Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container that will take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.

Jenniw853

> wrote in message
...
> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container that will
> take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>
> Jenniw853

That makes no sense.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:31:14 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container
>> that will take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>
> This is a refreshing change from the newbie Googlers answering 20
> years old posts out of context. Maybe she's answering a FUTURE post,
> when they invent a GMO rice that cooks in cold water.

That's funny!

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
news
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 22:13:42 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container that
>>> will
>>> take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>>
>> That makes no sense.
>
> At least she did it in only two sentences rather than 4 or 5
> long-winded rambling paragraphs.
>
> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
> bedroom?) with that prick you're finally getting to sleep at a
> reasonable hour?

Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there will
be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.

In article >, ost
says...
>
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 22:13:42 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> > > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container that will
> >> take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
> >
> > That makes no sense.
>
> At least she did it in only two sentences rather than 4 or 5
> long-winded rambling paragraphs.
>
> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
> bedroom?) with that prick

She didn't.

Julie and Angela shared a bedroom.

Janet UK

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

In article >, says...
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:31:14 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
> >
> >> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container
> >> that will take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
> >
> > This is a refreshing change from the newbie Googlers answering 20
> > years old posts out of context. Maybe she's answering a FUTURE post,
> > when they invent a GMO rice that cooks in cold water.
>
> That's funny!

I was just checking out future-google to follow Miss Julie's
passionate courtship of Kuthe. Sheldon caters the wedding reception,
Gary is best man, Bruce is a bridesmaid, Wayne is godfather to the
triplets.

No more spoilers but here's a tip; you'll need a proper newsreader to
see the sexy bits.

Janet UK

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Julie Bove wrote:
>
> Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there will
> be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.

Eh-oh! You probably shouldn't have said that here, Julie!
Easy guess is that gardener and friend will be moving
in from back house to main house soon.

If you're happy though, so be it.

Janet wrote:
>
> swertz wrote:
> > Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
> > you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
> > bedroom?) with that prick
>
> She didn't.
> Julie and Angela shared a bedroom.

I remember that. Husband had his own separate bedroom.
He also sounded like a worthless tyrant too so seems to me
Julie is much better off without him.

Divorce is never fun but sometimes some end up in a better
situation. Julie seems to be handling all this quite fine. Bet
the husband will never find some other woman that will wait on
him hand and foot like Julie did.

On 4/17/2018 9:44 AM, Gary wrote:
> Janet wrote:
>>
>> swertz wrote:
>>> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>>> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>>> bedroom?) with that prick
>>
>> She didn't.
>> Julie and Angela shared a bedroom.
>
> I remember that. Husband had his own separate bedroom.
> He also sounded like a worthless tyrant too so seems to me
> Julie is much better off without him.
>
> Divorce is never fun but sometimes some end up in a better
> situation. Julie seems to be handling all this quite fine. Bet
> the husband will never find some other woman that will wait on
> him hand and foot like Julie did.
>
The husband may not find someone but her gardener sure did!

Jill

Sqwertz wrote:

> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:31:14 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
> > Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container
> > that will take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>
> This is a refreshing change from the newbie Googlers answering 20
> years old posts out of context. Maybe she's answering a FUTURE post,
> when they invent a GMO rice that cooks in cold water.

They were talking about this on alt.usage.english. I think someone said
it had to do with a Google Groups app that doesn't quote by default.
Regular GG through a web browser does.

But the old thread thing is weird, and suddenly happening a lot. It was
always a bit of a problem. I don't know if the app is finding
"relevant" threads or something and presenting them to the users or
what.


Brian

On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 8:56:39 AM UTC-10, Default User wrote:
>
> They were talking about this on alt.usage.english. I think someone said
> it had to do with a Google Groups app that doesn't quote by default.
> Regular GG through a web browser does.
>
> But the old thread thing is weird, and suddenly happening a lot. It was
> always a bit of a problem. I don't know if the app is finding
> "relevant" threads or something and presenting them to the users or
> what.
>
>
> Brian

It's not possible to auto quote in Google Groups mobile interface. That's a serious problem and makes posting from a mobile device impractical. I don't see the connection myself.

Mostly, people on newgroups just get upset whenever they see a post not in the format they expect. I suspect it's a personality defect and these folks simply have a hard time living in this new age.

Why these really old post appear is kind of a mystery. Your best bet is to study the folks that post them. Typically, they'll make a single post on a topic and disappear. My assumption is that it's some kind of research project on how people react to this situation. Perhaps these things are being posted by the Russians or Chinese i.e., the commies.

Sqwertz wrote:

> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:31:14 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
> > Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container
> > that will take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>
> This is a refreshing change from the newbie Googlers answering 20
> years old posts out of context. Maybe she's answering a FUTURE post,
> when they invent a GMO rice that cooks in cold water.

They were talking about this on alt.usage.english. I think someone said
it had to do with a Google Groups app that doesn't quote by default.
Regular GG through a web browser does.

But the old thread thing is weird, and suddenly happening a lot. It was
always a bit of a problem. I don't know if the app is finding
"relevant" threads or something and presenting them to the users or
what.


Brian

Thanks for this explanation. I wondered why Google groups is to blame. I use GG and never see old threads.

Nellie

It's not possible to auto quote in Google Groups mobile interface. That's a serious problem and makes posting from a mobile device impractical. I don't see the connection myself.

Mostly, people on newgroups just get upset whenever they see a post not in the format they expect. I suspect it's a personality defect and these folks simply have a hard time living in this new age.

Why these really old post appear is kind of a mystery. Your best bet is to study the folks that post them. Typically, they'll make a single post on a topic and disappear. My assumption is that it's some kind of research project on how people react to this situation. Perhaps these things are being posted by the Russians or Chinese i.e., the commies.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Very true. I don't use my laptop much anymore, maybe once a week. I like my laptop a lot, but I like my phone more.

When I want to post something here, I copy and paste what I am answering. It's not that hard to do, but as dsi1 said, it makes it impractical if you want to do a lot of posting.

Nellie

dsi1 wrote:

> It's not possible to auto quote in Google Groups mobile interface.
> That's a serious problem and makes posting from a mobile device
> impractical. I don't see the connection myself.

I haven't tried it, but something along those lines is happening.

> Mostly, people on newgroups just get upset whenever they see a post
> not in the format they expect. I suspect it's a personality defect
> and these folks simply have a hard time living in this new age.

Well, I disagree with that. Most of the conventions are there for a
good reason, not just tradition. Things like this make it difficult to
figure out what the person is trying to say.

> Why these really old post appear is kind of a mystery. Your best bet
> is to study the folks that post them. Typically, they'll make a
> single post on a topic and disappear. My assumption is that it's some
> kind of research project on how people react to this situation.
> Perhaps these things are being posted by the Russians or Chinese
> i.e., the commies.

People on AUE claim it's people using GG and with Gmail addresses.
Possibly some service for people logged into Google. I have such an
account, and used Google Groups occasionally over the past few years
when I wasn't really reading usenet. I don't recall seeing anything.



Brian

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0700 (PDT), Nellie
> wrote:

>It's not possible to auto quote in Google Groups mobile interface. That's a serious problem and makes posting from a mobile device impractical. I don't see the connection myself.
>
>Mostly, people on newgroups just get upset whenever they see a post not in the format they expect. I suspect it's a personality defect and these folks simply have a hard time living in this new age.
>
>Why these really old post appear is kind of a mystery. Your best bet is to study the folks that post them. Typically, they'll make a single post on a topic and disappear. My assumption is that it's some kind of research project on how people react to this situation. Perhaps these things are being posted by the Russians or Chinese i.e., the commies.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Very true. I don't use my laptop much anymore, maybe once a week. I like my laptop a lot, but I like my phone more.
>
>When I want to post something here, I copy and paste what I am answering. It's not that hard to do, but as dsi1 said, it makes it impractical if you want to do a lot of posting.

dsi1 doesn't understand the basics of Usenet.

Nellie wrote:

> They were talking about this on alt.usage.english. I think someone
> said it had to do with a Google Groups app that doesn't quote by
> default. Regular GG through a web browser does.


> Thanks for this explanation. I wondered why Google groups is to
> blame. I use GG and never see old threads.

Are you using the app? I notice that while you did include quoted
material, it doesn't have quote indicators (> or the like) or an
attribution line. Did you copy/paste that?

Not complaining at you, just trying to work out the nuances.



Brian

Nellie wrote:

> When I want to post something here, I copy and paste what I am
> answering. It's not that hard to do, but as dsi1 said, it makes it
> impractical if you want to do a lot of posting.

That answers the question I posting in reply elsewhere. Can't you use a
web browser and the regular GG interface? That would make your posts
look better.



Brian

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 14:13:43 +0100, Janet > wrote:

>In article >, says...
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:31:14 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>> >
>> >> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container
>> >> that will take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>> >
>> > This is a refreshing change from the newbie Googlers answering 20
>> > years old posts out of context. Maybe she's answering a FUTURE post,
>> > when they invent a GMO rice that cooks in cold water.
>>
>> That's funny!
>
> I was just checking out future-google to follow Miss Julie's
>passionate courtship of Kuthe. Sheldon caters the wedding reception,
>Gary is best man, Bruce is a bridesmaid, Wayne is godfather to the
>triplets.

I hope I don't catch the flowers by mistake.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 03:37:50 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>news
>>
>> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>> bedroom?) with that prick you're finally getting to sleep at a
>> reasonable hour?
>
>Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there will
>be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.

Good one. The bully sharks will have a feeding frenzy with that
tidbit.

On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 10:30:18 AM UTC-10, Default User wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>
> > It's not possible to auto quote in Google Groups mobile interface.
> > That's a serious problem and makes posting from a mobile device
> > impractical. I don't see the connection myself.
>
> I haven't tried it, but something along those lines is happening.
>
> > Mostly, people on newgroups just get upset whenever they see a post
> > not in the format they expect. I suspect it's a personality defect
> > and these folks simply have a hard time living in this new age.
>
> Well, I disagree with that. Most of the conventions are there for a
> good reason, not just tradition. Things like this make it difficult to
> figure out what the person is trying to say.
>
> > Why these really old post appear is kind of a mystery. Your best bet
> > is to study the folks that post them. Typically, they'll make a
> > single post on a topic and disappear. My assumption is that it's some
> > kind of research project on how people react to this situation.
> > Perhaps these things are being posted by the Russians or Chinese
> > i.e., the commies.
>
> People on AUE claim it's people using GG and with Gmail addresses.
> Possibly some service for people logged into Google. I have such an
> account, and used Google Groups occasionally over the past few years
> when I wasn't really reading usenet. I don't recall seeing anything.
>
>
>
> Brian

This is the age of the mobile device. Usenet and everything else will change to accommodate that reality. This group will change too but it will go like some Chinese guy on a United airlines flight i.e., kicking and screaming..

The gmail accounts are being created solely for the purpose of posting old threads in a very limited way. Google Groups are being used for these type of posts because of its post retention goes way, way, back. I'm using Google Groups and can see the entire thread. It's kind of interesting to see these old posts.

On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 11:00:03 AM UTC-10, Default User wrote:
>
> That answers the question I posting in reply elsewhere. Can't you use a
> web browser and the regular GG interface? That would make your posts
> look better.
>
>
>
> Brian

When I see a post like that, it doesn't cause me to fret because I know what kind of interface they're using and what kind of device they're using to post. Knowledge is power. Where people can only see a problem, I see the why and how. Understanding is calming.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there
>> will
>> be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.
>
> Eh-oh! You probably shouldn't have said that here, Julie!
> Easy guess is that gardener and friend will be moving
> in from back house to main house soon.
>
> If you're happy though, so be it.

Meow!

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Janet wrote:
>>
>> swertz wrote:
>> > Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>> > you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>> > bedroom?) with that prick
>>
>> She didn't.
>> Julie and Angela shared a bedroom.
>
> I remember that. Husband had his own separate bedroom.
> He also sounded like a worthless tyrant too so seems to me
> Julie is much better off without him.
>
> Divorce is never fun but sometimes some end up in a better
> situation. Julie seems to be handling all this quite fine. Bet
> the husband will never find some other woman that will wait on
> him hand and foot like Julie did.

He is trying but I'll bet she will be back here soon enough.

dsi1 wrote:

> The gmail accounts are being created solely for the purpose of
> posting old threads in a very limited way. Google Groups are being
> used for these type of posts because of its post retention goes way,
> way, back. I'm using Google Groups and can see the entire thread.
> It's kind of interesting to see these old posts.

Sure, you can see them, but you have to find them first. If you just
access the group through the main GG interface, it's going to show
threads in update order. Normally you need to search to find an old.

But you can find really old stuff. I have located in the past my first
message. Properly, to alt.test, of course.



Brian

On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 1:35:28 PM UTC-10, Default User wrote:
>
> Sure, you can see them, but you have to find them first. If you just
> access the group through the main GG interface, it's going to show
> threads in update order. Normally you need to search to find an old.
>
> But you can find really old stuff. I have located in the past my first
> message. Properly, to alt.test, of course.
>
>
>
> Brian

I don't typically go looking for old posts although they are easy enough to find. Just enter keywords and sort by date. However, I'm talking about random responses to really old posts. I can see the whole thread. I think that's pretty special...

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 22:58:47 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 03:37:50 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> news
>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 22:13:42 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>>> That makes no sense.
>>>
>>> At least she did it in only two sentences rather than 4 or 5
>>> long-winded rambling paragraphs.
>>>
>>> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>>> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>>> bedroom?) with that prick you're finally getting to sleep at a
>>> reasonable hour?
>>
>> Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there will
>> be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.
>
>Always instigating the gossip, you whore.

I wonder how this punk copes on Facebook.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:30:14 -0000 (UTC), Default User wrote:

> dsi1 wrote:
>
>> Why these really old post appear is kind of a mystery. Your best bet
>> is to study the folks that post them. Typically, they'll make a
>> single post on a topic and disappear. My assumption is that it's some
>> kind of research project on how people react to this situation.
>> Perhaps these things are being posted by the Russians or Chinese
>> i.e., the commies.
>
> People on AUE claim it's people using GG and with Gmail addresses.
> Possibly some service for people logged into Google. I have such an
> account, and used Google Groups occasionally over the past few years
> when I wasn't really reading usenet. I don't recall seeing anything.

Theres a simple answer for this. Google Groups posts show up in
regular Google search results. They click on that and they are taken
to the Google Groups web interface. If they are logged into Google at
the time it gives a Reply: box to type in their hare-brained comments.
Google makes it easy to be an idiot.

Type "cooking rice in the fridge" into google and see what you get -
first hit is the OP in this thread.

This is also why they don't revisit the thread or group. It's just a
drive-by posting.

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 03:37:50 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> news
>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 22:13:42 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container that
>>>>> will
>>>>> take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>>>>
>>>> That makes no sense.
>>>
>>> At least she did it in only two sentences rather than 4 or 5
>>> long-winded rambling paragraphs.
>>>
>>> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>>> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>>> bedroom?) with that prick you're finally getting to sleep at a
>>> reasonable hour?
>>
>> Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there
>> will
>> be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.
>
> Always instigating the gossip, you whore. You're sleeping with the
> gardener and his wife who won't pay you any rent even after they move
> in. Boy, they sure you pegged as a gullible, hare-brained sucker.

You just wish, squirty! Try one small mammal with black fur and a slightly
larger white Tortie. Meow! I'll have to ask the gardener about this wife of
which you speak. As of yesterday he wasn't married.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:01:56 +0100, Janet wrote:
>
>> In article >, ost
>> says...
>>>
>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 22:13:42 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container that
>>>>> will
>>>>> take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>>>>
>>>> That makes no sense.
>>>
>>> At least she did it in only two sentences rather than 4 or 5
>>> long-winded rambling paragraphs.
>>>
>>> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>>> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>>> bedroom?) with that prick
>>
>> She didn't.
>>
>> Julie and Angela shared a bedroom.
>>
>> Janet UK
>
> I totally expected that she didn't share a bedroom with her husband.
> Their third bedroom must be reserved for the indoor grow operation of
> the wacky weed that she smokes to help keep her supposedly "normal".

Nopies. Wacky weed is legal here but the only kind I am familiar with
growing is the sativa and that doesn't do so well indoors.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:54:58 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> On 4/17/2018 9:44 AM, Gary wrote:
>>
>>> Divorce is never fun but sometimes some end up in a better
>>> situation. Julie seems to be handling all this quite fine. Bet
>>> the husband will never find some other woman that will wait on
>>> him hand and foot like Julie did.
>>>
>> The husband may not find someone but her gardener sure did!
>
> I really can't see Julie actively having or desiring sex. This is the
> same woman who can't cut watermelon because it makes a mess.
> Everything about her says she does not have sex or masturbate.

That's funny! Keep dreaming Stevie!

"Bruce" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 22:58:47 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 03:37:50 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> news >>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 22:13:42 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That makes no sense.
>>>>
>>>> At least she did it in only two sentences rather than 4 or 5
>>>> long-winded rambling paragraphs.
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>>>> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>>>> bedroom?) with that prick you're finally getting to sleep at a
>>>> reasonable hour?
>>>
>>> Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there
>>> will
>>> be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.
>>
>>Always instigating the gossip, you whore.
>
> I wonder how this punk copes on Facebook.

Dunno. I do quite well on there myself.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 14:13:43 +0100, Janet wrote:
>
>> In article >, says...
>>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:31:14 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container
>>>>> that will take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>>>>
>>>> This is a refreshing change from the newbie Googlers answering 20
>>>> years old posts out of context. Maybe she's answering a FUTURE post,
>>>> when they invent a GMO rice that cooks in cold water.
>>>
>>> That's funny!
>>
>> I was just checking out future-google to follow Miss Julie's
>> passionate courtship of Kuthe. Sheldon caters the wedding reception,
>> Gary is best man, Bruce is a bridesmaid, Wayne is godfather to the
>> triplets.
>
> I see it. It's no surprise that the menu was kasha varnishkes with
> vodka and diet 7-up. Look a week past that at the wedding
> announcements - Sheldon married her gardener. The wedding was held in
> Sheldon's barn and they drove off in Sheldon's tractor (to spend their
> honeymoon at his house).

Heavens no. My gardener doesn't swing that way.

On 4/18/2018 12:08 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:54:58 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> On 4/17/2018 9:44 AM, Gary wrote:
>>
>>> Divorce is never fun but sometimes some end up in a better
>>> situation. Julie seems to be handling all this quite fine. Bet
>>> the husband will never find some other woman that will wait on
>>> him hand and foot like Julie did.
>>>
>> The husband may not find someone but her gardener sure did!
>
> I really can't see Julie actively having or desiring sex.
> (snipped)
> -sw
>

Who said anything about sex? I was referring to Gary's comment about
her ex-husband not finding someone who will wait on him hand and foot.

Jill

writes:
>On 4/18/2018 12:08 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:54:58 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/17/2018 9:44 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>
>>>> Divorce is never fun but sometimes some end up in a better
>>>> situation. Julie seems to be handling all this quite fine. Bet
>>>> the husband will never find some other woman that will wait on
>>>> him hand and foot like Julie did.
>>>>
>>> The husband may not find someone but her gardener sure did!
>>
>> I really can't see Julie actively having or desiring sex.
>> (snipped)
>> -sw
>>
>
>Who said anything about sex? I was referring to Gary's comment about
>her ex-husband not finding someone who will wait on him hand and foot.
>
>Jill

Steve seems to be practicing his creative writing here again

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 22:02:03 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> Always instigating the gossip, you whore. You're sleeping with the
>>> gardener and his wife who won't pay you any rent even after they move
>>> in. Boy, they sure you pegged as a gullible, hare-brained sucker.
>>
>> You just wish, squirty! Try one small mammal with black fur and a
>> slightly
>> larger white Tortie. Meow! I'll have to ask the gardener about this wife
>> of
>> which you speak. As of yesterday he wasn't married.
>
> So there you go again - you instigated their divorce, too. Nice
> going, whore.

Hahaha. You are soooo funny! The only one of my gardeners that was married
is Carlos. AFAIK he's still married. Just no longer my gardener.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:47:48 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> On 4/18/2018 12:08 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:54:58 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/17/2018 9:44 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Divorce is never fun but sometimes some end up in a better
>>>>> situation. Julie seems to be handling all this quite fine. Bet
>>>>> the husband will never find some other woman that will wait on
>>>>> him hand and foot like Julie did.
>>>>>
>>>> The husband may not find someone but her gardener sure did!
>>>
>>> I really can't see Julie actively having or desiring sex.
>>> (snipped)
>>> -sw
>>>
>>
>> Who said anything about sex? I was referring to Gary's comment about
>> her ex-husband not finding someone who will wait on him hand and foot.
>
> When you said, ".... but her gardener sure did" you're implying that
> he's her new husband and in the context that he is presumably moving
> in with her (he's already living in the back yard). Is it really that
> hard to extrapolate what I said from all this context? Sheesh - you
> and terd.

Dear Lard! The tales you tell. I have birds, squirrels and at least one
raccoon living in the backyard as well as smaller things like bugs, worms
and slugs. I have no husband and don't ever plan on having another. Making
someone's dinner is hardly waiting on them hand and foot. Sheesh.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 22:04:01 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> I totally expected that she didn't share a bedroom with her husband.
>>> Their third bedroom must be reserved for the indoor grow operation of
>>> the wacky weed that she smokes to help keep her supposedly "normal".
>>
>> Nopies. Wacky weed is legal here but the only kind I am familiar with
>> growing is the sativa and that doesn't do so well indoors.
>
> It still a lot cheaper to grow your own. And the cannabis sativa
> strains do best when grown indoors ion most climates. It's no
> surprise it didn't work well for you.

I never tried growing it. I did look it up. I think Indica grows best here.
I do know people who use that. I'm not going to grow it though. We have a
very nice weed shop near here. Best in the area.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 22:09:43 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> I see it. It's no surprise that the menu was kasha varnishkes with
>>> vodka and diet 7-up. Look a week past that at the wedding
>>> announcements - Sheldon married her gardener. The wedding was held in
>>> Sheldon's barn and they drove off in Sheldon's tractor (to spend their
>>> honeymoon at his house).
>>
>> Heavens no. My gardener doesn't swing that way.
>
> <sigh> I guess ironic humor is way over your head, eh?
>
> So you have that intimate knowledge of him, eh? We can read the
> writing on the wall, Julie. he doesn't have to beat around your bush.

You're assuming that I have a bush. And you know what happens when you
assume!

On 4/17/2018 6:37 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> news
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 22:13:42 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>>> > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container
>>>> that will
>>>> take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>>>
>>> That makes no sense.
>>
>> At least she did it in only two sentences rather than 4 or 5
>> long-winded rambling paragraphs.
>>
>> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>> you're divorced.Â* Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>> bedroom?) with that prick you're finally getting to sleep at a
>> reasonable hour?
>
> Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there
> will be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.

Even I could guess you were talking about cats. I do hope you've
repaired the window screen so a raccoon can't break in and take one of them.

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 4/17/2018 6:37 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> news
>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 22:13:42 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Have done this myself regularly. It works. Better in a container that
>>>>> will
>>>>> take boiling water and also has a lid for best results.
>>>>
>>>> That makes no sense.
>>>
>>> At least she did it in only two sentences rather than 4 or 5
>>> long-winded rambling paragraphs.
>>>
>>> Speaking of which, we don't get your usual does of 5:AM posts now that
>>> you're divorced. Now that you don't have to share a bed (and
>>> bedroom?) with that prick you're finally getting to sleep at a
>>> reasonable hour?
>>
>> Who I share my bed with is none of your business! I will say that there
>> will be three of us later on. I'll just leave you wondering about that.
>
> Even I could guess you were talking about cats. I do hope you've repaired
> the window screen so a raccoon can't break in and take one of them.

Mr. Handyman took care of that years ago.