blake got all defensive:

>>>> I think if anybody took the trouble to draw up stats of that nature, sf
>>>> would *definitely* not be the worst offender in that respect. My guess
>>>> would be either Greg or blake.
>>>
>>> Hands-down, Greggie. I've seen blake post about food (certainly more
>>> often than some others).
>>>
>>> Dear, please don't pick on my blake! Even when it has nothing to do with
>>> food, his wit makes me smile. And Greg? Well, I expect no more than what
>>> we've been getting, so I'm not disappointed. Maybe a bit bored, but not
>>> disappointed since I have no expectations.
>>>
>>> This one-upsmanship-bullshit is just that. Bullshit. Play nice guys,
>>> please!
>>
>> Well, here are the stats on "your" blake: Tallying his posts from
>> yesterday and today, blake posted 65 times. ONLY SEVEN of them were about
>> food, and of those seven, several were of the "I've never had that" type,
>> with no further contribution given. That gives him a "food percentage" of
>> 10.8%
>>
>> Here are Greg's stats: 16 posts over that same time period, with 5 posts
>> about food. So *he* has a "food percentage" of 31.3% -- MUCH better than
>> "your" blake.
>>
>
> if you don't like my peaches, i suggest you killfile me. i'm not a moving
> target.

Did I say you should be killfiled? I merely showed how seldom you post about
food. Even Sheldon and your ****tard have better records than you in that
area. OT posts don't bother me. I'm not the one who brought up the issue of
OT postings; all I did was count and compare.

Bob