wrote:

On 2005-05-04, USENET READER wrote:


Robert Bonomi wrote:


In article . net,
USENET READER wrote:


I wanted to only see responses that were on topic -


"What you want is not necessarily what you get."



- I included the
qualifier that I didn't want to read the off-topic crap that didn't
address the quesions.



"Tough sh*t*" applies.



You are _not_ the moderator of the newsgroup, so you have *no* authority or
position to even ATTEMPT to dictate who, how, or what, gets posted in
response to your message.

If you don't like a response, *IGNORE* it.

who died and made you Pope? I can post any ****ing thing I want to,
including qualifiers to keep shut-in ass-wipes like you from offering
stupid advice or questions that have nothing to do with the question.

Like anyone can ask a question on USENET, anyone can qualify their
posting - you don't like it, don't respond!


So if anyone can post anything, why did you attempt to put a
qualification on replies. You knew it would be ignored, so in essence
you were just waving a red flag in front of a bull. I think you LIKE
the contentiousness and encourage it.

I posted the "Please - no BS comments from people who really can't
answer the question. Please respond through the group. Thanks!" so I
would have less bull**** uselss responses to read though - I guess I
thought that people would read between the "please" and the "thank you"
and out of the courtesy originally offered not offer useless info out of
the same courtesy. I see that courtesy was wasted on dickheads like you.

Gary L. Burnore wrote:

On Wed, 04 May 2005 00:58:42 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Unquestionably Confused wrote:


on 5/3/2005 8:25 AM USENET READER said the following:


I wanted to only see responses that were on topic - I included the
qualifier that I didn't want to read the off-topic crap that didn't
address the quesions.


As someone else mentioned, "What question(s)?" There were no questions
asked in your original post. Merely a rambling, semi-coherent statement
of your situation and what you'd seen and done. Concluding with your
condescending remark that we could save our breath unless we could reply
directly on point.

Jesus - what a douchebag - so ****ing sue me - any retard and most
Republicans could see I was looking for recommendations for windows.

Does this sound like you're asking a question?

"Greetings - I am looking specifically for recommendations on some new
windows for my home.

SO make a ****ing recommendation or shut the **** up!


You gonna MAKE anyone shut the **** up? Doubtful.

Are you ever gonna be able to offer up an on-topic response? Doubtful.

"USENET READER" wrote in message

"Rolex' is a symbol (you know what a "symbol" is, don't you?) for people
who love to screw their fellow Americans - no one who wears a Rolex on
theri wrist is gonna actually work in the trenches for a living, are they?
I am sure Ed didn't do the actual work - he is one of those khaki trouser
wearing supervising assholes who makes all the money and does none of the
actual "work".

Really? Just how do you know that?

Now I'm sure some people do consider me an asshole (one of me better
traits), but I can (and have) do the work with the best of them. The more
you write, the deeper you dig.

Gary L. Burnore wrote:

On Wed, 04 May 2005 01:00:20 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Tina wrote:


"USENET READER" wrote in message
thlink.net...


Tina wrote:



"USENET READER" wrote in message
arthlink.net...



Bite me loser asshole - do you have any idea how many times I have
posted questions and the only responses I get are stupid off-topic
comments that have nothing to do with the original question - like your
posting today?


HEY DICKLESS WONDER I DIDN' T WRITE THE ABOVE STUFF

Told you to get better meds..............;-)

Tina

I wasn't writing that to you, you useless twit!



You obviously fail to comprehend the medium.

You obviously can't even offer up an on-topic response. Or explain the
medium - what is there to comprehend - if some twit like Tina wants to
post a comment and then edits her posting in such a way that it makes it
look like she wrote something that she didn't write, then let her learn
how to repost as a proper quotation.

Mark Cooper wrote:

Perfect example of omeone in great need of a good "rogering", so she
won't respond with another off-topic comment.

How do you know so much about Paxil meds - they interfere with your
ability to get a good "rogering"?

You know...I don't know Tina, so I can't say whether or not she needs a
good rogering.

But I can say with relative certainty that you need a good
bitch-slapping.

You ain't man enough to do the job, but I am sure you know lots about
"bitches"!


Does "everything" have to be in quotes to you?

If it's the only way someone like you will learn to read and comprehend
someone in a posting, then I'll use the quotes as much as I like. That
is why peopl euse quotes - to call attention to something for a purpose.
Just like asking please and saying thank you in advance.

Tina wrote:

"USENET READER" wrote in message
ink.net...


Tina wrote:


Snip




You are truly an idiot in every possible interpretation of the word.
I'd suggest that you get a clue, but that seems well beyond your
capabilities.

rusty redcloud


USENET READER Wrote


waht kind of a ****ing name is rusty redcloud? You are a ****ing moron
because I asked for feedback on windows and you have offered up
everythign but info on windows - clearly you must have too much time on
your hands - you unemployed, Chief?



He who throws stones...no more snappy answers...at least I have the Big
enough balls to use my real name,,, I'd suggest you get whatever brand

of

windows and add bars to them so you lock your silly ass up and quit

wasteing

your breath on this group for any real answers or help.

Tina


USENET READER Wrote

Someone who calls themselves "tina" says that they have "big enough

balls" to use their real name? Is "Tina" the name you use before or
after the operation - which way are you going? No wonder you call
yourself "wood"girl



If that's the best you can do ..just shows how truly pitiful you are

Tina ( life is short for trivial dribble)

If you can't even use the English language properly in your sig file -
perhaps you might want to alter your quote to read: "Life is too short
for trivial dribble".

By adding the word "too" to the line, you turn it from trivial dribble
to something worthwhile - unless you are all about trivial dribble.

Wait - that is why you posted an off-topic response in the first place -
you are all about trivial dribble!

Gary L. Burnore wrote:

On Wed, 04 May 2005 01:02:16 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Red Cloud® wrote:


On Mon, 02 May 2005 22:38:07 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Bite me loser asshole - do you have any idea how many times I have
posted questions and the only responses I get are stupid off-topic
comments that have nothing to do with the original question - like your
posting today?




Gee, I wonder why you get all those stupid answers. I don't suppose you deserve
it for asking for help and insulting people in the same breath?

rusty redcloud

The only people who could possibly be insulted are the ones - like you -
who can't offer up the requested information and only want to post
off-tpoic **** like this.


Or you, who can't take the heat from a post YOU made.


And I love offending assholes like you!


So when are you going to start?

That I have kept you from trolling the net for little boys long enough
to respond like you have tells me I have offended you Gary!

Tom Disque wrote:

On Tue, 03 May 2005 13:32:38 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:


Matt - why would you consider vinyl over aluminum-clad windows? This is
an example of the type of on-topic response I was seeking when I posted
the original question. Thank you for staying on topic.


Since aluminum is a conductor and vinyl is not, I would think that
vinyl does a better job of insulating. Mine are vinyl; since it's
been almost five years, I don't recall if aluminum was presented as an
option.


My God - an actual on-topic response.

Actually, I wouldn't consider solid aluminum for the windows. I was
referring to wooden-framed windows clad with aluminum (two different
types of aluminum cladding) vs. vinyl or other types of plastic.

Matt L. wrote:


I bought and installed myself Pella's ProLine aluminum-clad double-hung wood
windows. They are about 5 years old now. I am pleased with them but if I
ever remodel another house I would probably consider vinyl windows that
don't have to be painted. I bought my windows from the Pella store in Cary
but I think they can also be ordered through Home Depot.


"USENET READER" wrote in message
thlink.net...


Greetings - I am looking specifically for recommendations on some new
windows for my home.

"USENET READER" wrote in message
ink.net...
Tina wrote:

"USENET READER" wrote in message
ink.net...


Tina wrote:


Snip




You are truly an idiot in every possible interpretation of the word.
I'd suggest that you get a clue, but that seems well beyond your
capabilities.

rusty redcloud


USENET READER Wrote


waht kind of a ****ing name is rusty redcloud? You are a ****ing
moron
because I asked for feedback on windows and you have offered up
everythign but info on windows - clearly you must have too much time
on
your hands - you unemployed, Chief?



He who throws stones...no more snappy answers...at least I have the Big
enough balls to use my real name,,, I'd suggest you get whatever brand

of

windows and add bars to them so you lock your silly ass up and quit

wasteing

your breath on this group for any real answers or help.

Tina


USENET READER Wrote

Someone who calls themselves "tina" says that they have "big enough

balls" to use their real name? Is "Tina" the name you use before or
after the operation - which way are you going? No wonder you call
yourself "wood"girl



If that's the best you can do ..just shows how truly pitiful you are

Tina ( life is short for trivial dribble)

"USENET READER WROTE"
If you can't even use the English language properly in your sig file -
perhaps you might want to alter your quote to read: "Life is too short
for trivial dribble".

By adding the word "too" to the line, you turn it from trivial dribble
to something worthwhile - unless you are all about trivial dribble.

Wait - that is why you posted an off-topic response in the first place -
you are all about trivial dribble!"

Gee I didn't know this was an english class.....I didn't do well on that
subject...so get over it ..actually my real name is Christina...and I don't
have to have an operation to have bigger balls than you...I know lots of
women with more balls and class than most men...hell you don't even qualify
as being a man...just an asshole that needs an attitude adjustment and maybe
a life.

Tina

USENET READER wrote:


Gary L. Burnore wrote:

On Wed, 04 May 2005 00:58:42 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Unquestionably Confused wrote:


on 5/3/2005 8:25 AM USENET READER said the following:


I wanted to only see responses that were on topic - I included the
qualifier that I didn't want to read the off-topic crap that didn't
address the quesions.



As someone else mentioned, "What question(s)?" There were no
questions asked in your original post. Merely a rambling,
semi-coherent statement of your situation and what you'd seen and
done. Concluding with your condescending remark that we could save
our breath unless we could reply directly on point.


Jesus - what a douchebag - so ****ing sue me - any retard and most
Republicans could see I was looking for recommendations for windows.

Does this sound like you're asking a question?

"Greetings - I am looking specifically for recommendations on some
new windows for my home.


SO make a ****ing recommendation or shut the **** up!



You gonna MAKE anyone shut the **** up? Doubtful.


Are you ever gonna be able to offer up an on-topic response? Doubtful.



Just ignore Gary, he's a troll in every newsgroup I've seen him in.

--
Odinn
RCOS #7

"The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never
worshipped anything but himself." -- Sir Richard Francis Burton

Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org
'03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide
'97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic
Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net
Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org

rot13 to reply

OMG! This world-class moron is still ranting about off-topic posts? You've made more off-topic posts than everyone
else combined. I have yet to hear one half-way intelligent thing come out of your mouth. If it wasn't for '**** this'
and 'asshole that' you wouldn't have anything to say at all.
Go back to your trailer park, take some meds, and adjust the rabbit ears on your TV so you can watch Jerry Springer. I
think your episode is coming on soon.

In article . net,
USENET READER wrote:
Robert Bonomi wrote:

In article et,
USENET READER wrote:

[[.. munch ..]]

Such a thing can be done in a reasonable manner, or in an unreasonable manner.
When the "request" is couched in language *DELIBERATELY*INTENDED* to inflame,
it is, prima-facie, an _unreasonable_ action.

my original comment qualifier was: "Please - no BS comments from people
who really can't answer the question." How is that an unreasonble manner?

Hint #1: "no BS comments"
Hint #2" "from people who really can't answer the question"

Call it "deliberately waving a red flag" if you like.

Any expectation that such language will get a positive response *IS*
unreasonable.


I am simply asking people to respond on the original topic if they can,
and resist the temptation to offer useless advice or information that
couldn't possibly begin to address the original topic.

LIAR. you went out of your way to offend people. With maybe 5 seconds
worth of _thought_, you could have phrased your request in a *NON*OFFENSIVE*
manner.

But, you -wanted- to stir up a fight.

The fact is, you didn't "ask", you *demanded*. And lashed out at those
who failed to follow your demands.

Asshole - I wrote "Please - no BS comments from people who really can't
answer the question. Please respond through the group. Thanks!" I
even said "please" and "thank you" in advance - how much more nicer
could I ask people to resist the temptation to offer bull****, off-topic
responses?

Try this on for size: "Please shut the **** up, you stupid, ignorant,
narrow-minded, opinionated, red-neck *******. Thank you." Now, let's
see if _you_ respond in the requested manner to *that* request. After all,
I even said "please" and "thank you" in response -- how much more nicer
could I ask? (Note: if _you_ won't play by _your_own_rules_, any expectation
on your part that _anyone_else_ would do so is clearly delusional.)

That aside, you only 'requested' no BS comments from "people who really
can't answer the question." Even by the actual request, anyone who
_could_ answer the question *WAS* free to make BS comments.

And you even bitched about those responses that *did* comply with the
actual request you made.

You simply wanted to pick a fight.

Of course, that _was_ your intent. in the first place. you didn't want
a reasoned discusion. you wanted a "fight".

No - by saying "Please - no BS comments from people who really can't
answer the question. Please respond through the group. Thanks!" I
wanted only on-topic responses. You people either can't read and
comprehend the meaning of those words in between "please" and "thank
you", or you just can't control yourselves.

Repeating: "Please shut the **** up, you stupid, ignorant opinionated
narrow-minded red-neck *******. Thank you."

Now, we'll find out whether _you_ "either can't read, or just can't control
yourself."

Well you are one asshole contractor who won't get my business. It's my
money and if I want to have someone come to my house who won't waste my
time with corn-pone, cracker-barrel stories about windows and doors that
are not relevent to my questions,


Thats ok. You are already a proven LIAR on the subject anyway. You
already said you did not intend to use an installation contractor -- that
you were going to install the windows yourself. So any "illegals" on the
premises are your own personal liability.

No - asshole - I said I was looking for un-biased advice on the pluses
and minueses of the different types of wimdows. When did I write (not
say - you can't say things in print, or don't you understand that?).

My, oh my. You appear to be suffering from Alzheimers, or some other form
of illness that such that your short-term memory is badly impaired (in
addition to your apparent Tourettes Syndrome behaviors). You are unable to
remember remarks that you made in a public forum less than *ONE*WEEK*AGO*.

I quote:

From: USENET READER
Message-ID: . net
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 19:33:22 GMT

....

I am looking to buy the windows and install them myself, .....

....


As you can see, you _did_ state exactly what I claimed you did.

And you _are_ a proven liar, for denying that you did so.

Since you *did* announce that you were not a 'customer', nor even a
"potential customer" of any installer, anything based on "the customer
is always right" quite simply, _by_your_own_declaration_ *DOES*NOT*APPLY*
to you.

As for "you can't say things in print, or don't you understand that?",
you have no business criticizing others for that when *YOU* do exactly
the same thing, "In print". In a public forum. With records readily
available to prove it. On more than one occasion. And as recently
as in the last 48 hours.



I
said I would not use any contractor who hires illegals. If that means I
have to install the windows on my own, how does that make me a liar?

You keep demonstrating the failings of your memory. You said, *in*these*
*exact*words* that you are "looking to buy the windows and INSTALL THEM
MYSELF." (emphasis added)

You are not in the market for installation services.

You have no intention of hiring an installation contractor

You are not even a 'potential customer' of an installer.

Any assertation of how you should be treated _because_ you are a
potential customer of an installer is thus based on a "known to be false"
premise. The one-word description of a person who makes such assertations
is a "liar". In this instance, that person is _you_.

If
anything, it makes any contractor who hires illegals a CRIMINAL - it is
against the law to hire illegals. Or don't you know that either?

You stated that you, *yourself* intended to do the install. Thus, as
previously stated, any "illegals" on the work-site are *YOUR* criminal
liability.

Also, if you plan to bring illegal immigrants to my home to do the work,
so you can afford another steel and gold Rolex while other US citizens
and legal immigrants can't find work because you will only hire illegals
who work for slave labor wages, stay the **** home.


snicker You really don't know anything about the way Ed ran his business
do you? For starters, he *hates* Rolex.

"Rolex' is a symbol (you know what a "symbol" is, don't you?) for people
who love to screw their fellow Americans - no one who wears a Rolex on
theri wrist is gonna actually work in the trenches for a living, are
they?

In point of fact, I know several people who work in the trenches (literally!
"in the trenches" -- they do pipeline installation work) who wear Rolexes --
because they are the _only_ watch that they have found that can stand up to
the rigors of the environment they work in. Old Rolex Oysters can be found
for relatively reasonable amounts.

Thus, you have your "facts" wrong, again. As if you care about facts.

I am sure Ed didn't do the actual work - he is one of those khaki
trouser wearing supervising assholes who makes all the money and does
none of the actual "work".

What credibility are you talking about - if you hire illegals and pay
them slave labor wages, you have no credibility.

And if it were the case that he paid *premium* wages, because he hired only
the _best_ workers; that he had 50+ applicants for every opening; that there
was a 3+ year waiting list to work for that operation, *then* what would
you say?

What are "premium wages"?

How does roughly 25% _above_ "union scale". with full benefits, strike you?
..
Is that compared to minimum wage, what they
pay at Wal-Mart, or in comparison to the regular wages they pay
illegals? If he hires illegals as "independent contractors" and doesn't
pay Social Security, Workman's Comp, Unemployment Insurance, he can
afford to pay a higher wage for the best people who will work under
those conditions, but he is still hiring illegals and he is still
BREAKING THE LAW!


If you tell me to take
what you want to give me and don't ask questions, then you have no
credibility as a vendor and no wonder you aren't in the business anymore.

Do you know how many years he was 'in the business', without a SINGLE
customer complaint? Do you have any idea what kind of _profit_ he
sold that business for?

If he hires illegals, I could really give a **** about all that. And
why don't you go ahead and tell me how many years he was in business
for, how much he sold the business for, and the hourly wage he pays his
illegals? You seem to know that info - why not offer up really useful
info and not useless crap that we can't possibly guess at? That is
because you don't believe in offering up useful info - you only offer crap!

Do you have *one* piece of information to so much as suggest that *ANY*
person that _ever_ worked for his company was an 'illegal alien'?

Do you know the meaning of the words "slander", and "libel"?

Yet again: "Please shut the **** up, you stupid, ignorant, opinionated ,
narrow-minded, red-neck *******. Thank you."

Gary L. Burnore wrote:

On Sun, 08 May 2005 14:16:20 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Gary L. Burnore wrote:

On Wed, 04 May 2005 01:02:16 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Red Cloud® wrote:


On Mon, 02 May 2005 22:38:07 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Bite me loser asshole - do you have any idea how many times I have
posted questions and the only responses I get are stupid off-topic
comments that have nothing to do with the original question - like your
posting today?




Gee, I wonder why you get all those stupid answers. I don't suppose you deserve
it for asking for help and insulting people in the same breath?

rusty redcloud

The only people who could possibly be insulted are the ones - like you -
who can't offer up the requested information and only want to post
off-tpoic **** like this.


Or you, who can't take the heat from a post YOU made.


And I love offending assholes like you!


So when are you going to start?

That I have kept you


You've not kept anyone from anything, nutcase.

Well, strictly speaking that's not true. He's kept me from reading
this group without LMAO for the last couple weeks.

Nutcase sounds about right, though. Along with troll.

On Sun, 8 May 2005 10:40:32 -0400, "Tina"
wrote:

[snip]
"USENET READER WROTE"
If you can't even use the English language properly in your sig file -
perhaps you might want to alter your quote to read: "Life is too short
for trivial dribble".

By adding the word "too" to the line, you turn it from trivial dribble
to something worthwhile - unless you are all about trivial dribble.

Wait - that is why you posted an off-topic response in the first place -
you are all about trivial dribble!"

Gee I didn't know this was an english class.....

He's wrong, anyway. 'too' modifies the shortness of life in the above
quote, not the triviality of 'dribble' (whatever that is).

Now, if he'd corrected you about using the term 'dribble' when you
meant 'drivel', then I'd have no argument with him.

"Owen Lawrence" wrote in message
Do you suppose you could chip in for my sake? We've finally saved what I
hope is enough money to replace our windows, but I'm just at the beginning
stage of researching the project. I've got 11 windows to replace (and
maybe both doors), and I'm considering doing the labour myself (to save
money, no other reason). Please say what you have to say. Thanks.

- Owen -

This thread went to hell pretty fast. You may get better result starting a
new one.

Owen Lawrence wrote:
Please - no BS comments from people who really can't answer the question.
Please respond through the group. Thanks!

Well, I was going to chip in with my own experiences in completely
replacing all the windows in my house, but frankly, I can't be bothered to
deal with a snotty little idjit like you.


Do you suppose you could chip in for my sake? We've finally saved what I
hope is enough money to replace our windows, but I'm just at the beginning
stage of researching the project. I've got 11 windows to replace (and maybe
both doors), and I'm considering doing the labour myself (to save money, no
other reason). Please say what you have to say. Thanks.




Owen, here's what I can remember of the whole project. It was a pro
installation, as I am NOT the guy you want on a ladder, and the job is a
lot easier with at least two experience guys doing it.

We had the whole house replaced, with the exception of a couple that
were too small to bother with. We went with lightly tinted, sealed,
argon-filled, double-glazed vinyl frames. No casement windows; the
supplier said that they'd never come up with a casement mechanism that
they were really happy with. The sliders are spring balanced, not
counterweighted. The sliders all unhook, to allow better access for
cleaning. They're from Alcan Canada. I don't know what the equivalent
supplier would be in your area.

The vinyl is a new(ish) formulation which does not go powdery on you
after a few years. They are all vinyl: no wood, no aluminum. There's a
green aluminum cladding around them that looks cool as all heck. We like
them. They make a considerable difference in the summer, and some in the
winter.

Overall, we're happy.

If I could do it again, I would want to make the sliders as big as
possible (i.e. exactly half the size of the windows). Those windows with
one tiny sliding pane that opens don't give enough ventilation for the
sultry tropical climate of southern Canada. I don't even want to imagine
what they'd be like in your neck of the woods.

We found that, while very helpful on energy costs, the window change
does not make up for fundamental problems with the construction of the
house, such as missing or inadequate insulation. (Tract home, built by
high-speed idiots. Don't get me started.)

This is important: Go and look at previous production from your
supplier. If a supplier can't give you references ("I'm sorry, but our
client list is confidential" or whatever lame excuse they use.) then
don't use that supplier. You wouldn't buy a beater car without a test
drive, and you're planning to have these windows for a long time.

If you don't like how the fit and finish look in a previous
installation, don't imagine that they'll magically do better on your
job. If possible, talk to both the home owner and the installer, to find
out what their experiences were, before you make a decision.

If you're going to put the windows in yourself, after you settle on a
supplier, make absolutely sure that you understand exactly what
measurements they need. (Glass size? Frame size? Stud to stud? If
possible, get THEIR guy to do the measuring.)

Get the facing boards off and have a look at how the windows are
mounted; It's not unheard of that a framer will leave out some of the
cripple studs or jack studs around a window, if he's in a hurry, which
is a bit of a bugger to deal with if you only find it on installation
day. Be prepared to fix that before you install your new windows.

When the windows get there, if any are not to spec, send them back.
Don't take second rate work. (You may know this already. I've taken a
long time to learn the words, "No. That's not good enough.")

It's tempting to replace windows in the decreasing order of decrepitude.
Don't fall for this. As soon as you start in one room, it becomes
unliveable until you finish. Do the house one room at a time. The best
homeowner install I ever heard of involved: Prepositioning windows in
the correct rooms. Daughter-in-law ripping out trim, followed by father
and son pulling windows and inserting new ones, followed by mother and
daughter-in-law doing rough cleanup. (Daughter-in-law worked like a
starving Irish navvy that weekend. Got a LOT of props from the old folks.)

Second day was dusting, touchup paint, etc.

HTH.

rm

BobMac wrote:

If I could do it again, I would want to make the sliders as big as
possible (i.e. exactly half the size of the windows). Those windows
with
one tiny sliding pane that opens don't give enough ventilation for
the
sultry tropical climate of southern Canada. I don't even want to
imagine
what they'd be like in your neck of the woods.

Hey. I'm getting tired of this chilly Wisconsin weather. I think I
might wander out there some weekend and take advantage of that sultry
tropical weather you got.

Robert Bonomi wrote:
In article . net,
USENET READER wrote:

Robert Bonomi wrote:


In article et,
USENET READER wrote:


[[.. munch ..]]


Such a thing can be done in a reasonable manner, or in an unreasonable manner.
When the "request" is couched in language *DELIBERATELY*INTENDED* to inflame,
it is, prima-facie, an _unreasonable_ action.

my original comment qualifier was: "Please - no BS comments from people
who really can't answer the question." How is that an unreasonble manner?


Hint #1: "no BS comments"
Hint #2" "from people who really can't answer the question"

Call it "deliberately waving a red flag" if you like.

Any expectation that such language will get a positive response *IS*
unreasonable.


I am simply asking people to respond on the original topic if they can,
and resist the temptation to offer useless advice or information that
couldn't possibly begin to address the original topic.


LIAR. you went out of your way to offend people. With maybe 5 seconds
worth of _thought_, you could have phrased your request in a *NON*OFFENSIVE*
manner.

But, you -wanted- to stir up a fight.


The fact is, you didn't "ask", you *demanded*. And lashed out at those
who failed to follow your demands.

Asshole - I wrote "Please - no BS comments from people who really can't
answer the question. Please respond through the group. Thanks!" I
even said "please" and "thank you" in advance - how much more nicer
could I ask people to resist the temptation to offer bull****, off-topic
responses?


Try this on for size: "Please shut the **** up, you stupid, ignorant,
narrow-minded, opinionated, red-neck *******. Thank you." Now, let's
see if _you_ respond in the requested manner to *that* request. After all,
I even said "please" and "thank you" in response -- how much more nicer
could I ask? (Note: if _you_ won't play by _your_own_rules_, any expectation
on your part that _anyone_else_ would do so is clearly delusional.)

That aside, you only 'requested' no BS comments from "people who really
can't answer the question." Even by the actual request, anyone who
_could_ answer the question *WAS* free to make BS comments.

And you even bitched about those responses that *did* comply with the
actual request you made.

You simply wanted to pick a fight.


Of course, that _was_ your intent. in the first place. you didn't want
a reasoned discusion. you wanted a "fight".

No - by saying "Please - no BS comments from people who really can't
answer the question. Please respond through the group. Thanks!" I
wanted only on-topic responses. You people either can't read and
comprehend the meaning of those words in between "please" and "thank
you", or you just can't control yourselves.


Repeating: "Please shut the **** up, you stupid, ignorant opinionated
narrow-minded red-neck *******. Thank you."

Now, we'll find out whether _you_ "either can't read, or just can't control
yourself."


Well you are one asshole contractor who won't get my business. It's my
money and if I want to have someone come to my house who won't waste my
time with corn-pone, cracker-barrel stories about windows and doors that
are not relevent to my questions,


Thats ok. You are already a proven LIAR on the subject anyway. You
already said you did not intend to use an installation contractor -- that
you were going to install the windows yourself. So any "illegals" on the
premises are your own personal liability.

No - asshole - I said I was looking for un-biased advice on the pluses
and minueses of the different types of wimdows. When did I write (not
say - you can't say things in print, or don't you understand that?).


My, oh my. You appear to be suffering from Alzheimers, or some other form
of illness that such that your short-term memory is badly impaired (in
addition to your apparent Tourettes Syndrome behaviors). You are unable to
remember remarks that you made in a public forum less than *ONE*WEEK*AGO*.

I quote:

From: USENET READER
Message-ID: . net
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 19:33:22 GMT

....

I am looking to buy the windows and install them myself, .....

....


As you can see, you _did_ state exactly what I claimed you did.

And you _are_ a proven liar, for denying that you did so.

Since you *did* announce that you were not a 'customer', nor even a
"potential customer" of any installer, anything based on "the customer
is always right" quite simply, _by_your_own_declaration_ *DOES*NOT*APPLY*
to you.

As for "you can't say things in print, or don't you understand that?",
you have no business criticizing others for that when *YOU* do exactly
the same thing, "In print". In a public forum. With records readily
available to prove it. On more than one occasion. And as recently
as in the last 48 hours.




I
said I would not use any contractor who hires illegals. If that means I
have to install the windows on my own, how does that make me a liar?


You keep demonstrating the failings of your memory. You said, *in*these*
*exact*words* that you are "looking to buy the windows and INSTALL THEM
MYSELF." (emphasis added)

You are not in the market for installation services.

You have no intention of hiring an installation contractor

You are not even a 'potential customer' of an installer.

Any assertation of how you should be treated _because_ you are a
potential customer of an installer is thus based on a "known to be false"
premise. The one-word description of a person who makes such assertations
is a "liar". In this instance, that person is _you_.


If
anything, it makes any contractor who hires illegals a CRIMINAL - it is
against the law to hire illegals. Or don't you know that either?


You stated that you, *yourself* intended to do the install. Thus, as
previously stated, any "illegals" on the work-site are *YOUR* criminal
liability.


Also, if you plan to bring illegal immigrants to my home to do the work,
so you can afford another steel and gold Rolex while other US citizens
and legal immigrants can't find work because you will only hire illegals
who work for slave labor wages, stay the **** home.


snicker You really don't know anything about the way Ed ran his business
do you? For starters, he *hates* Rolex.

"Rolex' is a symbol (you know what a "symbol" is, don't you?) for people
who love to screw their fellow Americans - no one who wears a Rolex on
theri wrist is gonna actually work in the trenches for a living, are
they?


In point of fact, I know several people who work in the trenches (literally!
"in the trenches" -- they do pipeline installation work) who wear Rolexes --
because they are the _only_ watch that they have found that can stand up to
the rigors of the environment they work in. Old Rolex Oysters can be found
for relatively reasonable amounts.

Thus, you have your "facts" wrong, again. As if you care about facts.


I am sure Ed didn't do the actual work - he is one of those khaki
trouser wearing supervising assholes who makes all the money and does
none of the actual "work".


What credibility are you talking about - if you hire illegals and pay
them slave labor wages, you have no credibility.

And if it were the case that he paid *premium* wages, because he hired only
the _best_ workers; that he had 50+ applicants for every opening; that there
was a 3+ year waiting list to work for that operation, *then* what would
you say?

What are "premium wages"?


How does roughly 25% _above_ "union scale". with full benefits, strike you?
.

Is that compared to minimum wage, what they
pay at Wal-Mart, or in comparison to the regular wages they pay
illegals? If he hires illegals as "independent contractors" and doesn't
pay Social Security, Workman's Comp, Unemployment Insurance, he can
afford to pay a higher wage for the best people who will work under
those conditions, but he is still hiring illegals and he is still
BREAKING THE LAW!



If you tell me to take
what you want to give me and don't ask questions, then you have no
credibility as a vendor and no wonder you aren't in the business anymore.

Do you know how many years he was 'in the business', without a SINGLE
customer complaint? Do you have any idea what kind of _profit_ he
sold that business for?

If he hires illegals, I could really give a **** about all that. And
why don't you go ahead and tell me how many years he was in business
for, how much he sold the business for, and the hourly wage he pays his
illegals? You seem to know that info - why not offer up really useful
info and not useless crap that we can't possibly guess at? That is
because you don't believe in offering up useful info - you only offer crap!


Do you have *one* piece of information to so much as suggest that *ANY*
person that _ever_ worked for his company was an 'illegal alien'?

Go out and look at any work crew on new construction or a remodeling job
- they are almost all illegals that don't speak a word of English. This
asshole sounds like the type who not only thinks every crackerbarrel
story out of his mouth is like the voice of God Almighty, and this type
of ignorant asshole thinks he can break any law that he wants to - as
long as he makes more money.

Do you know the meaning of the words "slander", and "libel"?

Yet again: "Please shut the **** up, you stupid, ignorant, opinionated ,
narrow-minded, red-neck *******. Thank you."

Please shut the **** up, you stupid, ignorant, opinionated,
narrow-minded, red-neck *******. Thank you.

Gary L. Burnore wrote:

On Sun, 08 May 2005 14:18:22 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:


Tom Disque wrote:


On Tue, 03 May 2005 13:32:38 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:



Matt - why would you consider vinyl over aluminum-clad windows? This is
an example of the type of on-topic response I was seeking when I posted
the original question. Thank you for staying on topic.


Since aluminum is a conductor and vinyl is not, I would think that
vinyl does a better job of insulating. Mine are vinyl; since it's
been almost five years, I don't recall if aluminum was presented as an
option.


My God - an actual on-topic response.


... and even then, you're a jerk. No shock there.

And never once a single on-topic response from Gary the Criminal Sex
Offender!

Do you suppose you could chip in for my sake? We've finally saved what I
hope is enough money to replace our windows, but I'm just at the
beginning stage of researching the project. I've got 11 windows to
replace (and maybe both doors), and I'm considering doing the labour
myself (to save money, no other reason). Please say what you have to
say. Thanks.




Owen, here's what I can remember of the whole project. It was a pro
installation, as I am NOT the guy you want on a ladder, and the job is a
lot easier with at least two experience guys doing it.

We had the whole house replaced, with the exception of a couple that were
too small to bother with. We went with lightly tinted, sealed,
argon-filled, double-glazed vinyl frames. No casement windows; the
supplier said that they'd never come up with a casement mechanism that
they were really happy with. The sliders are spring balanced, not
counterweighted. The sliders all unhook, to allow better access for
cleaning. They're from Alcan Canada. I don't know what the equivalent
supplier would be in your area.

I believe our house is actually an Alcan home, built in th '70s nearly 30
years before we bought it. Can't say I'm really impressed with the
construction, but you buy what you can afford. I kind of like the idea of
putting Alcan windows on an Alcan home.

Overall, we're happy.

When did you do this, and may I ask the cost? How happy we are has a lot to
do with how closely our expectations match our reality.

If I could do it again, I would want to make the sliders as big as
possible (i.e. exactly half the size of the windows). Those windows with
one tiny sliding pane that opens don't give enough ventilation for the
sultry tropical climate of southern Canada. I don't even want to imagine
what they'd be like in your neck of the woods.

My neck of the woods is Ottawa; we probably get one more month of winter
than you do.

(Tract home, built by high-speed idiots. Don't get me started.)

Knowing that I'm capable of rebuilding everything except the foundation, I'm
tempted to get started myself. I resist the urge, though. It would be
better to just move on. Unfortunately some things aren't going to wait for
us to do that, so here I am.

This is important: Go and look at previous production from your supplier.
If a supplier can't give you references ("I'm sorry, but our client list
is confidential" or whatever lame excuse they use.) then don't use that
supplier. You wouldn't buy a beater car without a test drive, and you're
planning to have these windows for a long time.

Yup. Do you ever watch "Holmes on Homes"? Many of his clients checked out
several references and STILL got seriously burned. I'll take the advice,
but I'm not expecting it to make my world problem free.

Thanks for all the other great suggestions. I'm saving a copy of your
response for future reference.

- Owen -

In article t,
USENET READER wrote:


Robert Bonomi wrote:
In article . net,
USENET READER wrote:

Robert Bonomi wrote:

In article et,
USENET READER wrote:

[[.. munch ..]]

Asshole - I wrote "Please - no BS comments from people who really can't
answer the question. Please respond through the group. Thanks!" I
even said "please" and "thank you" in advance - how much more nicer
could I ask ...

Try this on for size: "Please shut the **** up, you stupid, ignorant,
narrow-minded, opinionated, red-neck *******. Thank you." Now, let's
see if _you_ respond in the requested manner to *that* request. After all,
I even said "please" and "thank you" in response -- how much more nicer
could I ask? (Note: if _you_ won't play by _your_own_rules_, any
expectation on your part that _anyone_else_ would do so is clearly
delusional.)

[remarks not worth repeating removed]


Except that it demonstrated his _inability_ to respond as requested to
a "polite request" constructed according to *his* definition of polite.

So, not only is he a proven liar, with apparent Alzheimers-induced short-
term memory problems, who expects professionals to _give_ him the benefit
of their expertise when he has already stated he is not even a potential
customer, he is also a two-faced *******, who uses a different standard for
his own behavior than what he DEMANDS of the rest of the world.

On Sat, 14 May 2005 15:46:15 GMT, USENET READER
wrote:

[snip]
Go out and look at any work crew on new construction or a remodeling job
- they are almost all illegals that don't speak a word of English. This
asshole sounds like the type who not only thinks every crackerbarrel
story out of his mouth is like the voice of God Almighty, and this type
of ignorant asshole thinks he can break any law that he wants to - as
long as he makes more money.

Have you actually gone out and talked to them? Granted, there are
probably many that do fit your description, but it is rather bigoted
of you to paint them all with the same broad brush. Just because you
look Hispanic is no indication that you are not an American citizen.

I think that those who hire illegals should be penalized, but first we
should make it easier for them to verify the illegality of the
workers. As it stands, if the employer does more checking on someone
who is obviously Hispanic than he/she does one someone who is
obviously Anglo, he/she can be sued for discrimination.