Swingman wrote:

Congressional Reform Act of 2010

7. Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the American
people.

a) They must all do their income taxes, personally, by hand, and are audited
every other year.

b) They must run their offices by the same laws as any other business of
equivalent size and are required to personally file all required paperwork.

c) They will draw no government salary when running for office or otherwise
tending to business other than the taxpayers'.

d) They are subject to the same limitations on gifts, meals, and trips as any
other government employee.


-- Doug

On 1/3/2010 2:29 PM, Douglas Johnson wrote:
wrote:

Congressional Reform Act of 2010

7. Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the American
people.

a) They must all do their income taxes, personally, by hand, and are audited
every other year.

b) They must run their offices by the same laws as any other business of
equivalent size and are required to personally file all required paperwork.

c) They will draw no government salary when running for office or otherwise
tending to business other than the taxpayers'.

d) They are subject to the same limitations on gifts, meals, and trips as any
other government employee.

Yes!

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 12:09:50 -0800, Robatoy wrote:

It is only a foolish comment because it doesn't fit your idea of that
dream world you live in, Tim.

I plonked Tim a long time ago. If you guys would quit responding to his
diatribes I'd never know he was still around. Why do you persist?
You're never going to make a dent in that self-centered ego.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Jan 3, 6:38*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/3/2010 5:26 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 12:09:50 -0800, Robatoy wrote:

It is only a foolish comment because it doesn't fit your idea of that
dream world you live in, Tim.

I plonked Tim a long time ago. *If you guys would quit responding to his
diatribes I'd never know he was still around. *Why do you persist? *
You're never going to make a dent in that self-centered ego.

Translation: *I can't combat Tim's ideas so I'll attack him personally.


Translation: Please buy my bull**** as I am invincible!!!

Put down your arms, fellow wRECers!! Tim cannot be defeated!!! All
hail TIM!!!
We should all be grateful that Tim descends down to our level once in
a while and takes the time to even talk to us. Nay..._blesses_ us with
his wisdom.

Douglas Johnson wrote:
Swingman wrote:

Congressional Reform Act of 2010

7. Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the
American people.

a) They must all do their income taxes, personally, by hand, and are
audited every other year.

b) They must run their offices by the same laws as any other business
of equivalent size and are required to personally file all required
paperwork.

c) They will draw no government salary when running for office or
otherwise tending to business other than the taxpayers'.

d) They are subject to the same limitations on gifts, meals, and
trips as any other government employee.

e) In order to be allowed to vote in favor of a bill, the legislator must
first recite it verbatim and without error from memory. Each legislator
must be present for the entire duration of a vote on any bill and must
during that time be supporting entirely with his own bodily strength and
without mechanical contrivance or assistance of any kind full bound copies
of the US Code and the Code of Federal Regulations both printed on 12 pound
stock in 12 point Times Roman type. Exception--this is not required to vote
in favor of any bill which has no other effect than to repeal a section of
the US Code or Code of Federal Regulations.

f) They must perform personally all government-mandated tasks required of a
household in the United States and may not delegate any of these tasks to
any other person.

g) They must personally deal with all mail addressed to their residence or
domicile except that addressed to another named person resident at that
location, and may delegate this task to no other person.

Douglas Johnson wrote:

Swingman wrote:

Congressional Reform Act of 2010

7. Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the American
people.

a) They must all do their income taxes, personally, by hand, and are
audited every other year.

b) They must run their offices by the same laws as any other business of
equivalent size and are required to personally file all required
paperwork.

c) They will draw no government salary when running for office or
otherwise tending to business other than the taxpayers'.

d) They are subject to the same limitations on gifts, meals, and trips as
any other government employee.


Short, succinct, and would solve 90% of our problems. Would also add,

e) May not propose any law with a clause that requires any different
majority to alter, modify, amend, or repeal than was required to adopt said
law.


-- Doug

--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham

On Jan 3, 11:03*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/3/2010 8:12 PM, Robatoy wrote:





On Jan 3, 8:12 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/3/2010 5:59 PM, Robatoy wrote:

On Jan 3, 6:38 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/3/2010 5:26 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 12:09:50 -0800, Robatoy wrote:

It is only a foolish comment because it doesn't fit your idea of that
dream world you live in, Tim.

I plonked Tim a long time ago. *If you guys would quit responding to his
diatribes I'd never know he was still around. *Why do you persist? *
You're never going to make a dent in that self-centered ego.

Translation: *I can't combat Tim's ideas so I'll attack him personally.

Translation: Please buy my bull**** as I am invincible!!!

Put down your arms, fellow wRECers!! Tim cannot be defeated!!! All
hail TIM!!!
We should all be grateful that Tim descends down to our level once in
a while and takes the time to even talk to us. Nay..._blesses_ us with
his wisdom.

You don't need to be grateful for any such thing. *You do need to
develop some manners, however.

*Speak to me, oh Wise One, so I may communicate with You on Your
****ing terms.

I will settle for you communicating with everyone in simply decent terms.


Will you?
Okay, deal. And you stop the hopium, foaming nonsense you spew.

On Jan 3, 11:43*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/3/2010 10:20 PM, Robatoy wrote:





On Jan 3, 11:03 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/3/2010 8:12 PM, Robatoy wrote:

On Jan 3, 8:12 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/3/2010 5:59 PM, Robatoy wrote:

On Jan 3, 6:38 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/3/2010 5:26 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 12:09:50 -0800, Robatoy wrote:

It is only a foolish comment because it doesn't fit your idea of that
dream world you live in, Tim.

I plonked Tim a long time ago. *If you guys would quit responding to his
diatribes I'd never know he was still around. *Why do you persist? *
You're never going to make a dent in that self-centered ego.

Translation: *I can't combat Tim's ideas so I'll attack him personally.

Translation: Please buy my bull**** as I am invincible!!!

Put down your arms, fellow wRECers!! Tim cannot be defeated!!! All
hail TIM!!!
We should all be grateful that Tim descends down to our level once in
a while and takes the time to even talk to us. Nay..._blesses_ us with
his wisdom.

You don't need to be grateful for any such thing. *You do need to
develop some manners, however.

*Speak to me, oh Wise One, so I may communicate with You on Your
****ing terms.

I will settle for you communicating with everyone in simply decent terms.

Will you?
Okay, deal. And you stop the hopium, foaming nonsense you spew.

You mean the factual, thoughtful, analytical responses to your
racist profane rants?


Yes. Those.

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:03:28 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
I will settle for you communicating with everyone in simply decent terms.

That's going to be a big problem, because you think you're
communicating while everyone else thinks that you're incapable of
changing your one track mind from how you're constantly getting
cheated out of money.

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:43:22 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

You mean the factual, thoughtful, analytical responses to your
racist profane rants?

No, he means talking about woodworking which is the primary focus of
this newsgroup. Unfortunately, you've proven over and over that you're
incapable of doing something like that.

On Jan 4, 3:47*am, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:43:22 -0600, Tim Daneliuk



You mean the factual, thoughtful, analytical responses to your
racist profane rants?

No, he means talking about woodworking which is the primary focus of
this newsgroup. Unfortunately, you've proven over and over that you're
incapable of doing something like that.

I shrug and smile. He is now digging in the bottom of his bag trying
to find buttons he can push, knowing full well that I'm anything but a
racist, but that's okay. He's just really ****ed that I have labeled
him what he really is: a paranoid disillusioned megalomaniac who also
suffers from OCD and has an inferiority complex to boot. I guess
seminary school can do that to a weak child. As the song goes: *I
smile and wave!*
I don't know why my choice of words bother him so much as his heroes,
Nixon and Cheney use(d) the same type of words. Oh well... **** him.

Got any snow there, Dave? :-)

On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 08:23:13 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

On 1/4/2010 2:47 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:43:22 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

You mean the factual, thoughtful, analytical responses to your
racist profane rants?

No, he means talking about woodworking which is the primary focus of
this newsgroup.

As this thread yet again demonstrates.


Unfortunately, you've proven over and over that you're
incapable of doing something like that.

How's the stealing going these days?

You are a lousy troll Tim. No fish for thee.

Mark

On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 09:24:44 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

I agree ... because I am no troll at all. When this NG ceases
to discuss politics, I will honor that decision as I have in
other such forums. But being lectured by Upscale of all people
on how I ought not to in the face of the miles-long threads of
political venom found here is laughable.

P.S. I cannot recall a time - certainly not in years - when I *started*
a political thread.

But, be there one you are on just like white on rice. Then your name
does not show up at the grass root level of politics, in Maine
Township or the Des Plaines area. So spew if ya need to but not many
are listening.

So what your view of Madigan? The state of the state, the fact that
your state is stealing from its vendors by not paying its bills?

If you want to do something write to be a pita to your reps, and leave
the wreck the **** alone.

Mark

On Jan 4, 9:23*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/4/2010 2:47 AM, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:43:22 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

You mean the factual, thoughtful, analytical responses to your
racist profane rants?

No, he means talking about woodworking which is the primary focus of
this newsgroup.

As this thread yet again demonstrates.

Unfortunately, you've proven over and over that you're
incapable of doing something like that.

How's the stealing going these days?


How desperate are you??? LOL

Is there really no other place where you can have these intelligent
discussions? You keep gravitating to this group of idiots/dummies,
myself included. Is it so that in the land of the blind one eye can be
king? Are you that rose amongst thorns? Is that why you come here, so
you can look good? You really neeeeeeed that reinforcement? Are you
that ****ing weak?

On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 10:08:55 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

If you think I will remain silent in the face of some of the manifest political stupidities articulated
here you are higher than Bill Maher at breakfast.

Had to say what I wanted, what else happens is up to random
connections that are life.

Mark

On Jan 4, 11:44*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:


Naw. *I'm not desperate for your affirmation. *I do so love listening
to you and Uppy exchange words from your one page dictionary though.

You should have that page memorized by now, no? Why keep coming back?
What is about us that makes us so irresistible?
Are we the only ones left who will talk to you? Are you so desperate
that you are willing to navigate our (my) 'profanities' just to
'belong' to a group that pays attention to you? Are you hoping to
convert us to your horribly misguided view of the world?
Every time you respond, I get more insight as to how weak you really
are.


Happy Hating.

I hate senseless slaughter of human lives. Anywhere. You, Tim, don't
make the Hate Scale. You're just not important enough for me to hate.

On Jan 4, 11:44*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

the "money lenders" (gee, I wonder to whom
you are referring),

Who _am_ I referring to, Tim?

On Jan 4, 12:19*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:


On 1/4/2010 11:08 AM, Robatoy wrote:

Every time you respond, I get more insight as to how weak you really
are.

Weaker and weaker....


Your fly is down...

Now you're looking at my crotch! PERVERT!!! (Ah yes, that seminary
school again.)

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 05:41:39 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
Got any snow there, Dave? :-)

I'm happy to say there's been very little snow. Naturally, that fact
makes a tremendous difference when rolling around. Went out today and
damn it was cold. -15 Celsius before the wind chill is factored in.
Could be worse though, could be -15C AND four feet of snow.

On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 09:24:44 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
P.S. I cannot recall a time - certainly not in years - when I *started*
a political thread.

What *exactly* does starting a political thread have to do with
anything? The fact that you have or haven't started a political thread
counts for ****. Everybody else who takes part in a political thread
here only does so as a diversion, essentially taking a break from
their real reason to be here and that's woodworking.

Problem is, you're here solely to irritate and argue in political
threads. You contribute nothing else, your sole purpose is to post
your complaints and comments into existing conversations and
effectively hijack them when the opportunity appears.

You're a "who me?" innocent bull**** artist, taking zero
responsibility for anything. Obviously, you're here solely because you
wouldn't be able to compete in a real political newsgroup. Considering
there's quite a few of them and you're not very active in any of them
is confirmation of that fact. You're here solely to **** disturb. In
other words, you have zero life and you come to this newsgroup in a
feeble attempt to create one.

Pitiful life you have there Timbit. Must be lonely as hell, but you've
earned every bit of it.

On Jan 5, 11:49*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:


Wrong. *I'm here to improve my understanding of WWing -
which I primarily do passively. *

*When the group eschews such threads,
I will stick entirely to the on-topic material - which means I will rarely post
as I do not have the expertise to guide others in their WWing activities.


Sooo, you're mooching free advice?

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 10:49:28 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
Wrong. I'm here to improve my understanding of WWing -

That's bull****. Even if you were doing it passively as you claim,
you'd be asking many more woodworking questions other than the token
once a month question you do post. It's long past proven that you're a
liar without the integrity to be honest ~ at least when your diatribe
suffices a way out of being caught.

wouldn't be able to compete in a real political newsgroup. Considering
there's quite a few of them and you're not very active in any of them
is confirmation of that fact. You're here solely to **** disturb.

As usual, you completely ignore the pertinent questions such as why
aren't you active in dedicated political newsgroups? The obvious
answer would be that you just can't compete in such a group, and so
you're failure there leads you to pretend some type of superiority
here.

As I said, pitiful.

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:01:10 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
Wrong. ?I'm here to improve my understanding of WWing -
which I primarily do passively. ?

Sooo, you're mooching free advice?

No, it's quite obvious that he's trying to bull**** his way out of why
he's here in the first place.

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 10:49:28 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
Wrong. I'm here to improve my understanding of WWing -

That's bull****. Even if you were doing it passively as you claim,
you'd be asking many more woodworking questions other than the token
once a month question you do post. It's long past proven that you're a
liar without the integrity to be honest ~ at least when your diatribe
suffices a way out of being caught.

wouldn't be able to compete in a real political newsgroup. Considering
there's quite a few of them and you're not very active in any of them
is confirmation of that fact. You're here solely to **** disturb.

As usual, you completely ignore the pertinent questions such as why
aren't you active in dedicated political newsgroups? The obvious
answer would be that you just can't compete in such a group, and so
you're failure there leads you to pretend some type of superiority
here.

As I said, pitiful.

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 11:17:06 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

So, are you going to stop posting political stuff here to shut me
up? I humbly await your answer.

Oh, I already know that you won't shut up. So, that leaves me with the
enviable task of criticizing you whenever the mood strikes me, which
is most of the time.

I don't cheat or lie, something which you do. That's confirmed by your
frequent accusations of me stealing because I happen to use universal
healthcare. That does brand you a liar without ethics or integrity. It
also makes you an asshole among your other comparable traits.

On Jan 5, 9:25*am, wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 09:24:44 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

P.S. I cannot recall a time - certainly not in years - when I *started*
a political thread.

What *exactly* does starting a political thread have to do with
anything? The fact that you have or haven't started a political thread
counts for ****. Everybody else who takes part in a political thread
here only does so as a diversion, essentially taking a break from
their real reason to be here and that's woodworking.

Problem is, you're here solely to irritate and argue in political
threads. You contribute nothing else, your sole purpose is to post
your complaints and comments into existing conversations and
effectively hijack them when the opportunity appears.

You're a "who me?" innocent bull**** artist, taking zero
responsibility for anything. Obviously, you're here solely because you
wouldn't be able to compete in a real political newsgroup. Considering
there's quite a few of them and you're not very active in any of them
is confirmation of that fact. You're here solely to **** disturb. In
other words, you have zero life and you come to this newsgroup in a
feeble attempt to create one.

Pitiful life you have there Timbit. Must be lonely as hell, but you've
earned every bit of it.

.... and Bingo was his name-o....

Now... about those profanities, Tim.
Stop hiding behind this sanctimonious condemnation of UseNet standard
issue word choices.
You're in UseNet. People use words that suit them best in their quest
of getting a point across.
You cannot disqualify the content of a message because it contains a
few words that you, yourself would not have used.
The message remains intact that you are a ****ing asshole. Through and
through. There ARE no other words that describe you more accurately.
Your participation in these discussions prove that you are willing to
endure a few bad words when feeding at the trough of UseNet wisdom.
So stop being a hypocrite. Or leave. You are bitching like you walked
into a strip joint and complain that there are titties in full view.
It is the nature of the beast.

Personally, I sometimes resort to language I would not use around some
people. The fact that it ****es you off gives me great pleasure,
asshole!
If that bothers you, go away, stop reading/responding-to my posts. At
least you won't spoil the wREC's pristine waters anymore. So how about
a hug, eh, ****face? And I mean that in the nicest way.

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:29:15 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
So, once and for all, you are not a thief for participating in a system
you are forced to pay into. It is, however, unethical to fail to *oppose*
such forced wealth redistribution by whatever means available to you -
voting, supporting candidates that oppose this sort of thing. It is
flatly immoral to actively support and demand that government use its
force to pay for what you want and need. That, Sparky, IS stealing.

Valiant attempt to change what you've called me in the past. But, I'll
spend a little more time and find some of the messages where you've
accused me personally of stealing.

As far as ethics and immorality goes, your opinion doesn't qualify
either. Consider that there are a number of millions (that's six zeros
for your feeble mind to comprehend) who approve of and use our
universal healthcare. And yet, here you are stating that they're all
immoral and unethical for supporting universal healthcare. Apparently,
you're conceited enough to claim that their opinion is wrong and yours
is correct. Do you see any conflict there dumb ass?

Logic dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the
few. Despite your claims it's collectivism or socialism or whatever,
it's the MANY that form the foundation of any country and without
them, the country doesn't exist. Those MANY and their needs are not as
easy to dismiss as you attempt to do on a regular basis. An no, your
idiotic opinion that charity should handle those MANY is the opinion
of an idiot, you in this case.

On Jan 5, 1:30*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:11 PM, Robatoy wrote:





Now... about those profanities, Tim.
Stop hiding behind this sanctimonious condemnation of UseNet standard
issue word choices.
You're in UseNet. People use words that suit them best in their quest
of getting a point across.
You cannot disqualify the content of a message because it contains a
few words that you, yourself would not have used.
The message remains intact that you are a ****ing asshole. Through and
through. There ARE no other words that describe you more accurately.
Your participation in these discussions prove that you are willing to
endure a few bad words when feeding at the trough of UseNet wisdom.
So stop being a hypocrite. Or leave. You are bitching like you walked
into a strip joint and complain that there are titties in full view.
It is the nature of the beast.

Personally, I sometimes resort to language I would not use around some
people. The fact that it ****es you off gives me great pleasure,
asshole!
If that bothers you, go away, stop reading/responding-to my posts. At
least you won't spoil the wREC's pristine waters anymore. So how about
a hug, eh, ****face? And I mean that in the nicest way.

I think your arguments are as compelling as ever.



Excellent! There hope for you yet. See what a hug can do?
But no more looking at my fly, okay? I don't swing that way.

On Jan 5, 1:29*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

That, Sparky, IS stealing.

Antagonizing again, Tim. What did Big Bro' Robatoy tell you? It's too
smokey in here. Leave!

On 1/1/2010 1:26 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 1/1/2010 12:29 PM, Perry Aynum wrote:
You seen New Orleans, Bubba?

Yeah, my home state ... do notice that the part of NOLA settled when the
population looked after themselves and exercised common sense in still
intact and thriving.

But, let's see, we have an irrrational need to blame a natural disaster
on a political persuasion, eh?

What ****ing bloody idiocy you guys can foster ... you really should be
ashamed.

http://www.accuweather.com/video-on-...20Blame%20Game


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:09:25 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
Taking from some and giving to other using the threat of force is
always wrong. I don't care how many people vote for it.

Idiotic response as always. What do you think your taxes do? They're
often redistributed where they're needed. Disaster relief. Medicare,
and dozens of other examples are available.

Logic dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the

Your voting is exactly that. What exactly do you think a democracy is?
The majority get to decide what's best for the minority. Call it what
you will, but it's a prime example of the many using the power of the
many to dictate for the few. Your country is based on it. Are you so
single minded that you don't realize it. It's exactly what has made
your country great ~ the power of the many deciding the course that
your country will follow. It's called democracy. Your opinion that the
few with the assets to do so rule the rest. That's anarchy. I could
create my own anarchy by using a gun. Is that what you're advocating?

and so many other people's minds - justifies the use of government
force - all because YOU don't like and/or trust your fellow man.

No, I just don't like or trust greedy, self absorbed little people
like you. And every word you type supports my mistrust of people like
you. If people like you had been in the forefront of your nation's
infancy, you've have been an English colony years ago.

On Jan 5, 2:10*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:51 PM, Robatoy wrote:





On Jan 5, 1:30 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:11 PM, Robatoy wrote:

Now... about those profanities, Tim.
Stop hiding behind this sanctimonious condemnation of UseNet standard
issue word choices.
You're in UseNet. People use words that suit them best in their quest
of getting a point across.
You cannot disqualify the content of a message because it contains a
few words that you, yourself would not have used.
The message remains intact that you are a ****ing asshole. Through and
through. There ARE no other words that describe you more accurately.
Your participation in these discussions prove that you are willing to
endure a few bad words when feeding at the trough of UseNet wisdom.
So stop being a hypocrite. Or leave. You are bitching like you walked
into a strip joint and complain that there are titties in full view.
It is the nature of the beast.

Personally, I sometimes resort to language I would not use around some
people. The fact that it ****es you off gives me great pleasure,
asshole!
If that bothers you, go away, stop reading/responding-to my posts. At
least you won't spoil the wREC's pristine waters anymore. So how about
a hug, eh, ****face? And I mean that in the nicest way.

I think your arguments are as compelling as ever.

Excellent! There hope for you yet. See what a hug can do?
But no more looking at my fly, okay? I don't swing that way.

You'll recall it wasn't your fly. *It merely look like that part of your
body. *Then I realized I was looking at your hat.



Why were you even making attempt to look at me down there, you sick
*******!

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:10:01 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
I've already provided you with the calculus to shut me up.

Yeah, at the cost of his rights. That's the only reason you're here,
not because you belong, not because you contribute anything, but
because you have the legal right. Funny though, how you're so quick
to dismiss someone's else's rights to satisfy demands. Makes you a
Hyprocrite of the worst sort.

On Jan 5, 1:21*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:10:01 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:53 PM, Robatoy wrote:
On Jan 5, 1:29 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

That, Sparky, IS stealing.

Antagonizing again, Tim. What did Big Bro' Robatoy tell you? It's too
smokey in here. Leave!

Or.....?????

I've already provided you with the calculus to shut me up.

Open Source software = collectivism, socialism, communism.

Has was anyone been forced to contribute to Open Source?

On Jan 5, 3:02*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 1:25 PM, Robatoy wrote:





On Jan 5, 2:10 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:51 PM, Robatoy wrote:

On Jan 5, 1:30 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:11 PM, Robatoy wrote:

Now... about those profanities, Tim.
Stop hiding behind this sanctimonious condemnation of UseNet standard
issue word choices.
You're in UseNet. People use words that suit them best in their quest
of getting a point across.
You cannot disqualify the content of a message because it contains a
few words that you, yourself would not have used.
The message remains intact that you are a ****ing asshole. Through and
through. There ARE no other words that describe you more accurately..
Your participation in these discussions prove that you are willing to
endure a few bad words when feeding at the trough of UseNet wisdom.
So stop being a hypocrite. Or leave. You are bitching like you walked
into a strip joint and complain that there are titties in full view..
It is the nature of the beast.

Personally, I sometimes resort to language I would not use around some
people. The fact that it ****es you off gives me great pleasure,
asshole!
If that bothers you, go away, stop reading/responding-to my posts. At
least you won't spoil the wREC's pristine waters anymore. So how about
a hug, eh, ****face? And I mean that in the nicest way.

I think your arguments are as compelling as ever.

Excellent! There hope for you yet. See what a hug can do?
But no more looking at my fly, okay? I don't swing that way.

You'll recall it wasn't your fly. *It merely look like that part of your
body. *Then I realized I was looking at your hat.

Why were you even making attempt to look at me down there, you sick
*******!

OK, OK, I admit it. *I've always been fascinated by miniature modeling.



That weak attempt at humour took you an hour and a half?

On Jan 5, 2:02*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:36:03 -0800 (PST), "



wrote:
On Jan 5, 1:21*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:10:01 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:53 PM, Robatoy wrote:
On Jan 5, 1:29 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

That, Sparky, IS stealing.

Antagonizing again, Tim. What did Big Bro' Robatoy tell you? It's too
smokey in here. Leave!

Or.....?????

I've already provided you with the calculus to shut me up.

Open Source software = collectivism, socialism, communism.

Has was anyone been forced to contribute to Open Source?

I don't know. Why would that matter?

Certainly it matters. If it is *your* choice to give your work to
others, it's called charity.

It's collectivism, socialism and communism, regardless.

Absolutely *NOT*. You aren't required to participate in charity.

On Jan 5, 3:30*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 2:19 PM, Robatoy wrote:





On Jan 5, 3:02 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 1:25 PM, Robatoy wrote:

On Jan 5, 2:10 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:51 PM, Robatoy wrote:

On Jan 5, 1:30 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:11 PM, Robatoy wrote:

Now... about those profanities, Tim.
Stop hiding behind this sanctimonious condemnation of UseNet standard
issue word choices.
You're in UseNet. People use words that suit them best in their quest
of getting a point across.
You cannot disqualify the content of a message because it contains a
few words that you, yourself would not have used.
The message remains intact that you are a ****ing asshole. Through and
through. There ARE no other words that describe you more accurately.
Your participation in these discussions prove that you are willing to
endure a few bad words when feeding at the trough of UseNet wisdom.
So stop being a hypocrite. Or leave. You are bitching like you walked
into a strip joint and complain that there are titties in full view.
It is the nature of the beast.

Personally, I sometimes resort to language I would not use around some
people. The fact that it ****es you off gives me great pleasure,
asshole!
If that bothers you, go away, stop reading/responding-to my posts.. At
least you won't spoil the wREC's pristine waters anymore. So how about
a hug, eh, ****face? And I mean that in the nicest way.

I think your arguments are as compelling as ever.

Excellent! There hope for you yet. See what a hug can do?
But no more looking at my fly, okay? I don't swing that way.

You'll recall it wasn't your fly. *It merely look like that part of your
body. *Then I realized I was looking at your hat.

Why were you even making attempt to look at me down there, you sick
*******!

OK, OK, I admit it. *I've always been fascinated by miniature modeling.

That weak attempt at humour took you an hour and a half?

It took 4.93 nanoseconds as measured on my Timex atomic wris****ch.

However, unlike you and your prom date here, I have other things to do than
monitor your every posting.

Sure you do.... we're the ones keeping you alive.

On Jan 5, 4:41*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 2:34 PM, wrote:


It is still collectivism, socialism and communism. Voluntary or not,
it fits the definition perfectly.

In the context of the political discussion here, the three notions all
include force.

Invalid as you are the one that shaped the context.

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 15:41:17 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

On 1/5/2010 2:37 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:15:59 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

On 1/5/2010 2:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:36:03 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Jan 5, 1:21 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:10:01 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:53 PM, Robatoy wrote:
On Jan 5, 1:29 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

That, Sparky, IS stealing.

Antagonizing again, Tim. What did Big Bro' Robatoy tell you? It's too
smokey in here. Leave!

Or.....?????

I've already provided you with the calculus to shut me up.

Open Source software = collectivism, socialism, communism.

Has was anyone been forced to contribute to Open Source?

I don't know. Why would that matter? It's collectivism, socialism and
communism, regardless.


No it's not. The specific objection folks like me have is *the use of
force*. And it is force that characterizes collectivism, of which
socialism and communism are two forms. Take away the force, and there
is no issue.

That is where your train goes off the rails. Use of force has ZERO to
do with the definition of collectivism, socialism, or communism.

Open source software is a perfect example of collectivism, socialism
and communism at work.


You may wish to refine words as you like to argue your case, but the ordinary
meaning of all the above embraces the notion of force.

The word you're looking for, I believe, is "volunteerism".

No. You need to spend more time with a dictionary. It is you who is
projecting your own nonsense into the words collectivism, socialism
and communism. None of them are defined by force or coercion. You
clearly don't know what any of them truly mean. You use them as buzz
words with your own agenda making them into something they are not.