My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." He is a sheepdog.

I have a cat too. The cat is crazy. She climbs the walls. One good
thing about her is that she never begs for people food.

--Bryan

On Jul 21, 3:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *He is a sheepdog.
>
> I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls. *One good
> thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> --Bryan

I have a house. In it, is furniture. There is also a kitchen with
appliances. There are walls that divide up the house into seperate
rooms. There are also houses close by.

"Food Snob®" > wrote in message
...
> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." He is a sheepdog.
>
> I have a cat too. The cat is crazy. She climbs the walls. One good
> thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> --Bryan

been hittin the hooch again have ya?

On Jul 21, 5:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *

Not a very original name.

> He is a sheepdog.

Do you mean the breed, or that he tends sheep.
>
> I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls.

Climbs the walls? How?

> *One good thing about her is that she never begs for people food.

Not even fish?
>
> --Bryan

--Bryan

_______________________________________________

OK. As you can see the replying poster replied after the part of the
original post that was relevant. One could reply to the whole post at
the end, but answering point by point is more organized. One could
omit the original poster's sig, but leaving it in (At least the name.
Other parts of the sig can be snipped) is a reminder to anyone else
reading it who was being answered. The replying poster's sig is
automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. Since I use
GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. Again, at the very end.

On Jul 21, 5:26*pm, "C.D" > wrote:
> "Food Snob®" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *He is a sheepdog.
>
> > I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls. *One good
> > thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> > --Bryan
>
> been hittin the hooch again have ya?

This was an example, answering Blake about replying to posts. I have
not had any beer yet tonight. It's not even 6 o'clock here.

--Bryan

On Jul 21, 5:21*pm, Chemo the Clown > wrote:
> On Jul 21, 3:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
>
> > My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *He is a sheepdog.
>
> > I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls. *One good
> > thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> > --Bryan
>
> I have a house.

Do you own it or rent it?

> In it, is furniture. There is also a kitchen with
> appliances.

Appliances and furniture are useful.

> There are walls that divide up the house into seperate rooms.

Most houses are like that.

> There are also houses close by.

That's pretty typical too, unless you live out in the country.

--Bryan

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:44:57 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo® wrote:

> On Jul 21, 5:26*pm, "C.D" > wrote:
>> "Food Snob®" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *He is a sheepdog.
>>
>>> I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls. *One good
>>> thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>>
>>> --Bryan
>>
>> been hittin the hooch again have ya?
>
> This was an example, answering Blake about replying to posts. I have
> not had any beer yet tonight. It's not even 6 o'clock here.
>
> --Bryan

it was? i thought you were doing your andy impression.

blake

On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:41:00 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo® wrote:

> On Jul 21, 5:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
>> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *
>
> Not a very original name.
>
>> He is a sheepdog.
>
> Do you mean the breed, or that he tends sheep.
>>
>> I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls.
>
> Climbs the walls? How?
>
>> *One good thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> Not even fish?
>>
>> --Bryan
>
> --Bryan
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> OK. As you can see the replying poster replied after the part of the
> original post that was relevant. One could reply to the whole post at
> the end, but answering point by point is more organized. One could
> omit the original poster's sig, but leaving it in (At least the name.
> Other parts of the sig can be snipped) is a reminder to anyone else
> reading it who was being answered. The replying poster's sig is
> automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. Since I use
> GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. Again, at the very end.

why? anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
replying to. you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
the original poster's name after your reply? how foolish.

blake

On Jul 21, 6:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *He is a sheepdog.
>
> I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls. *One good
> thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> --Bryan

I am staring at brightly coloured dots and pressing plastic rectangles
with my fingers.

On Jul 22, 8:30*am, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:41:00 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo® wrote:
> > On Jul 21, 5:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
> >> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *
>
> > Not a very original name.
>
> >> He is a sheepdog.
>
> > Do you mean the breed, or that he tends sheep.
>
> >> I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls.
>
> > Climbs the walls? *How?
>
> >> *One good thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> > Not even fish?
>
> >> --Bryan
>
> > --Bryan
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> > OK. *As you can see the replying poster replied after the part of the
> > original post that was relevant. *One could reply to the whole post at
> > the end, but answering point by point is more organized. *One could
> > omit the original poster's sig, but leaving it in (At least the name.
> > Other parts of the sig can be snipped) is a reminder to anyone else
> > reading it who was being answered. *The replying poster's sig is
> > automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. *Since I use
> > GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. *Again, at the very end.
>
> why? *anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
> replying to. *you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
> the original poster's name after your reply? *how foolish.

Not deleting doesn't require special effort. You are a real asshole,
and you are a real asshole who just happens to have a personal dislike
of me. When you criticize me, you have no credibility because it is
so obvious that you are chomping at the bit to find any fault in
anything that I write. As nasty as you are to me, you can be
sickeningly patronizing to some of the others here. It's pathetic. I
see why Andy hates you so much, though I don't share that hate because
you really do seem pathetic.

Oh, and if you had read carefully you'd have seen that it was MY sig
that I had to add manually because of using a web-based newsreader.
>
> blake

--Bryan

Bobo Bonobo® > wrote to Blake in message
...
[snip
>>> reading it who was being answered. The replying poster's sig is
>>> automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. Since I use
>>> GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. Again, at the very end.
>>>
>> why? anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
>> replying to. you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
>> the original poster's name after your reply? how foolish.
>>
> Not deleting doesn't require special effort. You are a real
> asshole, and you are a real asshole who just happens to
> have a personal dislike of me. When you criticize me, you
> have no credibility because it is so obvious that you are
> chomping at the bit to find any fault in anything that I write.
[snip]

Blake is a disciple of the "Ready, Fire, Aim!" style of Usenet posting. He's
chosen his targets and doesn't really have anything constructive to add to a
conversation but can't help but participate.

"Pathetic" is an accurate discription of Blake... Pity him, too. Those
"laughing his ass off" posts rationalizing this ongoing behavior really is
the only momentary ray of sunshine in his Real Life®.

The Ranger

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:59:55 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo®
> wrote:

>On Jul 22, 8:30*am, blake murphy > wrote:
>>
<snip>
>> > One could
>> > omit the original poster's sig, but leaving it in (At least the name.
>> > Other parts of the sig can be snipped) is a reminder to anyone else
>> > reading it who was being answered. *The replying poster's sig is
>> > automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. *Since I use
>> > GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. *Again, at the very end.
>>
>> why? *anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
>> replying to. *you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
>> the original poster's name after your reply? *how foolish.
>
>Not deleting doesn't require special effort.
<snip
>
>Oh, and if you had read carefully you'd have seen that it was MY sig
>that I had to add manually because of using a web-based newsreader.
>>
>> blake
>
>--Bryan

I still don't understand why you won't keep his signature under his
own text instead of making it appear under your text.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Jul 21, 5:21*pm, Chemo the Clown > wrote:
> On Jul 21, 3:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
>
> > My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *He is a sheepdog.
>
> > I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls. *One good
> > thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> > --Bryan
>
> I have a house. In it, is furniture. There is also a kitchen with
> appliances. There are walls that divide up the house into seperate
> rooms. There are also houses close by.

When I inhale, air goes into my lungs. When I eat food. It goes into
my stomach.

On Jul 22, 8:37*am, Cam in Toronto > wrote:
> On Jul 21, 6:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
>
> > My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *He is a sheepdog.
>
> > I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls. *One good
> > thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>
> > --Bryan
>
> I am staring at brightly coloured dots and pressing plastic rectangles
> with my fingers.

Lee Press On Nails? Oh wait, you meant the computer. Hee hee.

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 07:57:33 -0700, The Ranger wrote:

> Bobo Bonobo® > wrote to Blake in message
> ...
> [snip
>>>> reading it who was being answered. The replying poster's sig is
>>>> automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. Since I use
>>>> GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. Again, at the very end.
>>>>
>>> why? anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
>>> replying to. you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
>>> the original poster's name after your reply? how foolish.
>>>
>> Not deleting doesn't require special effort. You are a real
>> asshole, and you are a real asshole who just happens to
>> have a personal dislike of me. When you criticize me, you
>> have no credibility because it is so obvious that you are
>> chomping at the bit to find any fault in anything that I write.
> [snip]
>
> Blake is a disciple of the "Ready, Fire, Aim!" style of Usenet posting. He's
> chosen his targets and doesn't really have anything constructive to add to a
> conversation but can't help but participate.
>
> "Pathetic" is an accurate discription of Blake... Pity him, too. Those
> "laughing his ass off" posts rationalizing this ongoing behavior really is
> the only momentary ray of sunshine in his Real Life®.
>
> The Ranger

Martha and Gertrude at the Automat.

blake

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:59:55 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo® wrote:

> On Jul 22, 8:30*am, blake murphy > wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:41:00 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo® wrote:
>>> On Jul 21, 5:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
>>>> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *
>>
>>> Not a very original name.
>>
>>>> He is a sheepdog.
>>
>>> Do you mean the breed, or that he tends sheep.
>>
>>>> I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls.
>>
>>> Climbs the walls? *How?
>>
>>>> *One good thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>>
>>> Not even fish?
>>
>>>> --Bryan
>>
>>> --Bryan
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>> OK. *As you can see the replying poster replied after the part of the
>>> original post that was relevant. *One could reply to the whole post at
>>> the end, but answering point by point is more organized. *One could
>>> omit the original poster's sig, but leaving it in (At least the name.
>>> Other parts of the sig can be snipped) is a reminder to anyone else
>>> reading it who was being answered. *The replying poster's sig is
>>> automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. *Since I use
>>> GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. *Again, at the very end.
>>
>> why? *anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
>> replying to. *you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
>> the original poster's name after your reply? *how foolish.
>
> Not deleting doesn't require special effort. You are a real asshole,
> and you are a real asshole who just happens to have a personal dislike
> of me.

you have it backward. i dislike you because you are a real asshole, a
person who feels himself put-upon by anyone who doesn't think as you do.

>When you criticize me, you have no credibility because it is
> so obvious that you are chomping at the bit to find any fault in
> anything that I write. As nasty as you are to me, you can be
> sickeningly patronizing to some of the others here. It's pathetic.
>I see why Andy hates you so much, though I don't share that hate because
> you really do seem pathetic.

yeah, you and andy *really* make me seem pathetic.

>
> Oh, and if you had read carefully you'd have seen that it was MY sig
> that I had to add manually because of using a web-based newsreader.
>>

it's a poor workman who blames his tools. why don't you trim off the
superfluous sign when you add your own? i repeat, i've *never* seen anyone
trim the way you do.

blake

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:14:03 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:59:55 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo®
> > wrote:
>
>>On Jul 22, 8:30*am, blake murphy > wrote:
>>>
> <snip>
>>> > One could
>>> > omit the original poster's sig, but leaving it in (At least the name.
>>> > Other parts of the sig can be snipped) is a reminder to anyone else
>>> > reading it who was being answered. *The replying poster's sig is
>>> > automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. *Since I use
>>> > GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. *Again, at the very end.
>>>
>>> why? *anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
>>> replying to. *you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
>>> the original poster's name after your reply? *how foolish.
>>
>>Not deleting doesn't require special effort.
> <snip
>>
>>Oh, and if you had read carefully you'd have seen that it was MY sig
>>that I had to add manually because of using a web-based newsreader.
>>>
>>> blake
>>
>>--Bryan
>
> I still don't understand why you won't keep his signature under his
> own text instead of making it appear under your text.

it doesn't make much sense, does it?

your pal,
blake

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:19:09 -0700 (PDT), projectile vomit chick wrote:

> On Jul 21, 5:21*pm, Chemo the Clown > wrote:
>> On Jul 21, 3:13*pm, Food Snob® > wrote:
>>
>>> My dog is named, "Dog the Dog." *He is a sheepdog.
>>
>>> I have a cat too. *The cat is crazy. *She climbs the walls. *One good
>>> thing about her is that she never begs for people food.
>>
>>> --Bryan
>>
>> I have a house. In it, is furniture. There is also a kitchen with
>> appliances. There are walls that divide up the house into seperate
>> rooms. There are also houses close by.
>
> When I inhale, air goes into my lungs. When I eat food. It goes into
> my stomach.

i thought your gig was food coming *out* of your stomach.

blake

blake murphy > wrote in message
.. .
> [..] i dislike you because you are a real asshole, a
> person who feels himself put-upon by anyone who
> doesn't think as you do.

Pot, y'all should look in the mirror before you start calling names.

What a spitlick you are. LOL.

The Ranger

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:33:00 -0700, The Ranger wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote in message
> .. .
>> [..] i dislike you because you are a real asshole, a
>> person who feels himself put-upon by anyone who
>> doesn't think as you do.
>
> Pot, y'all should look in the mirror before you start calling names.
>
> What a spitlick you are. LOL.
>
> The Ranger

oh noes!!!! a popinjay has called me a spitlick!! i must go lie down.

blake

blake murphy > wrote in message
...
>> What a spitlick you are.
>>
> [..] has called me a spitlick!!

It was a better description than either "dork" or "goof."

The Ranger

On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:51:35 -0700, The Ranger wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote in message
> ...
>>> What a spitlick you are.
>>>
>> [..] has called me a spitlick!!
>
> It was a better description than either "dork" or "goof."
>
> The Ranger

here's the thing, ranger. you can call me whatever names you want, but
what counts is what i post. if you can't deal with the content, you lose.

blake

On Jul 25, 10:10*am, blake murphy > wrote:
> you can call me whatever names you want,

Not anymore.

> but what counts [snip ongoing blake-bray]

Is a good filter...

The Ranger

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 12:03:55 -0700 (PDT), The Ranger wrote:

> On Jul 25, 10:10*am, blake murphy > wrote:
>> you can call me whatever names you want,
>
> Not anymore.
>
>> but what counts [snip ongoing blake-bray]
>
> Is a good filter...
>
> The Ranger

in other words, you lose.

blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:14:03 -0700, sf wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:59:55 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo®
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>On Jul 22, 8:30*am, blake murphy > wrote:
> >>>
> > <snip>
> >>> > One could
> >>> > omit the original poster's sig, but leaving it in (At least the name.
> >>> > Other parts of the sig can be snipped) is a reminder to anyone else
> >>> > reading it who was being answered. *The replying poster's sig is
> >>> > automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. *Since I use
> >>> > GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. *Again, at the very end.
> >>>
> >>> why? *anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
> >>> replying to. *you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
> >>> the original poster's name after your reply? *how foolish.
> >>
> >>Not deleting doesn't require special effort.
> > <snip
> >>
> >>Oh, and if you had read carefully you'd have seen that it was MY sig
> >>that I had to add manually because of using a web-based newsreader.
> >>>
> >>> blake
> >>
> >>--Bryan
> >
> > I still don't understand why you won't keep his signature under his
> > own text instead of making it appear under your text.
>
> it doesn't make much sense, does it?

This whole thread doesn't make sense. Someone replying to himself to
illustrate a posting style?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:59:55 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo® wrote:

> > Oh, and if you had read carefully you'd have seen that it was MY sig
> > that I had to add manually because of using a web-based newsreader.
> >>
>
> it's a poor workman who blames his tools. why don't you trim off the
> superfluous sign when you add your own? i repeat, i've *never* seen anyone
> trim the way you do.

He gets 5 extra brownie points for originality.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:53:19 -0700, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:14:03 -0700, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:59:55 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo®
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Jul 22, 8:30*am, blake murphy > wrote:
>>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>>> > One could
>>>>> > omit the original poster's sig, but leaving it in (At least the name.
>>>>> > Other parts of the sig can be snipped) is a reminder to anyone else
>>>>> > reading it who was being answered. *The replying poster's sig is
>>>>> > automatically tacked onto the end by newsreaders. *Since I use
>>>>> > GoogleGroups, I have to add it manually. *Again, at the very end.
>>>>>
>>>>> why? *anyone can tell from the beginning of the message who you are
>>>>> replying to. *you mean to tell me you *make a special effort* to include
>>>>> the original poster's name after your reply? *how foolish.
>>>>
>>>>Not deleting doesn't require special effort.
>>> <snip
>>>>
>>>>Oh, and if you had read carefully you'd have seen that it was MY sig
>>>>that I had to add manually because of using a web-based newsreader.
>>>>>
>>>>> blake
>>>>
>>>>--Bryan
>>>
>>> I still don't understand why you won't keep his signature under his
>>> own text instead of making it appear under your text.
>>
>> it doesn't make much sense, does it?
>
> This whole thread doesn't make sense. Someone replying to himself to
> illustrate a posting style?

apparently we're in the higher realm of the mathematics of posting.

your pal,
blake