I expected your asshole remark. What was it you are saying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002" <danfriedman2002@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Curtis,
> >
> > In reply to your first paragraph: You are not "seconding
> > the motion", but rather introducing your own "motion", as
> > your charactarization of my suggestion as "outing of people
> > against their will" is incorrect.
>
> How is it "incorrect?" That is EXACTLY what you
> are asking for, and have been asking since you
> descended upon this forum.
>
> > Your other 4 paragraphs devolve further. I interpret them
> > to be support for your critisism of my suggestion, which
> > you mischaracterized anyway (see above).
>
> IMHO, Curtis didn't mischaracterize your intent in any way.
> You made your intent very clear. You want to know the names
> of people who post on this forum. So far, you have only
> wanted to know the names of the people whose ideas you
> disagree with. I leave it up to the conspiracy theorists
> here to determine the "why" of this.
>
> When you first appeared here, I took you to task for this
> 'tude, and do so again. When you first went all drama queen
> on having your Holy Opinion questioned, you pitched a hissy
> fit and demanded that I stop referencing you on this forum.
> I did so. I neither mentioned you nor referred to you in
> any post since February. And then, out of the blue, you
> come barging in and run the same number all over again,
> upbraiding me for "speaking your name in vain."
>
> Get The Fuck Over Yourself.
>
> Neither you nor your opinions of How Fairfield Life Should
> Be Run are terribly of interest to me. I suspect I'm not
> alone in this, and that most on this forum -- judging from
> their lack of "piling on" to your adolescent demands --
> probably agree with me. What makes this forum special, and
> of value to those who appreciate it, is exactly the thing
> that you seem to find most threatening.
>
> People can come onto this forum and speak their minds. They
> can do so using their legal names or using an alias. If one
> of them isn't a member and chooses to send something to Rick
> to repost anonymously, they have the right to do so, and
> he respects that right.
>
> YOU want to "out" them. Don't you think that's more than a
> little sick, and straying over the line into spiritual
> fascism? I do.
>
> And now I'll go back to what I was successfully doing before
> YOU dragged me back into this -- ignoring your silly ass.
> I suggest you do the same thing with me, and with other
> perfectly legitimate opinions expressed here, whether you
> agree with them or not.
>
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
> > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey Rick,
> > >
> > > I just want to second the motion for more restrictions on posters here
> > > and more outing of people against their will. Our need to know who is
> > > posting is much more important than their privacy.
> > >
> > > Also I would like to see a lot less of posters using passive construction
> > > in their writing. We need MORE action verbs, not less. Any chance you
> > > can include that demand in your new rules?
> > >
> > > And (last thing) how about a total ban on anyone referring to Guru Dev as
> > > "that homeless guy who hit the lottery." It is offensive to dwelling
> > > impaired Americans.
> > >
> > > Oh yeah (seriously, last thing) and I'm getting a little sick of the
> > > phrase UFO when we know damn well who these aliens are and where they are
> > > from. (I'm talking to you El Salvador)
> > >
> > > Oops (I promise last last last) If you wouldn't mind, I would like to see
> > > a shot of female posters in a wet T-shirt. Not to be sexist but in the
> > > spirit of the fullest possible dis-clothes-her.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> > > > On Behalf Of nablusoss1008
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:55 PM
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> , "danfriedman2002"
> > > > <danfriedman2002@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this
> > > > non-Member are questioned.
> > > > >
> > > > > Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your
> > > > Sources need to be protected?
> > > > >
> > > > > More transparency, please.
> > > >
> > > > You must be joking ! Rick's motto is the wilder the rumor the better, at
> > > > least if it aims at a saint.
> > > > No transparency please !
> > > >
> > > > So says Nabby, whose real name none of us know, and who delights in
> > > > stories
> > > > of UFOs (which I happen to believe in myself), mysterious world saviors,
> > > > etc.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
