Gregory Morrow wrote:
    >
    > EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
    >
    > > bill frogg wrote:
    > > >
    > > > It seems helpful if you are about thirteen years old, sexually and
    > > > politically naive, and born of boring rightwing parents.....
    > > > froglett
    > >
    > > ....See what I meant about a thick skin? We have a few unfortunates
    > > here like this one, who greet complete strangers with gratuitous
    > > insults. (They don't all wait for offensive or inflammatory posts to
    > > spit their venom, but insulting strangers on newsgroups evidently makes
    > > them feel better, and it's cheaper than seeking professional help for
    > > their problems.)
    >
    > I like to insult the *long - time* members of newsgroups.

Yeah, I'm sure we've all noticed.

    >
    > --
    > Best
    > Greg

Hatunen wrote:
    > upthemountain wrote:

    > >OK, well: I am just reading the group with explorer
    > >(http://britishexpats.com/forum) and replying to the relevant
    > >message using the "reply" box... but I know there is another way because
    > >everyone was wondering where the FAQs were and there is actually a FAQ
    > >tab at the top of this page frame...

    > Somebody more familiar with Explorer is going to have to help you
    > here.

I doubt that this is even an 'Explorer' issue, per se. Rather, it
is an issue with the 'britishexpats.com' server, which seems to be
run by people who don't understand or care about Usenet (apart from
the fact that they can (ab)use it to create their "forums").


--
greg byshenk - [email protected] - Leiden, NL
hate spam?

In article , [email protected]
(EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)) wrote:

    > Also,
    > I'd been given to understand that "bandwidth" was a non-issue, these
    > days - unless you have a very, VERY old computer.

More an issue of your ISP connection than your computer -- but yes,
from an individual user's point of view the obsession with bandwidth can
sometimes seem rather antiquated. There is a slightly different argument
that if everybody wasted bandwidth the whole Net would be slower, but
let's not go there: we have enough tedious off-topicality already!

Please folk!!!! can we give it a rest!!! and get back
to the travel area where this newsgroup was excellent, helpful
etc
and is supposed to be anyway.
Jim
--
Please remove DONTSPAMME from my address to reply.
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
    > devil wrote:
    > >
    > > On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 19:05:34 +0000,
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
    > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > devil wrote:
    > > >>
    > > >> On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 05:23:55 +0000, Gerrit wrote:
    > > >> >
    > > >> > There is a set of "rules" which is posted here fairly
regularly by
    > > >> > Yves Bellefeuille ([email protected]). If you go to
Newsgroups on Google
    > > >> > and search for "rec.travel.europe FAQ" then you will be
able to view
    > > >> > this. There have been some accrimonious debates about
this FAQ but
    > > >> > this is the closest to a set of rules I know about. If
nothing else it
    > > >> > does have some good information.
    > > >>
    > > >> Careful here. I don't believe there is anything like a
consensus on
    > > >> these. More a case of a self-appointed vigilante really.
(Although it
    > > >> would appear he has recently stepped down.)
    > > >
    > > > Quite a few of our "regulars" seem to have left us! I know
Jack has a
    > > > grandson to occupy his time now, and Mxmanic e-mailed me
privately to
    > > > explain why he hasn't been around lately (nothing
world-shaking, but he
    > > > obviously preferred not to post it here). But there was
Robert (can't
    > > > remember the last name) a widely traveled New Yorker with
an interest in
    > > > fine wines, and Yves and a couple of others that don't seem
to be around
    > > > anymore.
    > >
    > > That would have been Robert Buxbaum?
    > Right! Does anyone know why he's no longer here? (Fortunately
he did
    > continue to post after 9/11, so one can assume he was not one
of the
    > casualties.)

Jimmy.john wrote:

    > Please folk!!!! can we give it a rest!!! and get back
    > to the travel area where this newsgroup was excellent, helpful
    > etc
    > and is supposed to be anyway.


Evelyn and that "Devil" fellow appear to like to constantly stir up
"trouble", Jim.....

--
Best
Greg


    > Jim
    > --
    > Please remove DONTSPAMME from my address to reply.
    > "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in
    > message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > >
    > > devil wrote:
    > > >
    > > > On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 19:05:34 +0000,
    > EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > devil wrote:
    > > > >>
    > > > >> On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 05:23:55 +0000, Gerrit wrote:
    > > > >> >
    > > > >> > There is a set of "rules" which is posted here fairly
    > regularly by
    > > > >> > Yves Bellefeuille ([email protected]). If you go to
    > Newsgroups on Google
    > > > >> > and search for "rec.travel.europe FAQ" then you will be
    > able to view
    > > > >> > this. There have been some accrimonious debates about
    > this FAQ but
    > > > >> > this is the closest to a set of rules I know about. If
    > nothing else it
    > > > >> > does have some good information.
    > > > >>
    > > > >> Careful here. I don't believe there is anything like a
    > consensus on
    > > > >> these. More a case of a self-appointed vigilante really.
    > (Although it
    > > > >> would appear he has recently stepped down.)
    > > > >
    > > > > Quite a few of our "regulars" seem to have left us! I know
    > Jack has a
    > > > > grandson to occupy his time now, and Mxmanic e-mailed me
    > privately to
    > > > > explain why he hasn't been around lately (nothing
    > world-shaking, but he
    > > > > obviously preferred not to post it here). But there was
    > Robert (can't
    > > > > remember the last name) a widely traveled New Yorker with
    > an interest in
    > > > > fine wines, and Yves and a couple of others that don't seem
    > to be around
    > > > > anymore.
    > > >
    > > > That would have been Robert Buxbaum?
    > >
    > > Right! Does anyone know why he's no longer here? (Fortunately
    > he did
    > > continue to post after 9/11, so one can assume he was not one
    > of the
    > > casualties.)

On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 17:59:28 +0000, Gregory Morrow wrote:

    >
    > Jimmy.john wrote:
    >
    >> Please folk!!!! can we give it a rest!!! and get back
    >> to the travel area where this newsgroup was excellent, helpful
    >> etc
    >> and is supposed to be anyway.
    >
    >
    > Evelyn and that "Devil" fellow appear to like to constantly stir up
    > "trouble", Jim.....


Calling me?

So, what's up?

"Jimmy.john" wrote:
    >
    > Please folk!!!! can we give it a rest!!! and get back
    > to the travel area where this newsgroup was excellent, helpful
    > etc
    > and is supposed to be anyway.
    > Jim

So you feel we should be forbidden from enquiring about posters we've
not heard from for a while? Why? (Many of us who have been posting here
for some time regard most fellow-posters as cyber-friends, and are
interested in their welfare.)

devil wrote:

    > On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 17:59:28 +0000, Gregory Morrow wrote:
    > >
    > > Jimmy.john wrote:
    > >
    > >> Please folk!!!! can we give it a rest!!! and get back
    > >> to the travel area where this newsgroup was excellent, helpful
    > >> etc
    > >> and is supposed to be anyway.
    > >
    > >
    > > Evelyn and that "Devil" fellow appear to like to constantly stir up
    > > "trouble", Jim.....
    > Calling me?
    > So, what's up?

;-)))

--
Best
Greg

On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 19:59:15 -0800, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
wrote:

    >Pan wrote:

    >> >Taking remarks out of context so you can make them say what YOU want
    >> >them to say is not exactly good "nettiquette", either.
    >>
    >> You seek to talk to me about nettiquette? Are the off-topic shouting
    >> matches good nettiquette? Mind you, I am more on your side than the
    >> side of your opponents, but all the political bullshit here annoys the
    >> hell out of me.
    >So don't read it!
[snip]

It takes up most of the bandwidth. You are naive in the extreme if you
think all that b.s. hasn't caused people who want to participate in
discussions of travel to Europe to unsubscribe. I'm sure you wouldn't
care if I unsubscribed, to let you and your ilk make this into a group
of nothing but inane off-topic invective.

Michael

On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 20:03:12 -0800, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
wrote:

    >Pan wrote:

    >> So why don't you take it upon yourself to quit posting on them? If
    >> people one by one stopped posting on those threads, they'd eventually
    >> take up less space and, perhaps, end.
    >I haven't noticed you refraining from making them even longer by whining
    >about those who post to them!
[snip]

Give me some examples.

I ignore the political threads, and you clearly aren't paying
attention if you'd make such an idiotic post.

Note that posting _about_ off-topic discussions _IS_ on-topic in
_this_ thread!

As to your assertion that all that invective is actually on-topic,
reread the charter. Your attitude annoys the hell out of me.

Michael

Did I say that...Your understanding of the
English language must be very restrictive!!!
I dont see you doing too much inquiring of "posters
we've not heard from for a while" but do on many
other OT threads
I have been posting on this newsgroup re travel
matters for years and this newsgroup WAS always very
helpful and informative.
Of late since the war stirrers, and I must admit myself in reply,
have hijacked this newsgroup. You seemed to have had a lot
to say as well. "Pot calling the kettle Black"
If you are really interested in your friends welfare you
would have their emai l addresses and emailing them
direct NOT on a newsgroup
"Methinks thou dost protest too loud thyself"
Jim


--
Please remove DONTSPAMME from my address to reply.
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
    > "Jimmy.john" wrote:
    > >
    > > Please folk!!!! can we give it a rest!!! and get back
    > > to the travel area where this newsgroup was excellent,
helpful
    > > etc
    > > and is supposed to be anyway.
    > > Jim
    > So you feel we should be forbidden from enquiring about posters
we've
    > not heard from for a while? Why? (Many of us who have been
posting here
    > for some time regard most fellow-posters as cyber-friends, and
are
    > interested in their welfare.)

Pan wrote:
    >
    > On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 19:59:15 -0800, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
    > wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >
    > >Pan wrote:
    >
    > >> >Taking remarks out of context so you can make them say what YOU want
    > >> >them to say is not exactly good "nettiquette", either.
    > >>
    > >> You seek to talk to me about nettiquette? Are the off-topic shouting
    > >> matches good nettiquette? Mind you, I am more on your side than the
    > >> side of your opponents, but all the political bullshit here annoys the
    > >> hell out of me.
    > >
    > >So don't read it!
    > [snip]
    >
    > It takes up most of the bandwidth. You are naive in the extreme if you
    > think all that b.s. hasn't caused people who want to participate in
    > discussions of travel to Europe to unsubscribe. I'm sure you wouldn't
    > care if I unsubscribed, to let you and your ilk make this into a group
    > of nothing but inane off-topic invective.

I thought you already had! (FWIW, I and my "ilk" have been on the group
longer than you have, and engage in plenty of travel discussion, along
with expressing our concern over explosive international situations.)

    >
    > Michael

Pan wrote:
    >
    > On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 20:03:12 -0800, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
    > wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >
    > >Pan wrote:
    >
    > >> So why don't you take it upon yourself to quit posting on them? If
    > >> people one by one stopped posting on those threads, they'd eventually
    > >> take up less space and, perhaps, end.
    > >
    > >I haven't noticed you refraining from making them even longer by whining
    > >about those who post to them!
    > [snip]
    >
    > Give me some examples.
    >
    > I ignore the political threads, and you clearly aren't paying
    > attention if you'd make such an idiotic post.

You "ignore" it by complaining about it at length? (You have strange
ideas of what constitutes "ignoring" something!)

    >
    > Note that posting _about_ off-topic discussions _IS_ on-topic in
    > _this_ thread!

Really? How do you arrive at that conclusion, when the original poster
was asking about "rules" for the group - a singularly "on topic"
request, even if there ARE no "rules" to speak of.

    > As to your assertion that all that invective is actually on-topic,
    > reread the charter. Your attitude annoys the hell out of me.

"All that invective" is not appearing here for the first time, nor is it
likely to be the last. The international situation appears to have
sparked some lively discussions on ALL the newsgroups, and I stand by
what I said: It is certainly more appropriate on a travel group than
one about music or pets or cooking (where such discussions are also
taking place). If you have a modicum of intelligence, you are certainly
capable of determining whether or not a thread is of interest to you,
and scrolling past it if it is not. Sorry if I irritate you, but
there's a simple solution - ever hear of a "killfile"? All you need do
is tell your computer you don't want to see any more posts from me, and
they'll all go away. (P-L-O-N-K)