Re: DWTS - George Hamilton gone

Mike Corbett <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 20:21:52 -0600, "Bob Wheatley"
<xmaster.dancer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Mike Corbett" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:io3tu1th8btjon2id4u5j5j25sgiu1fipe@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:11:52 -0600, "Bob Wheatley"
<xmaster.dancer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Mike Corbett" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
Please don't confuse polite requests for consideration with attempts to
control the behavior of others.

I never saw "polite". Did you?

All I've seen from this thread so far is "dickheads", "a-holes", and
"dolts".

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. ;-)

And apparently the way "Christmas" is beating this dead horse
he's fullfilling all of them.

I can't help but wonder what kind of individual would support someone like
him. Oh, I'm sorry... :-)))

However, I still simply disagree that I can predict the wishes and/or
circumstances of others. They are responsible for their own exposure to
news and events. If I'm asked ahead of time "politely" to avoid certain things,
all I can say is I'll do my best.
So far, no one here has answered how much time must elapse before an event
can be discussed or incorporated in a subject line. I read JC's post
concerning groups that discuss movies and books but that hardly applies to
our group.

The etiquette mentioned in JC's post applies to this thread. >

Really?
The quote JC posted begins "In groups...."
Re-read it and explain how it applies to RAD.
It doesn't say "in threads".

I don't have a complete in context quote of the original private email
either but no matter what it was, it was not an attempt to control. I know
you know the difference. >

Bull***. Yes I do and so do you.

At the time I posted, I did not have "a complete in context quote" of
the original private email. Yes, we both know the difference between
a polite request and an attempt to control. We also know the
similarities. Generally we "want" compliance with our request. If
there weren't a difference, simply desiring or preferring compliance
would make all polite requests "attempts to control".

Please don't let your vitriol for Ed, cloud your reasoning.

Please, Mike. It's a humorous diversion for me (and others) to know that
some demonstrably vulgar, trailer-trash, twit allows himself to get upset
over my words. This individual, who thrives on calling others an idiot,
hasn't the intelligence to recognize that he's allowing himself to be
controlled by his blind hatred...I don't even have to address him
directly. Please, let him continue. :-)

The funniest thing about Bob's vitriol, or hatred, is that it began when I
cut and pasted _his_ comments to others and addressed him using his own
words. Of course, I expected him to have at least a modicum of intellect
and recognize what I had done, but in his rage that someone had challenged
his bloated ego, he became, and remains defensive. Almost as defensive as
he is offensive.

Was that an attempt to control or a polite request, Bob?

Ed wanted to stop an individual known as "Christmas" from posting
information on RAD before he (Ed) was prepared for such information.

LOL! I don't even watch the show. My request was generic in behalf of
anyone on the West Coast who does watch it.

I can't help but wonder how these selfish and inconsiderate people would
feel if they had to record their favorite sports event and someone told
them the outcome before they had a chance to watch the recording. "Oh, you
had to record the Super Bowl? Don't watch it...Seattle got their butts
kicked. Nah, watch it...you won't believe the 78-yard run, or the
touchdown that was negated, etc., etc." ;-)

IOW, Ed
wanted "someone else" to do something (see: control) when he could have just
as easily avoided his exposure to NEWS by avoiding the subject via a subject
related NEWSgroup.

LMAO. (Pushes another button...) :-))

Again, and for the last time....
Please state the specific time that is allowable for posting such
information.

There isn't one. The appropriate request is to leave the spoiler out
of the subject line.

Certainly a three-hour delay wouldn't hurt. Absent that consideration,
"Spoiler" is a decent alternative.

Now, I'll sit back and enjoy a cup of tea knowing that Bob is stomping
around, red-faced and angry as hell. I can hardly wait for this
has-been's, "It sure must suck to be a wannabe in the dance world." LMAO.
Thanks for the laughs, Bob. I hope I made your day, 'cause you made mine.
:-))

Now, anytime you wish to stop acting like a spoiled brat, let me know. As
the XMAS jerk said, "It works both ways."

Now, I'm going to do you a favor, Bob. Read the article below, and think
about it. If you can comprehend what is written, it just may help you get
past my controlling your emotions. Not that I expect a thank you, but
you're welcome. ;-)

Ed
-------------------------------------------------------
TAKING OFFENSE

There is immense wisdom in the old proverb, "He that is slow to anger is
better than the mighty." Hannah More said, "If I wished to punish my
enemy, I should make him hate somebody."

To punish ourselves for others' faults, is superlative folly. The mental
arrow shot from another's bow is so practically harmless, unless our own
thought barb it. It is our pride that makes another's criticism rankle,
our self-will that makes another's deed offensive, our egotism that feels
hurt by another's self-assertion. Well may we feel wounded by our own
faults; but we can hardly afford to be miserable for the faults of others.

A courtier told Constantine that a mob had broken the head of his statue
with stones. The emperor lifted his hands to his head, saying, "It is very
surprising, but I don't feel hurt in the least."

We should remember that the world is wide; that there are a thousand
million different human wills, opinions, ambitions, tastes, and loves;
that each person has a different history, constitution, culture,
character, from all the rest; that human life is the work, the play, the
ceaseless action and reaction upon each other of these different atoms.
Then, we should go forth into life with the smallest expectations, but
with the largest patience; with a keen relish for and appreciation of
everything beautiful, great, and good, but with a temper so genial that
the friction of the world shall not wear upon our sensibilities; with an
equanimity so settled that no passing breath nor accidental disturbance
shall agitate or ruffle it; with a charity broad enough to cover the whole
world's evil, and sweet enough to neutralize what is bitter in it,
?determined not to be offended when no wrong is meant, nor even when it
is, unless the offense be against God.

Nothing short of our own errors should offend us. He who can willfully
attempt to injure another, is an object of pity rather than of resentment;
while it is a question in my mind, whether there is enough of a flatterer,
a fool, or a liar, to offend a whole-souled person.
.

Loading