In article , "Charles" wrote:
"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
Tell me, Corky, how is this man going to find your "bad connection"
without removing the fixture and testing the source first, eh? Seems
to me that is the very first step - so he knows whether to work on the
fixture or go back to the switch.

Look, Porky. If you have useful input for the OP, tend to it.

Idjit. That's exactly what he's doing by pointing out that the OP needs to
remove the fixture and test the source.

Don't take cheap shots at others trying to help.

Physician, heal thyself. He *is* providing useful advice, and *you* are taking
cheap shots without having provided even one iota of useful advice yourself.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , "Charles" wrote:

A phantom voltage is defined by NEMA as being caused by capacitive coupling
among conductors. Inducitve coupling is different

What difference does it make? Either way, the voltage that the OP is measuring
is at an *extremely* low current, and as such is meaningless.

No big deal here, as neither capacitive coupling or
inductive coupling is applicable to this particular situation.

This is an ass-umption on your part, with little apparent foundation.

This
situation is so simple, in terms of troubleshooting, that it merits little
discussion.

Indeed it is; unfortunately, this is not a compliment to your own
diagnostic skills, as both the likely failure mode and the means of
troubleshooting it continue to elude you. You ass-ume, with no basis, that the
circuit the OP is testing is a completed circuit with a "bad connection" (e.g.
high resistance connection) somewhere. In fact, the more likely situation by
far is an *open* circuit with sub-milliampere-level current induced by an
adjacent, powered circuit. If the OP tests with an analog voltmeter, or an
incandescent test lamp -- or any other device with a low enough impedance to
actually place significant load on the circuit -- the measured voltage will
likely drop to zero.

A bad connection is a bad connection. Anybody with an ounce of common sense
knows how to proceed.

Presumably you are not in this category, then, as I haven't seen you providing
any advice to the OP on how to proceed.

Outdoor, low-voltage lighting systems all have, or
eventually have, bad connections. Pull up the wires and wiggle the
connections and the lights go on and off.

Go back and re-read the original post, Chuckie. Or read it for the first
time, more likely.

Heck, just read the title of the thread, taking particular notice of the
phrase "Flood Lights".

Now just what was it, precisely, that caused you to decide this is a
low-voltage system? Another unfounded ASS-umption on your part.

Hint for the uninformed [perhaps you'll recognize yourself in this category]:
Low-voltage lighting is used for landscaping. Residential FLOODlights are
normally 120V.

My problem is with twits like you who have probably never fixed a broken
flashlight.

Twits like whom, exactly? In stark contrast to the guy you've been jumping on,
the sum total of useful advice you've provided in this thread is zero. Zip.
Zilch. Nada.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Charles wrote:
Don't quibble with just me Mark. NEMA recognizes "phantom" as a term
too: G



Jeff, in my humble opinion the term "phantom voltage" is not applicable in
this case. NEMA and others use it to refer to a capacitively induced
voltage into an open circuit and measured by a high-impedance meter. In
this case, the voltage is not a phantom but is a real voltage in a circuit
with high resistance (due to a bad connection).




Well now, I'd say that depends on what you choose to consider "high"
resistance. Anything from 1K to one ohm less than infinity could be
termed "high" in a lighting circuit. G

Consider this....The OP says he's got "power" at the sockets whether the
switch is on or off.

If we take him at his word, and discount the very limited possibility
that the switch could have failed in a way which keeps it "closed"
regardless of its position, then I'd expect it to be far more likely
that there IS a break in the wiring somewhere and that "power" the OP
sees when the switch is OFF is just a capacitively coupled voltage.

None of us could definitely nail where the problem really is from the
OP's limited description, least of all me. But I'd side with you and
cast my vote for an open connection somewhere well ahead of the fixture,
leading to the OP seeing a capacitively coupled "phantom" voltage.

Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight.

On Thu, 31 May 2007 11:32:50 -0400, Jeff Wisnia
wrote:


If we take him at his word, and discount the very limited possibility
that the switch could have failed in a way which keeps it "closed"
regardless of its position, then I'd expect it to be far more likely
that there IS a break in the wiring somewhere and that "power" the OP
sees when the switch is OFF is just a capacitively coupled voltage.


If he did have 120V at the fixture the lamp would burn.

He has two problems. One of them is most likely the tester.

On May 31, 12:50 pm, Terry wrote:
On Thu, 31 May 2007 11:32:50 -0400, Jeff Wisnia

wrote:

If we take him at his word, and discount the very limited possibility
that the switch could have failed in a way which keeps it "closed"
regardless of its position, then I'd expect it to be far more likely
that there IS a break in the wiring somewhere and that "power" the OP
sees when the switch is OFF is just a capacitively coupled voltage.

If he did have 120V at the fixture the lamp would burn.
.....

If it were a "real" 120V and not the "phantom" voltage, true -- or
there's the possibility of the fixture base not contacting the bulb
base, etc.

It's that indicated voltage but not being from a complete, functioning
circuit that has become the whole (apparently futile) argument of the
subthread...and, since OP has either not come back or at least not
ventured to stick a toe in (and who could blame him at this point?) to
amplify the situation or add additional details or answers to queries,
it's all just speculation...

Only if it can also supply sufficient current to light the filament --
that's the whole argument --

dpb wrote:

On May 31, 12:50 pm, Terry wrote:

and, since OP has either not come back or at least not
ventured to stick a toe in (and who could blame him at this point?)


I often wonder what fascinating results we might witness if some of the
insults passed out on this thread were to take place "face to face" in
the corner pub. G

"Hey, you two guys, TAKE IT OUTSIDE!"

Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight.

On Thu, 31 May 2007 13:50:07 -0400, Terry
wrote:

On Thu, 31 May 2007 11:32:50 -0400, Jeff Wisnia
wrote:


If we take him at his word, and discount the very limited possibility
that the switch could have failed in a way which keeps it "closed"
regardless of its position, then I'd expect it to be far more likely
that there IS a break in the wiring somewhere and that "power" the OP
sees when the switch is OFF is just a capacitively coupled voltage.


If he did have 120V at the fixture the lamp would burn.


If the 120V is still present when a good bulb is screwed in.

He has two problems. One of them is most likely the tester.






--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"God was invented by man for a reason, that
reason is no longer applicable."

Jeff Wisnia wrote:

I often wonder what fascinating results we might witness if some of the
insults passed out on this thread were to take place "face to face" in
the corner pub. G

"Hey, you two guys, TAKE IT OUTSIDE!"


What insults? ;-))

On Thu, 31 May 2007 14:45:21 -0500, Clancy Wiggum
wrote:

Jeff Wisnia wrote:

I often wonder what fascinating results we might witness if some of the
insults passed out on this thread were to take place "face to face" in
the corner pub. G

"Hey, you two guys, TAKE IT OUTSIDE!"


What insults? ;-))

Some people have spent much of their lives being taught to confuse
internal reality (imagination) with external reality (things you might
see and hear). The insults were someone's internal reality, that they
failed to notice weren't transmitted over the internet.

Go back and re-read the original post, Chuckie. Or read it for the first
time, more likely.

Dougie, just back off. You don't know crap about the OP's situation, as the
post was hardly definitive. You have ass-sumed as much as anyone else,
perhaps more so.

Also, Dougie, the thing that binds geniuses, ordinary folks, and idiots all
into one group ... called the human race ... is that they all have opinions.
The best of them respect the opinions of others.

Internet criticizers are a dime a dozen. Offer solutions or shut the heck
up.

On Thu, 31 May 2007 15:11:14 -0400, Jeff Wisnia
wrote:

and, since OP has either not come back or at least not

I often wonder what fascinating results we might witness if some of the
insults passed out on this thread were to take place "face to face" in
the corner pub. G

Pubs are up North, Bars are in the South ...

"Hey, you two guys, TAKE IT OUTSIDE!"

When I walked to school in two directions (circa '60 something); there
was a "bar" with a reputation. It was a notorious place; and at our
age we would almost be scared to walk past the place. It was near our
school and called the _Bloody Bucket_.

--
Oren

...through the use of electrical or duct tape, achieve the configuration in the photo..

In article ,
says...



Go back and re-read the original post, Chuckie. Or read it for the first
time, more likely.

Dougie, just back off. You don't know crap about the OP's situation, as the
post was hardly definitive. You have ass-sumed as much as anyone else,
perhaps more so.

At least I know that the OP has outdoor FLOODlights, Chuckie. That part
of his "situation" obviously eluded you.

It's not much of a stretch of the imagination to suppose that outdoor
FLOODlights are 120V, Chuckie, not low-voltage lighting like you assumed
with no foundation whatsoever.

Also, Dougie, the thing that binds geniuses, ordinary folks, and idiots all
into one group ... called the human race ... is that they all have opinions.

And some of those opinions have more value than others. Yours fall into
the latter group.

The best of them respect the opinions of others.

Just like you respected Clancy's, huh?

Internet criticizers are a dime a dozen. Offer solutions

I *did*, Chuckie -- in the part that you snipped:

"If the OP tests with an analog voltmeter, or an incandescent test lamp
-- or any other device with a low enough impedance to actually place
significant load on the circuit -- the measured voltage will likely drop
to zero."

That *is* the solution to the OP's immediate mystery: the question of
why he's measuring voltage, but the lights don't come on. Once he
confirms that current isn't actually getting to the fixture, he's well
on his way to finding out why not.

or shut the heck up.

You know, that's really pretty funny -- you haven't offered ANY
solutions or useful advice at all. The only thing you've done is
criticize the correct solutions offered by others, and add
misinformation.

So... Offer solutions or shut the heck up.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. net...
In article ,
says...

Just like you respected Clancy's, huh?

Sorry Dougie; did not know that you are his champion. Since you are, check
his rude and tasteless response to my response which was NOT to him. You
ought to rein that boy in ... or at least teach him about civilized
behavior.

As to the rest of your drivel, it matters not if it is a 240-V lighting
system ... everybody here has been ASS-suming a lot. I have no interest in
your drivel, so let's ignore each other ... (and not stalk each other ...
case in point: your crap response about the paper shredder).

Charles wrote:


"Doug Miller" wrote in message
.net...
In article ,
says...

Just like you respected Clancy's, huh?

Sorry Dougie; did not know that you are his champion. Since you are, check
his rude and tasteless response to my response which was NOT to him.

My rude response to your response which was not to me? Huh?

If you're writing about your non-response, to the response I gave -
which turned into your alleged response (which I deem as bull****),
you're right.


You ought to rein that boy in ... or at least teach him about civilized
behavior.

Let's leave Doug out of our argument for now... He already told you
the facts.

If you don't like the way I write, PLONK ME.


As to the rest of your drivel, it matters not if it is a 240-V lighting
system ... everybody here has been ASS-suming a lot.

It's a 120V floodlight that is the best assumption, Corky. You came
up with some crap about low voltage lights as evidenced by:

Message-ID:
"Outdoor, low-voltage lighting systems all have, or
eventually have, bad connections. Pull up the wires and wiggle the
connections and the lights go on and off."

I have no interest in your drivel, so let's ignore each other ... (and not stalk each other ...
case in point: your crap response about the paper shredder).

It's not stalking boy, it's "responding". If he were to stalk you he
might list your home address and phone. Like this:

Schuler, Chuck & Elaine
5985 Bermuda Ln
Naples, FL 34119-9599
(239) 594-3889

Charles wrote:


Nothing worth reading.

Charles' attitude and demeanor are not wort my im, no matter how ood any
of his
suggestions might be.

His crap infuses every post he has made, not just this one.

Charles, on my machine, you have just disappeared from this group

I'll nener have to read any more of your drivel.

PLONK

Bye - bye.

"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:


"Doug Miller" wrote in message
l.net...
In article ,
says...

Just like you respected Clancy's, huh?

Sorry Dougie; did not know that you are his champion. Since you are,
check
his rude and tasteless response to my response which was NOT to him.

My rude response to your response which was not to me? Huh?

If you're writing about your non-response, to the response I gave -
which turned into your alleged response (which I deem as bull****),
you're right.


You ought to rein that boy in ... or at least teach him about civilized
behavior.

Let's leave Doug out of our argument for now... He already told you
the facts.

If you don't like the way I write, PLONK ME.


As to the rest of your drivel, it matters not if it is a 240-V lighting
system ... everybody here has been ASS-suming a lot.

It's a 120V floodlight that is the best assumption, Corky. You came
up with some crap about low voltage lights as evidenced by:

Message-ID:
"Outdoor, low-voltage lighting systems all have, or
eventually have, bad connections. Pull up the wires and wiggle the
connections and the lights go on and off."

I have no interest in your drivel, so let's ignore each other ... (and
not stalk each other ...
case in point: your crap response about the paper shredder).

It's not stalking boy, it's "responding". If he were to stalk you he
might list your home address and phone. Like this:

Schuler, Chuck & Elaine
5985 Bermuda Ln
Naples, FL 34119-9599
(239) 594-3889

See, now you have upped the ante. My attorney will be contacting you. I
hope you have a very good attorney, by the way.

"jJim McLaughlin" wrote in message
. ..
Charles wrote:


Nothing worth reading.

Charles' attitude and demeanor are not wort my im, no matter how ood any
of his
suggestions might be.

His crap infuses every post he has made, not just this one.

Charles, on my machine, you have just disappeared from this group

I'll nener have to read any more of your drivel.

PLONK

Bye - bye.

Bye

Charles wrote:


See, now you have upped the ante. My attorney will be contacting you. I
hope you have a very good attorney, by the way.


Good luck with that, Corky.

George J wrote:

Some people have spent much of their lives being taught to confuse
internal reality (imagination) with external reality (things you might
see and hear). The insults were someone's internal reality, that they
failed to notice weren't transmitted over the internet.


Nahh... They were good old fashioned insults! :-))

Chuck is all upset now... boo ****in' hoo.

"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:


See, now you have upped the ante. My attorney will be contacting you. I
hope you have a very good attorney, by the way.


Good luck with that, Corky.

Oh, you really don't know. Your sad awakening is just around the corner.
What you have done is well documented and cannot be weaseled out of. You
have stepped way over the line and will now pay a hefty price.

Court time! Invasion of privacy covers distribution of private information.
You are dust.

On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:17:38 -0500, Clancy Wiggum
wrote:

It's not stalking boy, it's "responding". If he were to stalk you he
might list your home address and phone. Like this:

I try to refrain from this type of stuff, but you can also use Google
Maps to posts a link to a satellite photo of the address.

Reminds me of the Simpson's episode where Marge sees Homer in the
backyard laying on a hammock naked.

Charles wrote:


"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
.. .
Charles wrote:


See, now you have upped the ante. My attorney will be contacting you. I
hope you have a very good attorney, by the way.


Good luck with that, Corky.

Oh, you really don't know. Your sad awakening is just around the corner.
What you have done is well documented and cannot be weaseled out of. You
have stepped way over the line and will now pay a hefty price.

Court time! Invasion of privacy covers distribution of private information.
You are dust.



Now, now. Chuck... Let's ground you.

You are posting on an international newsgroup, you have ZERO
expectation of privacy! Your email address clearly identifies you as
'.


If you didn't want to be identified, you should not have used your
real name.

"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:


"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
. ..
Charles wrote:


See, now you have upped the ante. My attorney will be contacting you.
I
hope you have a very good attorney, by the way.


Good luck with that, Corky.

Oh, you really don't know. Your sad awakening is just around the corner.
What you have done is well documented and cannot be weaseled out of. You
have stepped way over the line and will now pay a hefty price.

Court time! Invasion of privacy covers distribution of private
information.
You are dust.



Now, now. Chuck... Let's ground you.

You are posting on an international newsgroup, you have ZERO
expectation of privacy! Your email address clearly identifies you as
'.


If you didn't want to be identified, you should not have used your
real name.

You are in for an education about how this really works. Sorry, but you are
not going to like what happens next.

http://www.psp.gov.ab.ca/index.cfm?p...act/index.html

Charles wrote:


"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
.. .
Charles wrote:


"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:


See, now you have upped the ante. My attorney will be contacting you.
I
hope you have a very good attorney, by the way.


Good luck with that, Corky.

Oh, you really don't know. Your sad awakening is just around the corner.
What you have done is well documented and cannot be weaseled out of. You
have stepped way over the line and will now pay a hefty price.

Court time! Invasion of privacy covers distribution of private
information.
You are dust.



Now, now. Chuck... Let's ground you.

You are posting on an international newsgroup, you have ZERO
expectation of privacy! Your email address clearly identifies you as
'.


If you didn't want to be identified, you should not have used your
real name.

You are in for an education about how this really works. Sorry, but you are
not going to like what happens next.


As I already wrote, good luck. Your slack-jawed attorney is going to
have to subpoena logs from Germany, then you'll have to prove to a US
court they are admissible. When all is said and done, my argument
will prevail - I can say anything I want, provided it is public
information - which is how your data was received.

Why do think you have a right of privacy? You provided your name, and
Google provided the rest. Sue Google, guess what - genius, there is
way more public info available about you. Would you like me to post
that too, or do you care to shut up right now?

Charles wrote:

http://www.psp.gov.ab.ca/index.cfm?p...act/index.html


BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Neither one of us live in Alberta, Canada!

You are one dumb ****.

"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:

http://www.psp.gov.ab.ca/index.cfm?p...act/index.html


BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Neither one of us live in Alberta, Canada!

You are one dumb ****.

See, there you go digging your own grave. How do you know where I legally
live? God, but you are stupid.

Charles wrote:


"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
.. .
Charles wrote:

http://www.psp.gov.ab.ca/index.cfm?p...act/index.html


BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Neither one of us live in Alberta, Canada!

You are one dumb ****.

See, there you go digging your own grave. How do you know where I legally
live? God, but you are stupid.



Public record.

You've done well.. You must not have always been stupid.

http://www.collierappraiser.com/reco...00052250002000


What did you pay for that death house? I hope it was less than
$250,000, or you were taken.

"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:


"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
. ..
Charles wrote:

http://www.psp.gov.ab.ca/index.cfm?p...act/index.html


BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Neither one of us live in Alberta, Canada!

You are one dumb ****.

See, there you go digging your own grave. How do you know where I legally
live? God, but you are stupid.



Public record.

You've done well.. You must not have always been stupid.

http://www.collierappraiser.com/reco...00052250002000


What did you pay for that death house? I hope it was less than
$250,000, or you were taken.

Just go away. You know nothing about me and you never will and litigation
against your dispersal of my personal information is a good possibility. It
is being pursued, as I type this.

Sad that you have to resort to this kind of behavior when just losing a
simple argument. Why do you have to be so nasty? Payback is around the
corner.

Charles wrote:
..

Sad that you have to resort to this kind of behavior when just losing a
simple argument. Why do you have to be so nasty? Payback is around the
corner.



Blow me.

"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:
.

Sad that you have to resort to this kind of behavior when just losing a
simple argument. Why do you have to be so nasty? Payback is around the
corner.



Blow me.

Junior high school behavior.

"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:
.

Sad that you have to resort to this kind of behavior when just losing a
simple argument. Why do you have to be so nasty? Payback is around the
corner.



Blow me.

Path:
border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!ne wsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!storethat.news.telefonica.de!telefonica. de!news.germany.com!newsfeed.datemas.de!news.datem as.de!not-for-mail
From: Clancy Wiggum
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair
Subject: Outdoor Flood Lights-Juice but no Light
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 20:00:11 -0500
Organization: Datemas.de http://www.datemas.de
Lines: 11
Message-ID:
References:









Reply-To: Newsgroup
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.datemas.de
eAAzavUweILDWcZfqzLBIcVnxRaYqlCjEJygVSmElZSrO+bGEB AGTkYymAWZFB3/Rld2I8y6w+Rf/HiDNFrXdPNQQ8MKKllzIetZr/OdU3EwdNpnr9lQSathc0UncrJ3i2t082twdt7Ok5phVabH9O3f fWOQhYJ77KWA1SG7uEE=
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 01:00:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.1/32.783
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.home.repair:972574

Charles wrote:

Path:
border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!n ewsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!storethat.news.telefonica.de!telefonica. de!news.germany.com!newsfeed.datemas.de!news.datem as.de!not-for-mail


Way to go ace.

LOL!!

Charles wrote:


"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
.. .
Charles wrote:
.

Sad that you have to resort to this kind of behavior when just losing a
simple argument. Why do you have to be so nasty? Payback is around the
corner.



Blow me.

Junior high school behavior.



Yup... you reap what you sow.


What's next, Colombo?

In article , "Charles" wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
.net...
In article ,
says...

Just like you respected Clancy's, huh?

Sorry Dougie; did not know that you are his champion. Since you are, check
his rude and tasteless response to my response which was NOT to him. You
ought to rein that boy in ... or at least teach him about civilized
behavior.

He can write whatever he damn pleases as far as I'm concerned. My only intent
in making that comment was to highlight your hypocrisy in criticizing others
for the same behavior you exhibit yourself.

As to the rest of your drivel, it matters not if it is a 240-V lighting
system ... everybody here has been ASS-suming a lot.

Actually, it matters quite a bit. I haven't seen anything in your posts yet
that would lead me to expect that you might actually realize that, though.

I have no interest in
your drivel, so let's ignore each other

LOL -- In other words, you want to be able to continue to post useless crap,
and not be called on it. Doesn't work that way, Chuckie -- you post useless
crap, and somebody is sure to call you on it. If you don't like being called
on it, the solution is simple: stop posting useless crap.

... (and not stalk each other ...
case in point: your crap response about the paper shredder).

Oh, that was *you*? ROTFLMAO!! I hadn't even paid any attention to who posted
it.

Figures, though.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Clancy Wiggum wrote:

Charles wrote:


"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
. ..
Charles wrote:
.

Sad that you have to resort to this kind of behavior when just losing a
simple argument. Why do you have to be so nasty? Payback is around the
corner.



Blow me.

Junior high school behavior.



Yup... you reap what you sow.


What's next, Colombo?


Hey Corky, you are notably silent. What's up?

I hope there is no need to disclose the deed agreement on your home,
it may have some numbers on it. That would be bad, huh? I expect you
will apologize for your misdeeds... soon. I really don't like being
called names, so I expect you to write back that Clancy Wiggum is your
Master.

Say it.

Hey Corky, you are notably silent. What's up?

I hope there is no need to disclose the deed agreement on your home,
it may have some numbers on it. That would be bad, huh? I expect you
will apologize for your misdeeds... soon. I really don't like being
called names, so I expect you to write back that Clancy Wiggum is your
Master.

You are really pushing. You better be careful with your threats. Gee, I'd
like to meet you eye to eye and man to man.

Charles wrote:



Hey Corky, you are notably silent. What's up?

I hope there is no need to disclose the deed agreement on your home,
it may have some numbers on it. That would be bad, huh? I expect you
will apologize for your misdeeds... soon. I really don't like being
called names, so I expect you to write back that Clancy Wiggum is your
Master.

You are really pushing. You better be careful with your threats. Gee, I'd
like to meet you eye to eye and man to man.



I am your master, you are my bitch!

Say it fool. Say you are my bitch!

Why do think you have a right of privacy? You provided your name, and
Google provided the rest. Sue Google, guess what - genius, there is
way more public info available about you. Would you like me to post
that too, or do you care to shut up right now?

Do as like and so will I. Germany is close enough.

"Clancy Wiggum" wrote in message
...
Charles wrote:



Hey Corky, you are notably silent. What's up?

I hope there is no need to disclose the deed agreement on your home,
it may have some numbers on it. That would be bad, huh? I expect you
will apologize for your misdeeds... soon. I really don't like being
called names, so I expect you to write back that Clancy Wiggum is your
Master.

You are really pushing. You better be careful with your threats. Gee,
I'd
like to meet you eye to eye and man to man.



I am your master, you are my bitch!

Say it fool. Say you are my bitch!

Your time is coming and it is sooner than you think. Sleep well.