors are handcuffed when it comes to prosecuting criminal
aliens because some of those criminal aliens can only be prosecuted in the
Federal District where they entered the country. Do you believe this law
should be changed so that criminal aliens may be tried, convicted and
sentenced in any U.S. jurisdiction. Choices: Yes, No, No Opinion.

My response: Yes

7. When known criminal aliens set foot on American soil, they are not
arrested; they are turned away at our borders. Should this policy of "catch
and release" remain in force, or should the law be changed so that criminal
aliens attempting to break and enter into our homeland are arrested, tried
and sentenced in the U.S. Choices Yes, No, No Opinion.

My response: No. They're not criminals here until they have committed a
crime here.  Keeping them out is good enough.

8. Some politicians want to give illegal aliens the right to obtain a
driver's license. In fact, this is already the law in one state. Do you
agree or disagree that illegal aliens should be permitted to obtain U.S.
driver's licenses. Choices: Agree, Disagree, No Opinion.

My response: Disagree. Illegal aliens should be deported as soon as
practical. They don't need U. S. driver's licenses in their country of
origin. The last thing we need to do is issue identification that makes them
look more legal than they actually are.

9. 25% of the population in Los Angeles County jails are criminal aliens -
many of whom have committed crimes with firearms. Yet they are simply
awaiting deportation, instead of being tried, convicted and sentenced for
their crimes.  After deportation, 60% of those criminal aliens end up back
in jail. Should NRA support the current law that requires deportation of
these criminal aliens, or fight for a new law that requires federal
prosecution and prison sentences for crimes committed against Americans.
Choices: Support the current deportation laws, Fight for new laws requiring
federal prosecution and sentencing, Don't Know.

My response: Fight for new laws requiring federal prosecution and
sentencing. Do the crime here, do the time here. Equal treatment for all.

10. How much should Congress authorize in funds for the U.S. Marshals
Service to track down and arrest all 595,000 criminal aliens who are
currently in this country, committing crimes against Americans like you?
Choices: Nothing, $100 Million, $100 Million, $250 Million, $500 Million, As
much as it takes, Not sure.

My response: Not sure. As much as it takes comes closest to my thoughts, but
tracking all of them down is pretty much impossible. On the other hand, the
U.S. Marshall's service isn't doing much else these days.

11. Do you agree or disagree that anyone who knowingly helps a criminal
alien obtain counterfeit or false documents should be guilty of a federal
felony and arrested? Choices Yes, No, Don't Know.

My response: Yes. Equal treatment for both the alien that gets the documents
and anyone that helps obtain them.

12. If NRA fights for a new law dealing with the problem of aliens who
commit crimes with firearms, which of the following scenarios would you
support for locking up those criminal aliens in a U.S. Prison? A foreign
criminal who: Choices: Yes, No, Don't Know for all.

Illegally enters the U.S.     My response: No. Send them back.
Re enters the U.S. after being deported.    My response: No. Send them back.

Commits a felony in the U.S.    My response: Yes

Smuggles human cargo.    My response: Yes

Deals in human trafficking, e.g. prostitution.    My response: Yes. Only
because it's a crime for someone here legally. I don't think prostitution
should be a crime.

Deals drugs or commits a drug related crime.    My response: Yes

Crosses into the U.S. to flee prosecution in his or her own country.  My
response: No. Send them back. Let their country pay for their punishment.

Commits any criminal act.    My response: Yes. Equal treatment under the
law.

Commits a crime with a firearm.    My response: Yes. Equal treatment under
the law.

13. Should NRA fight for a new federal law that prohibits cities from
designating themselves as "sanctuary cities" that shelter criminal aliens?
Choices: Yes, No, Don' t Know.

My response: No. Aiding a criminal is a crime in this country. Use existing
laws to handle the problem.

14. Some countries like Jamaica, Iran and El Salvador don't have deportation
treaties with the United States, which prohibits U.S. prosecutors from
deporting criminal aliens to these countries. Should NRA fight for a law
that provides for the deportation of criminals to these countries? Choices:
Yes, No, Don't Know.

My response: Yes. I think, it's yes. Those that enter the U.S. illegally,
should be sent back to where they came from unless they commit a crime here.
If they do, then deportation is not the answer, punishment consistent with
what those that are here legally get is the answer.

15. Will you help NRA fight for a comprehensive anti- crime bill that
defends our homeland from criminal aliens and gives law-abiding Americans
the power to defend themselves and their families?

My response: Yes. I recently sent funds to become an NRA Life Member. I
fully support the NRA's efforts to protect my rights, no matter who
jeopardizes them. I support strong laws and penalties, consistently applied
against all those who would use firearms to commit crimes just as much as I
support leaving the rights of those that do not commit crimes alone.

Lee
Greg Mossman - 19 Feb 2008 21:05 GMT
> Here's the latest NRA Poll. I'm curious how the liberals will respond.

[snip yet more of Lee's never-ending off-topic gun nutty BS that
doesn't belong here but which he can't shut up about because he's sick
with obsession]

None of us give a sh.t.  Take your podium somewhere where people care.
This is a scuba forum.
pugetsounddiver@gmail.com - 19 Feb 2008 21:29 GMT
> > Here's the latest NRA Poll. I'm curious how the liberals will respond.
>
> [snip yet more of Lee's never-ending off-topic gun nutty BS that
> doesn't belong here but which he can't shut up about because he's sick
> with obsession]

The most obsessed here is you, little girl.

> None of us give a sh.t.

Lots of us give a sh.t, and especially just the fact that any mention
of freedoms held by others you judge, but cant attack as you see fit
throws you into a desperate lather of hypocrisy and lies.

> Take your podium somewhere where people care.
> This is a scuba forum.

Not according to you.

You use it as you see fit for your personal and political ends, then
have the effrontery to call others names and hand out projection,
lies, and outright fabrications.

Right along here will come an example.

You're a hypocrite piece of sh.t, Greg.
Lee Bell - 19 Feb 2008 21:40 GMT
>> [snip yet more of Lee's never-ending off-topic gun nutty BS that
>> doesn't belong here but which he can't shut up about because he's sick
>> with obsession]

Chicken sh.t.

You gave a sh.t when you posted your defense of illegal aliens.

Were you lying then or are you lying now?
Greg Mossman - 19 Feb 2008 22:00 GMT
> >> [snip yet more of Lee's never-ending off-topic gun nutty BS that
> >> doesn't belong here but which he can't shut up about because he's sick
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> You gave a sh.t when you posted your defense of illegal aliens.

I never started an off-topic thread about illegal aliens in a scuba
newsgroup.  Why would I do an idiotic thing like that.  I may have
responded to your idiotic off-topic thread that you started about
illegal aliens, but the topic of illegal aliens certainly doesn't
obsess me enough to post off-topic threads about it.

> Were you lying then or are you lying now?

I gave a sh.t about the illegals because you posted a bunch of lies
and I felt someone had to call you on them.  But in general I don't
give a sh.t about illegal aliens or guns on rec.scuba because neither
of them have anything to do with scuba.

The fact is that you are definitely obsessed with guns and illegals to
the point that you rant about them on an unrelated forum to people who
don't give a sh.t.  That's akin to the guy standing in the subway
terminal or street corner ranting about the second coming.  They have
loitering laws to take care of those folks.  Too bad we don't have
loitering laws here.
Scott - 20 Feb 2008 01:15 GMT
> >> [snip yet more of Lee's never-ending off-topic gun nutty BS that
> >> doesn't belong here but which he can't shut up about because he's sick
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Were you lying then or are you lying now?

Both.
Greg Mossman - 19 Feb 2008 21:51 GMT
On Feb 19, 1:29 pm, pugetsounddi...@gmail.com wrote:

> > > Here's the latest NRA Poll. I'm curious how the liberals will respond.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> The most obsessed here is you, little girl.

Wouldn't the most obsessed one be the one who continually starts these
off-topic threads?

Or perhaps it's the one who stalks those who complain about the off-
topic threads and calls them "little girl"?

> Lots of us give a sh.t, and especially just the fact that any mention
> of freedoms held by others you judge, but cant attack as you see fit
> throws you into a desperate lather of hypocrisy and lies.

It's one of those stupid polls that all the interests groups send out
expecting all "yes" answers from their constituents along with a hefty
donation check.  I don't get them from the NRA anymore, thankfully,
but plenty of them roll in from Planned Parenthood, Sierra Club, ACLU,
the DNC, and plenty other groups that have gotten a check out of me in
the past.

Are you interested in me posting separate threads on my response to
each one of these?  I hope not, since I'm so uninterested that I throw
the "polls" away with the rest of the junk mail.  Lee, as a government
servant, obviously has more time on his hands and not only fills them
out but retypes them here for the rest of us to suffer through.

It makes me sick that the junk mail I patiently throw away is being
reposted here where I have to ignore it yet again.  Keep your junkmail
to yourselves, that's all I ask.

> You use it as you see fit for your personal and political ends, then
> have the effrontery to call others names and hand out projection,
> lies, and outright fabrications.

When was the last time I started an off-topic thread for my "personal
and political ends"?  When?  When?

> You're a hypocrite piece of sh.t, Greg.

Cite?  When?  When?  When?

Can't do it, can you?
pugetsounddiver@gmail.com - 19 Feb 2008 23:59 GMT
> When was the last time I started an off-topic thread for my "personal
> and political ends"?  When?  When?
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Can't do it, can you?

Don't have to, wont waste the time, liar, you and your bullshit speak
for themselves.

You're a lying, socialist, hypocrite piece of sh.t, Greg.
Greg Mossman - 20 Feb 2008 00:34 GMT
On Feb 19, 3:59 pm, pugetsounddi...@gmail.com wrote:

> > When was the last time I started an off-topic thread for my "personal
> > and political ends"?  When?  When?
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Don't have to, wont waste the time, liar, you and your bullshit speak
> for themselves.

Can't do it, can you?

Lie, lie, lie, and then when I ask you to prove it, nothing but
bullshit emerges from your toilet mouth.

Typical Scott.

> You're a lying, socialist, hypocrite piece of sh.t, Greg.

Once again,

> Cite?  When?  When?  When?

> Can't do it, can you?

> Can't do it, can you?
> Can't do it, can you?
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Can't do it, can you?
> Can't do it, can you?

Pussy.
dazed and confuzzed - 20 Feb 2008 00:23 GMT
> Here's the latest NRA Poll. I'm curious how the liberals will respond.
> Before anyone says it, I'll admit it, the poll is biased. Considering the
[quoted text clipped - 152 lines]
>
> Lee

THe only problem with the NRA is that they are too liberal, and too
willing to compromise.

While I am an NRA member, I more strongly support GOA

Signature

“TANSTAAFL”
____________________________________________________________________________

America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American.
____________________________________________________________________________
 "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them;
the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3

Greg Mossman - 20 Feb 2008 00:34 GMT
On Feb 19, 4:23 pm, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net>
wrote:

> THe only problem with the NRA is that they are too liberal, and too
> willing to compromise.
>
> While I am an NRA member, I more strongly support GOA

GOA = Gunnuts of America?
dazed and confuzzed - 20 Feb 2008 00:41 GMT
> On Feb 19, 4:23 pm, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> GOA = Gunnuts of America?

Something like that. It'll do for the likes of you.

Signature

“TANSTAAFL”
____________________________________________________________________________

America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American.
____________________________________________________________________________
 "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them;
the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3

Greg Mossman - 20 Feb 2008 00:57 GMT
On Feb 19, 4:41 pm, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net>
wrote:

> > GOA = Gunnuts of America?
>
> Something like that. It'll do for the likes of you.

Are you going to sign me up if McCain wins?
dazed and confuzzed - 20 Feb 2008 01:23 GMT
> On Feb 19, 4:41 pm, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Are you going to sign me up if McCain wins?

You're a big boy, do it yourself.

You paid the bet once, and I am not gonna wager this election one way or
the other.

Now matter which way t goes, the country loses.

Signature

“TANSTAAFL”
____________________________________________________________________________

America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American.
____________________________________________________________________________
 "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them;
the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3

dechucka - 20 Feb 2008 01:26 GMT
>> Here's the latest NRA Poll. I'm curious how the liberals will respond.
>> Before anyone says it, I'll admit it, the poll is biased. Considering the
[quoted text clipped - 163 lines]
>
> While I am an NRA member, I more strongly support GOA

Finally I agree with you about something. Kids should not be allowed out of
the house without gun training, that way you could have massacres in
preschools as well as in schools and universities. Why let the toddlers not
have any fun
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick - 20 Feb 2008 01:59 GMT
> "dazed and confuzzed" <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote in message

>> While I am an NRA member, I more strongly support GOA
>
> Finally I agree with you about something. Kids should not be allowed out
> of the house without gun training, that way you could have massacres in
> preschools as well as in schools and universities. Why let the toddlers
> not have any fun

 Notice how Dechucka can spoil with some ad-hom hyperbole, but he's too
spineless to take the pole.

 I'm tellin ya, there's a Canadian in the woodpile somewhere.

Signature

--

    Not a claim, merely an observation, Joe. Can you honestly say that in
  these discussions your ego hasn't swelled even a little with renewed
pride
    over the superiority your guns provide over lesser mortals? -JOF

                       Popeye/www.finalprotectivefire.com

dechucka - 20 Feb 2008 02:12 GMT
>> "dazed and confuzzed" <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>  Notice how Dechucka can spoil with some ad-hom hyperbole, but he's too
> spineless to take the pole.

I'll take where do I sign up
Chris Guynn - 20 Feb 2008 13:56 GMT
> >> "dazed and confuzzed" <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote in message
> >
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> I'll take where do I sign up

Congratulations on finally coming out of the closet.
dechucka - 20 Feb 2008 19:51 GMT
>> >> "dazed and confuzzed" <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote in message
>> >
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Congratulations on finally coming out of the closet.

? is the NRA a horses hoof association?
Chris Guynn - 20 Feb 2008 21:10 GMT
> >> >> "dazed and confuzzed" <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote in message
> >> >
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> ? is the NRA a horses hoof association?

Well, he said that you were "too spineless to take the pole" and you
responded that "[You'd] take [it]..."

I just figured that you were coming out.
dechucka - 20 Feb 2008 21:20 GMT
> in
>> >> message news:13rn2ct24gemaff@news.supernews.com...
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> I just figured that you were coming out.

is this some latent desire on your behalf?

anyhow I will do the NRA poll if someone can give me a link
Chris Guynn - 20 Feb 2008 22:13 GMT
<snip>

> is this some latent desire on your behalf?

You're the one who said you were interested in the pole.  I was just trying
to be supportive.  Next time, I won't bother.
dechucka - 20 Feb 2008 22:29 GMT
> <snip>
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> trying
> to be supportive.  Next time, I won't bother.

I'll post if somewhere could tell me where to.

IMHO we do not have enough school massacres in Australia bring on the NRA
here
Joe English - 21 Feb 2008 00:18 GMT
>><snip>
>>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> IMHO we do not have enough school massacres in Australia bring on the NRA
> here

The NRA is not responsible for or promotes any school massacres or any
gun violence at all.  In fact quite the opposite.  It has been quite
active in teaching firearm responsibility, proper gun use, and gun safety.

We teach water safety, traffic safety, and electric safety in our
schools, maybe if we taught gun safety in the schools also, it would
reduce the incidents of shootings in gun free zones
dechucka - 21 Feb 2008 00:23 GMT
>>><snip>
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> violence at all.  In fact quite the opposite.  It has been quite active in
> teaching firearm responsibility, proper gun use, and gun safety.

all those guns and all those massacres. Of course there is no correlation,
wait a second comparable countries with less guns have less massacres

> We teach water safety, traffic safety, and electric safety in our schools,
> maybe if we taught gun safety in the schools also, it would reduce the
> incidents of shootings in gun free zones

I doubt you septics love your guns and killing people
crownfield - 21 Feb 2008 01:23 GMT
In article <47bcc48a$0$30999$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-
01.iinet.net.au>, dechucka@vomithotmail.com says...
-
-"Joe English" <joe2aenglish@wisperhome.com> wrote in message
-news:47bcc343$0$29805$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
-> We teach water safety, traffic safety, and electric safety in our schools,
-> maybe if we taught gun safety in the schools also, it would reduce the
-> incidents of shootings in gun free zones
-
-I doubt you septics love your guns and killing people

and you third world barbarians hate them...
-
-
-

Signature

Bob Crownfield
crownfield@verizon.net

dechucka - 21 Feb 2008 04:49 GMT
> In article <47bcc48a$0$30999$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-
> 01.iinet.net.au>, dechucka@vomithotmail.com says...
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> and you third world barbarians hate them...

because they cause so many school massacres, maybe they aren't barbarians
dechucka - 20 Feb 2008 02:29 GMT
>> "dazed and confuzzed" <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>  Notice how Dechucka can spoil with some ad-hom hyperbole, but he's too
> spineless to take the pole.

that's "poll"
ScubaZine - 21 Feb 2008 02:37 GMT
I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little
girl for posting OT stuff but thought you would be interested in the
actual numbers of who posts and who starts articles. Nothing about it
being on or off topic.

http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10


Signature

____________________________
Lee E. J. Arnould

Web Slave
http://www.ScubaZine.com
mb:0419896933
skype:scubazine
msn:scubazine

Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick - 21 Feb 2008 04:01 GMT
>I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little girl
>for posting OT stuff but thought you would be interested in the actual
>numbers of who posts and who starts articles. Nothing about it being on or
>off topic.
>
> http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10

 It's amazing that a.sholes like you can be so transparently hypocritical.

 You just posted off topic in two threads, after having said several times
that there was no reason for you to post here because there was no
information.

 "I have been monitoring the group "off and on" for many years too since
1986 in fact (before the rise of the www world) although as ScubaZine
only recently I used other emails addresses in past (eg
bronte.utas.edu.au, DivinginAustralia.com to name a few). I am off now
as cant see any benefit in reading the group.
Length of use does not mean ownership.
Oh can you stop cross posting to a.R.scuba if you want me to see a
response email me direct no need for others to be bored by our childish
arguments."

 Yet here you are again...

 FOAD.

 ps, you're a liar as well, with your "monitoring off and on for many
years" bullshit.

 You posted on usenet 90 times in three months back in '01, mostly
elsewhere,, trying to play off your trash site back then too.

 Run along, boy.

Signature

--

    Not a claim, merely an observation, Joe. Can you honestly say that in
  these discussions your ego hasn't swelled even a little with renewed
pride
    over the superiority your guns provide over lesser mortals? -JOF

                       Popeye/www.finalprotectivefire.com

Scott - 21 Feb 2008 04:17 GMT
> >I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little girl
> >for posting OT stuff but thought you would be interested in the actual
> >numbers of who posts and who starts articles. Nothing about it being on or
> >off topic.

http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10


>   It's amazing that a.sholes like you can be so transparently hypocritical.
>
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
>   Run along, boy.

http://www.scubazine.com/contact.asp?theregion=397

Snorkel and all.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick - 21 Feb 2008 04:23 GMT
>> >I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little
>> >girl
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>
> Snorkel and all.

 That doesn't beat the fluorescent console. :-)

Signature

--

    Not a claim, merely an observation, Joe. Can you honestly say that in
  these discussions your ego hasn't swelled even a little with renewed
pride
    over the superiority your guns provide over lesser mortals? -JOF

                       Popeye/www.finalprotectivefire.com

Scott - 21 Feb 2008 15:31 GMT
> >>   Run along, boy.
> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>   That doesn't beat the fluorescent console. :-)

The whole ensemble is very revealing.
dechucka - 21 Feb 2008 04:55 GMT
>> >I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little
>> >girl
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>
> Snorkel and all.
dechucka - 21 Feb 2008 04:55 GMT
>> >I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little
>> >girl
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>
> Snorkel and all.

amazing popeye posts and lapdog is here
Scott - 21 Feb 2008 04:12 GMT
> I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little
> girl for posting OT stuff but thought you would be interested in the
> actual numbers of who posts and who starts articles. Nothing about it
> being on or off topic.

http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10


Change the search parameters a little.

Sorry you played your hand so early, and that you kneel to do it.

Too bad you don't have enough hair on your a.s to make a direct comment or
accusation.

BTW, your website sucks, an long ago worn out line of bullshit.

Do you sell Amway?
Grumman-581 - 21 Feb 2008 04:15 GMT
> http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10

>
> Change the search parameters a little.

Or just look at 2007...
http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5%2f31%2f2007&sNG=r
ec.scuba&sTP=10


The problem is that when you use different schemes for obfuscating your
email address, it shows up as different IDs...

Interesting that it only goes up to 5/31/2007...

Signature

See NNTP header field "X-Real-Email-Address" to reply by email.

Scott - 21 Feb 2008 04:19 GMT
> > http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10

> >
> > Change the search parameters a little.
>
> Or just look at 2007...

http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5%2f31%2f2007&sNG=r
ec.scuba&sTP=10


> The problem is that when you use different schemes for obfuscating your
> email address, it shows up as different IDs...
>
> Interesting that it only goes up to 5/31/2007...

He thinks he is clever and is going to defend his countryman against their
combined, exponential, ignorance.
Joe English - 21 Feb 2008 12:47 GMT
>>http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10

>>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Interesting that it only goes up to 5/31/2007...

I ve been on here long before 2/06
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick - 21 Feb 2008 13:18 GMT
>>>http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10

>>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> I ve been on here long before 2/06

The data on the http://netscan.research.microsoft.com web site will no
longer be updated after May 31, 2007. The Microsoft Research Community
Technologies Team thanks you for your interest in this research project, and
hopes that it has been a valuable resource.
Signature


--

   A skilled, armed man lives on a plane of security and contentment
     different from that of others. The man who cannot cut it, envies,
          fears and sometimes hates the man who can. -Cooper

                       Popeye/www.finalprotectivefire.com

John Mason Jr - 22 Feb 2008 22:59 GMT
>> http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10

>>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Interesting that it only goes up to 5/31/2007...

Quote
The data on the http://netscan.research.microsoft.com web site will no
longer be updated after May 31, 2007. The Microsoft Research Community
Technologies Team thanks you for your interest in this research project,
and hopes that it has been a valuable resource.

End Quote

John
Lee Bell - 21 Feb 2008 12:20 GMT
>I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little girl
>for posting OT stuff but thought you would be interested in the actual
>numbers of who posts and who starts articles. Nothing about it being on or
>off topic.

> http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/AuthorMetrics.aspx?sDT=5/31/2007&sNG=rec.s
cuba&sTP=10

Interesting that others took offense to this post. It didn't bother me a
bit.  I found the information interesting. Thanks for sharing it.

Lee
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick - 21 Feb 2008 13:25 GMT
>>I make no comments about the article or who is bigger girl or little girl
>>for posting OT stuff but thought you would be interested in the actual
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Lee

 It's an out-of-date Microsoft thing.

 I reviewed it last week per a conversation in UK.R.S

 There's one somewhere in Google that I've been to, that's up to the day.

=========================================

----- Original Message -----
From: "ScubaZine WebSlave" <ScubaZine@scubaZine.com>
To: "Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" <Popeye@finalprotectivefire.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 11:12 PM
Subject: Re: The Latest NRA Poll. Answer if you dare.

> Commenting on other peoples comments is not the same as creating Off topic
> comments. That has been my point.

 Like your rose colored view of insults to my country, the sentence above
is equally preposterous.

 Off topic posting is off topic posting.

 Especially since you've been clearly told that off topic posting is a norm
for our group, there is little or no difference between starting an OT
thread and posting it it.

> Why do you always resort to insulting people?

 You're being grossly offensive.

  I just cut to the finish.

  DO NOT e-mail anything to me that you don't post as well.

> I run my web site for people to get information.I do it for free and I
> have little advertising if you think it is trash then ok how can I improve
> it for you.

 I have no interest in websites of that type.

> You persist in calling people liers yet you have no evidence.

 I posted the evidence.
==============================
>>  ps, you're a liar as well, with your "monitoring off and on for many
>> years" bullshit.
>>
>>  You posted on usenet 90 times in three months back in '01, mostly
>> elsewhere,, trying to play off your trash site back then too.
==============================

 Prove me wrong, I'll be happy to apologize.

> Lee
>
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
>>
>>  Run along, boy.

===============================

Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick wrote:

>  Were these the whining, Anti-American remarks that you missed?
>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>>
>> why not they are the weakist link

I still don't see anything Anti-American here. Yes someone is having a
go at Marines and I believe you were in the military as was I and it is
standard to give other peoples military a ribbing but it is Not
Anti-American. My Army is better trained than your army type crap has
been around as long as armies.

By the way your comments about Australia being a third world something
or other and our women are easy was anti-Australian but hey I don't give
a sh.t I like this country and don't care what others say.

Same as when someone yesterday made comments about rec.scuba. You stated
this was anti-American no it was anti rec.scuba no nation was mention
although the word septic politics was mention... is this Anti America?
Referring to a country by its nick name is not anti American. I don't
think "Carabu f.ckers" is anti-Canadian nor Sheep f.ckers anti-New
Zealand. It is a fine line but truly Anti-Country comments should be
defended but yet to see a truly Anti-American Statement. For argument
sake saying You are a Whatever is not the same as saying All Americans
are a whatever. (Please this is an example only I am not anti-American)

I have been monitoring the group "off and on" for many years too since
1986 in fact (before the rise of the www world) although as ScubaZine
only recently I used other emails addresses in past (eg
bronte.utas.edu.au, DivinginAustralia.com to name a few). I am off now
as cant see any benefit in reading the group.

Length of use does not mean ownership.

Oh can you stop cross posting to a.r.scuba if you want me to see a
response email me direct no need for others to be bored by our childish
arguments.

Lee

Signature

____________________________
Lee E. J. Arnould

Web Slave
http://www.ScubaZine.com
mb:0419896933
skype:scubazine
msn:scubazine

--

--

   A skilled, armed man lives on a plane of security and contentment
     different from that of others. The man who cannot cut it, envies,
          fears and sometimes hates the man who can. -Cooper

                       Popeye/www.finalprotectivefire.com

Sheldon - 27 Feb 2008 00:06 GMT
While I agree with most of your answers, who is going to pay attention to
this poll?  Remember, it's a NRA poll.  Any answers would be slanted towards
NRA members.  The NRA might be interested, but if anyone sends the results
to a congressman or senator they won't give a hoot.

This may be OT, but if I was going to have a talk with my elected
representative I would introduce myself as a law-abiding-citizen.  Not a NRA
member.

Sheldon
NRA member
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.