It is now 9:53 EST. For once in his life Y2K Pro has posted something which is worth reading, and it has just vanished.

-- Peter Errington (petere@ricochet.net), January 02, 2000

Answers

It was only worth reading because Zog was writing.

Zog is always worth reading. But pro is banned for being the consumate arsehole - c'est la vie.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), January 02, 2000.

Heh. Obviously not a uniform standard.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), January 02, 2000.

Peter,

From what I've seen, Pro ruined his credibility by primarily posting personal attacks with practically no substance. Perhaps with the limited time and energy our sysops have, they feel it's simpler just to delete all of his posts rather than having to read through everything, separating the wheat from the chaff.

It is too bad that we apparently missed a good post, but with all of the fantastic contributions by many of the rest of the forum participants, I doubt it would have contributed much to the discussion, in any case.

-- eve (123@4567.com), January 02, 2000.

What this is all about, folks, is that Y2K Pro posted something by Zog for our consideration. Zog started off in grand fashion by blaming government agent provaceteurs for Columbine and the attack on the Jewish daycare center, and went on from there.

-- Peter Errington (petere@ricochet.net), January 02, 2000.

Peter,

So Pro's intent was to extract something from Zog's posts that might hold Zog up for ridicule? And are we to extrapolate from this that, say, Zog's post on using plastic bags in collecting water through leaf condensation is therefore somehow less truthful or relevant?

-- eve (123@4567.com), January 02, 2000.