JM> Bob Klahn -> John Massey wrote:

 JM>>> O BullShit You drop a flame at people for no reason other
 JM>>> than to drop a flame.

 BK>>  Lie.

 JM> Truth

 BK>>  Hulett says you are wrong.

 JM> No Hulett say: (SIC)

 Say what?

 BK>>
 JM> ************************************************************
 JM> ************** EH>> Klahn opens himself up to flames...
 EH>>> He then feels the necessity to flame back because he's
 EH>>> afraid of looking weak.
 BK>>
 JM> ************************************************************

 JM> ************** Which is true, but you also will flame
 JM> first. Only you don't think what you do is flaming.

 Before Hardegree, no flames. I went back about a month and a
 half in the echo before he chimed in. No flames. I offered that
 opportunity to anyone who was interested, no takers. Docs place
 cycled those msgs off after about a year, so they are no longer
 there. I can easily send you my archives of that time, but they
 only include msgs that involve me.

 You had the chance. Now that the chance is gone, it's awfully
 weasly of you to demand proof when you would not look at it the
 first time around.

 JM>>>>> That's why you post in this echo,

 BK>>>>  Really really dumb. Explain why I posted in this echo before
 BK>>>>  Stan arrived, in Jan 05. Back when this echo was flame free.

 BK>>  I notice you have no answer to this.

 JM> You have never proven this echo was flame free before Jan
 JM> 05. You have only expressed your opinion that it was.

 I offered the proof a year ago. Now I can repost my archives,
 but they do not include msgs that don't involve me. You had the
 chance. If you ignored it that's your failure, not mine.

 JM>>>>> and why your Debate echo is, for all practical purposes, dead

 BK>>>>  So, you are saying a flame echo is better than no echo?

 JM>>> yep

 BK>>  That is a measure of you, not me.

 JM> Yep, I can deal with it , You can't. You whine line a
 JM> picked on play ground kid about the flamers rather that
 JM> deal with it.

 You do realize that is a non-sensical sentence, don't you?

 And you do realize you have chosen to be a flamer instead of a
 serious contributor, don't you?

 BK>>>>  disagree. I would rather see the echo die than turn into a flame
 BK>>>>  echo.

 JM>>> Well if debate is any example, you got your wish.

 BK>>  Lots of echos have slow times, esp in summer. Almost everything
 BK>>  in this echo is flame. If a few of us left this echo would die
 BK>>  practically overnight.

 JM> Please Please give it a try.

 Ok, here's the deal. You get all the right wingnut flamers to
 stop posting about and to me and all the others who disagree
 with them, and I'll try to get all the decent posters, defined
 as not right wingers, to stop posting here. Let's see how long
 this echo lasts.

 I'll be watching for the right wingnuts to stop flaming.

 JM>>>>> BTW what has happen to that anal retentive lawyer
 JM>>>>> co-moderator  that answers post 6 months old with what I'm
 JM>>>>> sure he thinks is witty repartee.

 BK>>>>  Just who are you talking about? You seem to be confused again.

 JM>>> I think his name is Peter, something or other.

 BK>>  No one fitting the description you gave.

 JM> Yeah but calling him an arrogant prick seemed just to much.

 Yeah, that would put him on your level.

BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... Before Hardegree-no flames: Richardson more flames: Hulett-all cheap shots.
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a