Don Kirkman wrote:
> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
> article .com>:
>
> >John wrote:
> >> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:52:53 -0800, Don Kirkman >
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
> >> >article .com>:
>
> >> >>Don Kirkman wrote:
>
> >> >>> He's been a busy little beaver switching user IDs. Since he owns the
> >> >>> domain he can easily change to show any user name he wants, but that
> >> >>> doesn't make it ethical or honest. Based on Google's statistics, which
> >> >>> can sometimes be a little off*
>
> >> >>> UserID # of uses First use Last use
> >> >>> -------- ----------- ----------- -----------
> >> >>> nospam 444 8/30/03 1/27/06
> >> >>> nospam1 nil
> >> >>> nospam2 11 2/04/04 2/04/04
> >> >>> nospam3 66 2/06/04 2/11/04
> >> >>> nospam4 43 2/12/04 4/14/04
> >> >>> nospam5 137 4/14/04 8/25/04
> >> >>> nospam6 657 9/11/04 1/22/06
> >> >>> nospam7 201 12/31/05 1/23/06
> >> >>> nospam8 133 12/28/05 1/23/06
> >> >>> nospam9 36 1/06/06 1/22/06
> >> >>> nospam10 24 1/06/06 1/22/06
> >> >>> nospam11 49 1/08/06 1/22/06
> >> >>> nospam12 12 1/11/06 1/22/06
> >> >>> nospam13 14 1/12/06 1/12/06
>
> >> >>> * Here the numbers are so overwhelming an occasional miss won't make
> >> >>> any difference.
>
> >> >>Thank you for your labors which have yielded a result that demonstrates
> >> >>that though I may have needed back-up email addresses that I have not
> >> >>been "nym-shifting."
>
> >> >I consider thirteen variations of "nospam" nym-shifting, but then I tend
> >> >to use the established definitions of words instead of making my own
> >> >individual definitions. And these thirteen distinct and different user
> >> >IDs are in addition to your others which you continue to use. You, sir,
> >> >are not only a nym-shifter but an evasive liar.
>
> >> >I don't think I've ever heard of a "back-up email address" but I imagine
> >> >that's an alias for "a different name from one I used before."
>
> >> Don, are you saying that your kill file runneth over? Maybe you
> >> should try using a computer?
>
> >It seems that Don's ire arises from the advisory and not from
> >difficulties with his kill file.
>
> What "ire" would that be?

The one that you exhibit.

> I never mentioned anger or a kill file;

You don't have to.

> I
> simply gathered publicly available information and posted it--to
> **inform**. I didn't bother to reply to John because (1) I didn't
> understand what he meant and (2) if he meant what I think he did it was
> an irrelevant non-sequitur.
> >Please forward the following link to everyone:
>
> So I notice now you're advocating spamming in every message you write.

No.

Will be available to "glow" and chat about this and other things like
cardiology, diabetes, cooking and nutrition that interest those
following this thread here during the next on-line chat (02/02/06) from
6 to 7 pm EST:

http://tinyurl.com/cpayh

For those who are put off by the signature, my advance apologies for
how the LORD has reshaped me:

http://tinyurl.com/bgfqt

Prayerfully in Christ's love,

Andrew
http://tinyurl.com/8juld