Digest for rec.sport.golf@googlegroups.com - 23 updates in 8 topics

Sunday, June 4, 2017

"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jun 03 08:58AM -0700


> Hey John. Please put some of the post to which you're replying in
> your return posts. I knew that this was responding to one of mine,
> but the other two didn't explain your answer.
 
Sorry. The only way I see Moderate's posts are when someone
else responds to them. Apparently he's been banned from
Google Groups.
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 03 09:29AM -0700

- hide quoted text -
 
> Hey John. Please put some of the post to which you're replying in
> your return posts. I knew that this was responding to one of mine,
> but the other two didn't explain your answer.
 
Sorry. The only way I see Moderate's posts are when someone
else responds to them. Apparently he's been banned from
Google Groups.
 
I'm not sure that's something to be sorry about. I just wonder how it happened.
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 03 12:44PM -0500

>else responds to them. Apparently he's been banned from
>Google Groups.
 
>I'm not sure that's something to be sorry about. I just wonder how it happened.
 
 
 
As I understand it only an owner or manager of a Google group can ban
members or remove posts from that group's news server. Anyone can
report abuse to the address for such in the header for his posts. I
don't know if that does any good or not.
Carbon <nobrac@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>: Jun 03 02:23PM -0400

On 06/02/2017 10:35 PM, Dene wrote:
 
> Uh....most of the time I don't see what moderate says, since he's banned on GG. He may very well be trolling you. Why not put him on full ignore?

Agree. GG has excellent taste.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 03 04:31PM -0700

On 2017-06-03 4:16 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
>> I'm not sure that's something to be sorry about. I just wonder how it happened.
 
> I decided to stop having my posts appear on Google Groups. There
> is no ban.
 
And how did you do that, exactly?
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 03 04:51PM -0700

On 2017-06-02 11:23 AM, Moderate wrote:
>> idiocy. Hell, even his daughter and her husband who is part of his
>> administration were against it.
 
> You obviously haven't read the Paris Accord.
 
And what have you read that you'd like to share with us?
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 03 04:52PM -0700

On 2017-06-02 4:19 PM, Moderate wrote:
>> something. Now, if you read Breitbart and that ilk they talk doomsday
>> as usual, but their thinking is as small as yours.
 
> I read the Accord.
 
So when you said it was a "bad deal" what specifically did you mean?
 
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 03 07:38PM -0500

On Sat, 3 Jun 2017 16:31:23 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>
wrote:
 
 
>> I decided to stop having my posts appear on Google Groups. There
>> is no ban.
 
>And how did you do that, exactly?
 
Well, he uses the aioe server, but PiaoHong.Usenet.Client. as his
news reader. That might be because he's using an Android smartphone.
But why would one stop using Google? Because he couldn't? :-)
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 03 07:46PM -0700

Well, he uses the aioe server, but PiaoHong.Usenet.Client. as his
news reader. That might be because he's using an Android smartphone.
But why would one stop using Google? Because he couldn't? :-)
 
Yeah....even somebody as low techy as me ain't buying Mod's story about GG.
 
FWIW.... I'm glamping near a pretty little town called Lone Pine CA, having gone through Death Valley. At 3 pm, 115 degrees at the valley floor....but it was a dry heat. :-)
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 03 09:27PM -0700

"You obviously know little about the Paris agreement. There was no
"deal", no penalties, any country could take their own pace in
reducing carbon emission, or leave at any time."
 
Which is EXACTLY what Trump did.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 03 09:30PM -0700

> "deal", no penalties, any country could take their own pace in
> reducing carbon emission, or leave at any time."
 
> Which is EXACTLY what Trump did.
 
Let's put back in what you (deliberately) snipped:
 
> the signatory of the country agreeing to it.
 
>> Then cancelling it was no big deal.
 
>> It was a bad deal for America, because Obama made bad deals.
 
If there were no penalties... ...how exactly was it a bad deal that the
US needed to get out of?
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 03 09:49PM -0700

On Saturday, June 3, 2017 at 9:30:32 PM UTC-7, Alan Baker wrote:
 
> >> It was a bad deal for America, because Obama made bad deals.
 
> If there were no penalties... ...how exactly was it a bad deal that the
> US needed to get out of?
 
How about shipping ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR overseas? And this doesn't count the cost of reducing OUR emissions by 28%.
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 03 10:18PM -0700

How about shipping ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR overseas? And this doesn't count the cost of reducing OUR emissions by 28%.
 
Good reply but facts are irrelevant when dealing with the RAT. His response will be designed to perpetuate an argument. Watch...
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 04 12:27AM -0700


>> If there were no penalties... ...how exactly was it a bad deal that the
>> US needed to get out of?
 
> How about shipping ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR overseas? And this doesn't count the cost of reducing OUR emissions by 28%.
 
How about proving that...
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 03 09:54PM -0700


> >Normal Americans are watching.
 
> Sigh. So two ladies are being nutso. That happens to righties as
> well. There are crazies in every walk of life and politics.
 
This is encouraging: the first step of recovery is admitting you have a problem.
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 03 09:50PM -0700

On Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 3:28:51 PM UTC-7, Alan Baker wrote:
> for White House appointees over eight years.'
 
> And before the inevitable cries of "fake news!":
 
> <https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/Waiver%20Chart%205-31-17.pdf>
 
You wingnuts are now concerned about ethics; how refreshing.
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 03 09:39PM -0700

Not only did he get us out of an expensive agreement that would have ABSOLUTELY no effect on global warming (there hasn't been any for NINETEEN YEARS), but he simultaneously put the world on notice that there is a new sheriff in town who is not a wimp pushover. The apology tour is OVER!
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 03 09:42PM -0700

> Not only did he get us out of an expensive agreement that would have ABSOLUTELY no effect on global warming (there hasn't been any for NINETEEN YEARS), but he simultaneously put the world on notice that there is a new sheriff in town who is not a wimp pushover. The apology tour is OVER!
 
To say he's a genius implies he knows what exactly is going on when he
so very clearly does not.
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 03 09:40PM -0700

On Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 2:03:17 PM UTC-7, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> NO ONE WANTS THIS ANIMAL.
> HE IS GARBAGE, ALL HE HAS IS ATTENTION seeking.
 
> A waste, a total waste.
 
Don't be so hard on yourself...
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 03 09:33PM -0700

On Friday, June 2, 2017 at 7:25:18 PM UTC-7, Nomen Nescio wrote:
 
> All the motherfucker does is cut and paste.
 
> Anything for attention.S
 
> Just wish he would get a toupee
 
So, WHY don't you get one?
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jun 03 06:16PM -0500

> else responds to them. Apparently he's been banned from
> Google Groups.
 
> I'm not sure that's something to be sorry about. I just wonder how it happened.
 
I decided to stop having my posts appear on Google Groups. There
is no ban.
--
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 03 10:03AM -0500

>different than your ad hominem.
 
>Sorta. My way of dealing with the RAT leaves me in complete control. I don't feed him...merely ridicule him from time to time. Since all he cares about is the argument, he gets nothing from me. Very freeing decision I made a few months ago.
 
>I think Moderate enjoys jabbing you. Your decision.
 
I can only judge someone on what they show. With Moderate it's always
his ass. I enjoy pointing that out.
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 03 08:48AM -0700

- show quoted text -
I can only judge someone on what they show. With Moderate it's always
his ass. I enjoy pointing that out.
 
Then by all means carry on. The primary purpose of RSG is entertainment. Personally I'm amused every time the RAT vainly tries to get me to respond. I'm convinced he hates having his troll bait dangle in the wind.
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.golf+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment