Coin Web sites

if you don't like Reid's random rants, just killfile him like most of the
rest of the NG readers have done.

"Donald F. Boudreau" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:15:51 -0500, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 16:09:06 +1100, "A.Gent"
wrote:

Bravo!

One down, one to go.

Herein lies the true evil of what you do. I know. You think you're
just cranky, your very email address says this. But your real
intention is to drive people away or to shut them up. This happens.
Some people, a lot of people, get driven away from Usenet because of
the kind of junk that you and people like you post, mindless
flamejunk, petty criticisms, biting vitriol. Other people are
intimidated into silence. Ain't gonna happen with Nick, or me.
Instead, I'd suggest that instead of wasting your time and others'
with these junk posts, your starting new threads just to try to harass
others and all the rest, you limit yourself to debating the issues,
sharing knowledge, asking questions, or that you shut up yourself.

Why don't you shut up and leave this newsgroup so that the rest of us can
enjoy
some peace and quite around here!!!!
Besides, who wants to debate with you. My take on this group is to share
information. If you want to get into debating, why not start up your own
little
group. Then you can have a great time debating with yourself. Yes, RCCD
would be
the ticket. - rec. collecting coins-debating. I might even take a peek
once in a
while to see if you're enjoying yourself with all your sock puppets.
Alleged participants ----- 22
Actual " ----- 1

Don

If you ask enough people for advice, you're bound to find someone
to advise you to do what you wanted to do anyway.

Anka wrote:
No, Reid. DORIS is the Aussiephile farmer. CHRYSTA is the English
teacher.
Geez. How long have you been posting here? Maybe you need a scorecard.

Chrysta wrote:
No problem. We're all just chicks anyway. I can see how it would be
really hard to tell us apart. There are so many of us to keep track of
on here, and without a visual frame of reference to slot us as either
"dogs" or "babes," how can we expect him to know which of us is which?
--
Chrysta Wilson
LOL

Australian Milk Producers Association
http://www.geocities.com/ampa_ltd/

Calling ALL farmers, rural businesses, australians! See
http://home.iprimus.com.au/wpbalcombe/ Please leave feedback re OZ Dairy
Crisis at http://geocities.yahoo.com/gb/sign?member=BAlcs9 Welcome to
"Balcowa"!
http://www.geocities.com/balcs9/index.htm

Bruce was running:
Well, I don't need degrading cheesecake photos to tell a teacher from a
farmer. But they'd help. Post please? :-)
Bruce (Ducking and running)
Thank you Bruce, At least you didn't say the YOUNG teacher!!!!vbg
Doris
"the farmer"

Australian Milk Producers Association
http://www.geocities.com/ampa_ltd/

Calling ALL farmers, rural businesses, australians! See
http://home.iprimus.com.au/wpbalcombe/ Please leave feedback re OZ Dairy
Crisis at http://geocities.yahoo.com/gb/sign?member=BAlcs9 Welcome to
"Balcowa"!
http://www.geocities.com/balcs9/index.htm

In , on 11/05/2003
at 11:15 AM, Reid Goldsborough said:

Ain't gonna happen with Nick, or me.

What? Somehow the ding-dong equates shutting him out as "going away"?
Well, this kind of logic seems par for the course for him. Which is why I
got tired of reading his drivel.

Begs this question: If he "knocks down" the last one, as he sees it, what
the hell will he ever post about? Ah, but as most would answer and as I
already have: Who Cares??!!! rhetorical

Nick

In , on 11/05/2003
at 01:35 PM, Donald F. Boudreau said:

My take on this group is to share information.

So, Don. When are you going to get around to sharing some information?
Wouldn't that beat being just another one of those "me too" Reid-hounds?

Duh.

Nick

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 16:09:06 +1100, "A.Gent"
wrote:

Bravo!

One down, one to go.

Herein lies the true evil of what you do.

OK Reid.
I *challenge* you to answer this post (and the other post after this one)
point-by-point before you plonk me - or before you abandon this thread
("Have fun!")

"...the true evil of what" I do.
"true evil" ?
As in "mass-murderer" evil? As in "gang rapist" evil?
....or as in "confronting Reid with the truth" evil?
Of course it is the last example - a concept which you seem to find
intensely aggravating, judging by your affronted replies.

Do you know what "true evil" means?


...I know. You think you're
just cranky, your very email address says this.

I've already pointed this one out to you, Reid, but I'll do it again.
Look at my reply-to address. It says: "still cranky at spam bots".
Not "cranky" in general. Just cranky at spam bots. Why do you think I
supplied an artificial addy with that message? Do I need to explain what a
spam bot is? I'm actually quite gusted with this NG, and remain so despite
your caustic invective.


...But your real
intention is to drive people away or to shut them up.

How on earth can you presume to know what my "real intention" is? I've
never stated any such thing. You are wa-a-a-a-ay off-target there, Reid,
and again you are showing classic symptoms of projection.


...This happens.
Some people, a lot of people, get driven away from Usenet because of
the kind of junk that you and people like you post, mindless
flamejunk, petty criticisms, biting vitriol.

OK.
Please post a link to *any* examples of the above
(i.e. "mindless flamejunk", "petty criticisms" or "biting vitriol")
which I have posted. Ever.

I don't post as such.
Flaming implies intense aggravated flinging of personal insults. If you
look very carefully, Reid, you'll discover that I *don't* indulge in this
pastime. I address the issues and the "facts" as they are presented.

The closest I have come to flaming is when I repeatedly asked you to concede
the insulting nature of some posts you'd made. You ignore such requests, of
course. Despite your recent self-flagellating piece on admitting to making
mistakes, you are actually defiantly reluctant to do that. (ref: the
"Electrum" thread)

The only "petty criticisms" I make are in response to petty errors. I don't
flame for spelling or grammar errors (Tho' I may parody them!) but I will
take you to task for your absolute statements of "fact" which are actually
just expressions of your feeling(s) at the time.

....or ar errors only "petty" when *you* make them? IOW, they are
significant and damning when someone else makes them...

The closest I have come to "biting vitriol" is a rather mean parody I posted
of one of your posts. ("Glomming Bogo Democracies") That was, more
accurately, "biting sarcasm" for which I do not apologise. (Rather enjoyed
it, actually.)
Sadly for the sake of completeness, you admitted that you hadn't read that
post (quote: "so, you've learned to cut and paste" - when in fact it was
substantially original, but written *in the style of*.)


...Other people are
intimidated into silence.

Oh yeah? In *this* NG? Name one.


... Ain't gonna happen with Nick, or me.

How can you speak for Nick with such accuracy? Do you know how his mind
works? Do you know how he thinks? Do you know what he's going to do? Have
you ever been seen together in the same room? Whoops! How did that last
question slip out?


Instead, I'd suggest that instead of wasting your time

That's OK. Nice of you to be concerned, but time is one thing I've got
plenty of.


... and others'

Anybody else can skip this thread. No apologies there. As an example, I
skip all the ANA threads in this NG, 'cause they are of no interest to me,
but I don't demand that everyone stop posting all that "ANA junk".

with these junk posts,

Which, remember, Reid, are responses to your crass statements.

...your starting new threads just to try to harass
others and all the rest,

Harass?
By pointing out mistakes?
By objecting to objectionable language?
By posting a parody which *demonstrably* provided joy for many?
(Anyway, Reid, don't say "harass others" when you mean "harass me". I give
you a hard time because of your crass insensitivity and juvenile naivity.
There are no "others". Call a spade a spade. There *are* other trolls in
RCC who I deliberately ignore, because it is obvious from their mood-swings
that they are struggling with real-world depression. I pick on you because
you dish it out, and therefore should be able to take it in return.)


...you limit yourself to debating the issues,

Well, what if the issue is "accuracy", or "decency", or "ulterior motives"?
Why should you be allowed to get away with such travesties just because your
next post says: "Coin coin coin glom glom glom" or other such On-Topic
snippets?

Again, Reid, I *respond* to your baiting. I don't initiate criticisms of
you. You do. I then respond.

....and I don't respond just for the heck of it. I respond when you have
made an egregious assault on either an individual or on good taste itself.


sharing knowledge,

I've actually done a fair bit of that. Really.


...asking questions,

Done a little bit of that, too, but I prefer to read other folks' Q&As.


...or that you shut up yourself.

Uh huh.
Another typically Reidishly fine debating point.

OK.
On your next post....

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 03:16:16 GMT, "Nick Knight"
wrote:

drivel

Perfect word for it. Others, not quite as good: claptrap, blather,
rubbish, nonsense, bunk, inanity, garbage, junk, hogwash, baloney, and
hooey. Oh yeah, and BS. g

Hmmmm.
If I were to operate in true RG mode, I should now reply: "Oh well done.
You've learnt how to use a thesaurus."
(But that would be too easy)



It's the inaccuracy that I focus on most, I guess.

No it isn't, Reid.
Its anything that makes you look silly; i.e. a large proportion of what you
post.

Accuracy doesn't appear to a quality which you hold in very high regard.
Remember your appalling unsupported inferences in the "Electrum" thread?
Remember how you refused to concede that you were in error in your
assertions?

I guess not.



... A.Gent said what I
posted about Google was naive. Hogwash! g

Now here's the problem.
You suffixed that statement with a g
Does that mean that you're joking?
Its really hard to work out when you're joking, Reid, because *so much* of
what you post is funny.

I would asked him why he
felt it was naive, but I'd undoubtedly get back more drivel.

OK. Here goes:
drivel
Assuming that you *seriously* want me to address my charge of naivity in
your post (and that you are not just joking g )then I gladly will.

To say that your post was "naive" means it was lacking in sophistication;
that it did not display critical judgement; that it was callow. I stand by
those sentiments 100%.

When you replied to yourself in the "Coin Web sites" thread, you went off on
a tangent that was transparently intended to pillory your own critics.
Rather than having the courage of your convictions to name the offenders,
you naively alluded to them in passive voice, as if you were an innocent
(naive?) bystander, objectively reporting the sins of others.

Did you expect anyone to be fooled by this naive tactic?

(Other than Nick, of course.)
/drivel



It's one thing to object to what I posted because I was showing off. I
was. Admittedly. But big whoop.

Kindly point to ONE example of me criticising you for showing off.


...Showing off is one of the motivations
that's core to coin collecting,

Fine.
I agree.
Showing off (or "sharing") is good.

When did I say it wasn't?


... even though my own motivation,
primarily, is impressing myself what I acquire and even more than this
with what I learn. I'd guess that this is true with many people.

I'm sorry.
I don't understand that sentence, and I wouldn't *presume* to correct it.
Perhaops you will, Reid, then I can address it too.


...But
showing off to others is fun too, as is seeing others show off, seeing
what really does it for them. Sometimes I'm impressed with what
impresses them, sometimes not. Sometimes when I'm impressed with what
impresses them, it opens up new ideas for my own collecting goals,
with new items added to my want list. (Don't worry. I haven't get
added Bust half bogos to my want list, though I do find them
impressive, particularly the contemporary fakes though the more recent
ones as well. I haven't yet found any contemporary Bust dollar bogos
and don't think I've even read or heard of any, except of course the
1804 novadels.)


Phew!
Just gotta grab this line of thought and drag it back before you start
waxing lyrical about glomming hemidrachms.

That's all fine Reid. I have no problem with you showing off your stuff to
others (big of me, yes?)


Anyway, bottom line for me is coins are impressive, as in amazing, as
in awe-inspiring. Some of them anyway. Mine. g

Ho Ho Ho!
Funny!

(as you would say)


Reid, a few posts ago you accused me of flaming you because of your helpful
and informative posts on coin web sites. I didn't. I criticised you (still
do) because of your naive and self-serving paragraphs where you sought to
insult your critics. I referred specifically to those paragraphs alone. I
used the word "above" to indicate that which I was objecting to.

It would be nice if you would concede your error there, Mr
I-Always-Admit-It-When-I'm-Wrong.

Reid, I actually look forward to some of your posts. Occasionally they are
informative and entertaining.
I have in the past contributed in a positive fashion to these threads.
(Remember?)
I have assisted you in editing some of your Periodic Posts (Remember?)
You have graciously acknowledged some of my assistance in this regard, both
in this forum and by private email (Remember?)

My mind is not closed, and I look forward to future entertaining posts from
you. I certainly will not seek to denigrate good, useful information.

I never have.

But... if you insist on insulting worthy people in a cowardly fashion;
If you persist in posting transparently trollish unfunny blurbs (ref. some
of your appallingly misogynist drivel in your "ugliest woman" threads);
If you unapologetically continue to use scatological and other unforgivably
offensive and insensitive insults;
(and worst of all)
If you insist on posting lame jokes without the benefit of a smiley or a
g;

....then rest assured I will be there to give you stick.

Someone once said that bad behaviour drives people away from NGs such as
these. (I wonder who that was?)

Well, sorry, Reid, but your bad behaviour won't have that effect on me. I
enjoy this forum altogether too much for that. I'll still be there,
needling your barbs.

Now, before you plonk me, Reid, have the courage to address my above
points, and the ones in my (slightly) earlier post.
See if you can do it sans invective.

Jeff.

....or...

A.Gent (which is a word play on the Latin for "silver", and has nothing to
do with my manners.)

MANY PEOPLE IN RCC scribed upon the newsgroup scroll
:


Herein lies the true evil of what you do.

OK Reid.
I *challenge* you to answer this post (and the other post after this
one) point-by-point before you plonk me

As in "mass-murderer" evil? As in "gang rapist" evil?


Do you know what "true evil" means?

...I know. You think you're
just cranky, your very email address says this.
Do I need to explain
what a spam bot is? I'm actually quite gusted with this NG, and
remain so despite your caustic invective.

...But your real
intention is to drive people away or to shut them up.

...This happens.
Some people, a lot of people, get driven away from Usenet because of
the kind of junk that you and people like you post

Please post a link to *any* examples of the above
(i.e. "mindless flamejunk", "petty criticisms" or "biting vitriol")

The closest I have come to flaming is when I repeatedly asked you to
concede the insulting nature of some posts you'd made. You ignore
such requests, of course. Despite your recent self-flagellating piece
on admitting to making mistakes, you are actually defiantly reluctant
to do that. (ref: the "Electrum" thread)

The only "petty criticisms" I make are in response to petty errors. I
don't flame for spelling or grammar errors (Tho' I may parody them!)
but I will take you to task for your absolute statements of "fact"
which are actually just expressions of your feeling(s) at the time.

...or ar errors only "petty" when *you* make them? IOW, they are
significant and damning when someone else makes them...

The closest I have come to "biting vitriol" is a rather mean parody I
posted of one of your posts. ("Glomming Bogo Democracies") That was,
more accurately


So the above snippets were gleaned from posts in thias thread. None
of them friendly, none helpful.
The irony of it is, the original post (like last SATURDAY, y'all)
contained this:

"You see this over and over. People argue and argue their points well
beyond reason and common sense, or they stop arguing their points and
start attacking personally those they're debating,"

Reid, you said the above, in msg 511496. You've helped make this
true in this thread.
Give it up. Just drop it. Walk away. Don't worry about who has the
last word. Don't continue to "argue points beyond reason". Have a cup of
coffee, take a walk. Read the paper. Take a nap. Eat some homemade
oatmeal raisin cookies. If you don't have any, make some.
Whatever y'all do, just let this thread go, please. It's been
rocking along since Saturday, and y'all are stuck in an endless cycle of
"did not, did too". Go enjoy your coins.


--
Allen McBroom
Remove WOOF when replying by email

Ummmm Reid, You just got plonked but good!

Allen McBroom spoke thusly...

So the above snippets were gleaned from posts in thias thread. None
of them friendly, none helpful.
The irony of it is, the original post (like last SATURDAY, y'all)
contained this:

"You see this over and over. People argue and argue their points well
beyond reason and common sense, or they stop arguing their points and
start attacking personally those they're debating,"

Reid, you said the above, in msg 511496. You've helped make this
true in this thread.
Give it up. Just drop it.

Why drop it now? Until that point, it was a thread of limited interest
and had 3 people who posted (me being one because I have read up on
google's behavior a lot and have a website) to it and had less than a
dozen replies. After that point, it has been engaged by about 20 posters
and has had 50 or more replies. A roaring success in a Pavlovian kind of
way. :-)


--
Stujoe
The Stujoe Collection: Coin Grading, News, Forums and more...
http://www.TheStujoeCollection.com/forums