Note that we have here two more examples of Barry's continuing obsession with the number of my posts.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: <snip> > > > He felt that his posts were unappreciated, as I > > > said to start with. Obviously you don't tell > > > somebody to cut back posts you appreciate. > > > > No? Even your *supporters* were asking you > > to post less, Judy. And you categorically > > refused, as did Lawson, as did Shemp. The > > posting limits were the result. Actually I never "categorically refused." I don't think Lawson did either. And to the extent *anybody* wanted me to cut back, I felt unappreciated. > Just as a followup, I should point out that > yesterday, in less than 24 hours, you made 33 > posts. Those posts were mainly you either > rehashing old arguments that you've been argu- > ing about for 14 years on this forum or another, > and a few token posts dissing people you don't > like and trying to "lessen" them in the eyes > of other posters. Actually this is a highly inaccurate description. No surprise there. > If the posting limits had *not* been put into > effect, and you continued to post at the same > rate, you'd easily rack up over 200 posts for the > week. And yet somehow without posting limits, I rarely went over 100 posts per week. How many posts I make per day has to do with how many posts are being made by others (typically more on the weekends) and the specific topics that come up. <duh> How many of the people who "appreciate" > your posts here do you think still would if > you were allowed to post as much as you clearly > want to? Dunno, why don't you ask them? I appreciated almost all of Lawson's posts, no matter how many there were. > I think that what many of us "appreciate" most > about your posts is that now, under the new > posting limits, you've often compulsively used > them all up by Monday morning, and we can spend > the rest of the week free of them. The same would > be true of Lawson if he were still around, but > he'd "foul out on posts" by mid-day Saturday. > > And Shemp will probably come off his two-week > hiatus full of bile and go over the limit within > a few days, and then we'll be free of his posts > for at least a month. I'm a big *fan* of the > posting limits. :-) Oddly enough, Shemp, Lawson, and I are three of your sharpest critics here. *Of course* you're a "fan" of limiting our posts.
