It is the top thread at Google

-- (Taking c@re of.business), June 02, 2001

Answers

< p>

You jealous of me?

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 02, 2001.

Even got to fly this little sweetie once, but then you probably are too stupid to know what it is.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 02, 2001.

TWEEEEEEEEEEET!!!!!

Ten-yard penalty on Cherri for use of the sexist term "little sweetie." Another five-yard penalty for obsessing and posting twice in rapid succession to the same thread.

Third down and eight to go, Ms. Stewart.

-- Referee (striped.guy@the.sidelines.com), June 02, 2001.

Correction, that should be third down and TWENTY-eight to go.

I hereby accept my own five-yard penalty for obsessing.

Back to your regularly scheduled game.

-- Referee (striped.guy@the.sidelines.com), June 02, 2001.

Why would anybody be jealous of an old has-been like Cherri?

-- (Cherri is @ old, fat and .stale), June 02, 2001.

Better a has been than a neverwas and a never gonna be. You don't have enought time left in your life to do what I have done. neeneer neeneer neeneer~~~

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 02, 2001.

Here's a few nice pictures

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 02, 2001.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 02, 2001.

WOW you flew the SR Cherri? Had the great pleasure of seeing 2 SR's fly over the old Lockheed plant in Cali just before they were "retired". Still stands as the most impressive event/thing I have ever witnessed.

Unbelievable it was. To think those outdated boggles the mind. And that was at least 10 years ago.

-- (bush@twofaced.scum), June 02, 2001.

I got a chance to fly one once when I went to Beale AFB TDY while working on the KC-135. The Simulator understand, not the actual aircraft. I would have been shot if I got near one.

Taking c@re of.business, you aren't even smart enough to click the "no" circle on the Notify Me of Responses line when you post, and you presume to judge me badly?

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 02, 2001.

Ooops, I was working on the B-52-G at the time. I worked on the KC-135 on the east coast.

Gonna try this again.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 02, 2001.

I think of Cherri like my sister. We both have two brothers and loved our dads VERY much, and share the grief of losing them. We disagree just like siblings and envy the strengths we don't have that we see in the other. Psychotic? I don't think so, but let's look at the definition of psychosis: fundamental mental derangement [as paranoia] characterized by defective or lost contact with reality. Since I still think that there's SOMETHING of value in EVERY person, unless you show me otherwise, it seems that *I*'m the one with the psychosis.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 02, 2001.

TWEEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!

Automatic turnover for an obsessive triple post; a further 10-yard penalty for a further obsessive double post.

Any more infractions of this type will earn a harsh "delay of game" penalty.

-- Referee (striped.guy@the.sidelines.com), June 02, 2001.

No I don't think Cherri is psychotic, but I think you are, along with about 50 million Republicans.

-- (Repugligoons use @ politics. of personal destruction), June 02, 2001.

Republigoons, fuck you.

Cherri, the F4 is what I envy you for most. Got to watch them Droop Tailed Devils at work and a better killer you couldn't find. Definately best birds from my era.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), June 02, 2001.

Amazing! Although he usually has his head up his ass, I agree with Carlos on one thing... fuck you, Repugligoons!

-- (Is riff-raff finally @ coming. to his senses?), June 02, 2001.

Say what anon girlie?

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), June 02, 2001.

Carlo's I never realized what an unusual job I had at the time, The first time I dropped a nuke on Cuba I a=sat in the cockpit and though about all the children I would have killed in real life. It was one of those times when you are confronted with a conflict in your moral values and it took me some time to resolve it within myself.

I used to give check rides to the pilots and one, our wing comander who had bee a POW for 7 years in viet nam was in the sim. I gave him the most difficult check ride possible, one we sim techs had developed and practiced for months. He passed it and landed saely, when he got out he was soaked with sweat and told me, "If I had had a check ride like that before I went to VietNam I wouldn't have spent 7 years in a POW camp." He shook my hand and thanked me, It was one of the proudest moments of my life. We weren't doing them any favors by going easy on them, their lives were at stake. I wish I could remember his name.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 02, 2001.

What the hell are you talking about, ‘Check Ride’? I was sweating after that great lip wrap you applied to my cruise missile. I’ve always wondered what the devil you were doing in the BOQ men’s room? Anyway, thanks again for the Suck It Much experience…it really helped that I didn’t have to look at your face for too long, WHEW.

-- John McCain (blinded@by.fright), June 02, 2001.

No Cherri is not psychotic. I disagree with her politics, but besides that I think she is pretty cool.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), June 03, 2001.

Cherri has the same sort of mental fixation on Bush as the Doomers had on the end of the world. But other than that she is A-OK with me, and if you don't like what she posts, post something else yourself.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), June 03, 2001.

Thanks Unk. It's kinda pointless to post articles or my opinion when she plasters the world with propaganda during her every waking moment. She sacrifices quality for quantity and I can't keep up. I don't think all of us combined can.

Besides, I told her earlier this morning in another thread I would leave her alone.

-- (10.9.8@7.6), June 03, 2001.

Unk, live and let live is all fine and dandy when it comes to people's posts. But considering that Cherri slings a high volume of shit at other people's posts, no one -- especially Cherri -- should be surprised when a high volume of shit is fired back at hers. What goes around comes around, you know.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 03, 2001.

I figuered IT out.

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 03, 2001.

Well, don't keep us in suspense. Cough it up, troll.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 03, 2001.

Cool.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), June 03, 2001.

Thought so.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 03, 2001.

7 divided by 4 squared, my fellow troll.

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 03, 2001.

No troll here. Plenty of posts with my name on them -- you don't have to look hard to find them. You, on the other hand, are my own little personal leash-troll. Does daddy's little troll want walkies? Yes? Hmm???

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 03, 2001.

Wow, you've actually made a post or two with your name on them? Wow! This has never been done before. How many handles do you troll under?

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 03, 2001.

Cherri, cool stuff!

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 04, 2001.

"Wow, you've actually made a post or two with your name on them?"

I've made many posts with my name on them. Perhaps you should ask Ain't Gonna Happen about it. Oh, I forgot. He's not here any more. I hammered him into the ground.

"Wow! This has never been done before."

You appear to be easily impressed.

"How many handles do you troll under?"

I am not a troll. OTOH, you are an admitted troll. Perhaps the operant question should be "how many handles do YOU troll under?"

Now come here and get on your leash, troll.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 04, 2001.

Denial. This is sad.

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 04, 2001.

349 1/2 phony handles and 1 real one. How about you?

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 04, 2001.

Guesswork and baiting will get you nowhere. I'm no troll.

Now, if you'd like to discuss your own trollish habits, I'm all ears.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 05, 2001.

Your no troll? Your handle is making fun of another forumite. Of course your no troll. Everyone else is a troll, but YOU are above that right?

You are funny. Can we keep him/her?

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 05, 2001.

"Your no troll?"

Nope.

"Your handle is making fun of another forumite."

So's yours. What's your point?

"Of course your no troll."

Good. I'm pleased you were finally able to overcome your mistaken assumption.

"Everyone else is a troll, but YOU are above that right?"

I didn't say everyone else was a troll. I said that I'm not one, and that you are one. Nothing more. Have you got voices in your head, or are you just making up things you really, really, really wish I had said?

"You are funny."

Then you are easily amused in addition to being easily impressed.

"Can we keep him/her?"

If you're referring to me, yes. In fact, you are stuck with me.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 05, 2001.

And you are stuck with me. So you'd better get used to it.

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 05, 2001.

Ho hum. It's remarkable how your existence is wrapped up in following me around now. But even with that, you're nothing more than a minor annoyance. You know, I started out by disagreeing with and contradicting Ain't, but he's pretty much gone now. And after he split, I found other things to do.

You, OTOH, appear to be interested solely in following me around and letting me know you're there. Not much promise there, troll. A wad of gum on the sole of my shoe has as much career future as you. Do you think (now that you have publicly announced your intention to be my leash-troll) that you could at least try to disagree with me or contradict me? You know, at least put a little effort into your troll? Say "you're wrong" to me once in a while and try to show how you think I'm wrong? Come on, troll, give me some effort and forethought; don't be simply a mosquito buzzing aroung.

Otherwise, you're just going to look pathetic.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 06, 2001.

Oh don't flatter yourself. It takes about three seconds to spot one of your posts. Another four seconds to respond to it. And a little longer to try to figure out what you are blathering about. Not that anyone cares, but out of compassion to the less mentally fortunate it is a job that I have taken.

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 06, 2001.

BTW, it looks like Ain't is back. Better don your tinfoil helmet and tinfoil light saber and battle him/her.

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 06, 2001.

"Oh don't flatter yourself."

Your very existence is flattery enough. The mere fact that you follow me around and troll me is sufficient flattery such that I need not flatter myself. Thanks for the assist!

"It takes about three seconds to spot one of your posts."

Yes! The fact that I post "Already Done Happened" at the bottom of each of them should have helped you divine their source. A lesson well learned, troll. Very good. Now we will move on to big words and how to spell them.

"Another four seconds to respond to it."

Yes, of course it does, especially when you spell and punctuate so poorly, and when your posts are so devoid of content. Lack of effort and no time invested = poor results.

But I predict that you will be back very, very soon. You cannot help yourself. You absolutely must respond to me. I think I shall leave you some presents on other threads. Let's see if you will follow me there, too.

"And a little longer to try to figure out what you are blathering about."

I'm terribly sorry that my writing is over your head. Perhaps if you were to ask me questions on the items that you do not understand, then I might explain more fully. OTOH, if you persist in labeling things you do not understand as "blather," then I fear you shall never comprehend what I am saying. And you'll probably never figure out how traffic lights work (hint: red means stop, green means go). And you'll probably never get the hang of opening those child-proof caps on the bottles the nice pharmacist gives you. Nor will you ever understand that the unbridled consumption of snack foods is what has caused your butt to swell out of all proportion to the rest of your body.

Yes, asking questions can only help you. Admittedly, you don't understand a lot of things, but many people, myself included, stand ready to help you. Just ask! :)

"Not that anyone cares, but out of compassion to the less mentally fortunate it is a job that I have taken."

Hold on to that dream! Some day the kind folks at the rehab office may actually find a job for you! But until that day, you must continue to earnestly work on your job skills. Otherwise, you will never be able to get off the public dole.

"BTW, it looks like Ain't is back. Better don your tinfoil helmet and tinfoil light saber and battle him/her."

It takes no more than a baseball cap and a butter knife to take Ain't on. And considerably less than that to deal with you.

BTW, were you going to expend any effort on disagreeing with me, or did you simply want to be my punching bag? Either way is fine with me.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 07, 2001.

"Your very existence is flattery enough. The mere fact that you follow me around and troll me is sufficient flattery such that I need not flatter myself. Thanks for the assist! "

Trust me, I'm not following you around. When your odiferous body order offends me, I know your nearby.

"Yes! The fact that I post "Already Done Happened" at the bottom of each of them should have helped you divine their source. A lesson well learned, troll. Very good. Now we will move on to big words and how to spell them."

Which big words would you like spelling help with?

"Yes, of course it does, especially when you spell and punctuate so poorly, and when your posts are so devoid of content. Lack of effort and no time invested = poor results.

But I predict that you will be back very, very soon. You cannot help yourself. You absolutely must respond to me. I think I shall leave you some presents on other threads. Let's see if you will follow me there, too. "

You are not worth more than 4 seconds to respond. Let me try to illustrate this in a way you might be able to comprehend - Do you dress up all fancy to take the garbage to the the curb?

If I see you on another thread, I might reply to you. It depends how stupid you are acting there. I'm sure you will be following Ain't around though. Perhaps if you would type something interesting, other people would be interested in replying to you as well.

"I'm terribly sorry that my writing is over your head. Perhaps if you were to ask me questions on the items that you do not understand, then I might explain more fully. OTOH, if you persist in labeling things you do not understand as "blather," then I fear you shall never comprehend what I am saying. And you'll probably never figure out how traffic lights work (hint: red means stop, green means go). And you'll probably never get the hang of opening those child-proof caps on the bottles the nice pharmacist gives you. Nor will you ever understand that the unbridled consumption of snack foods is what has caused your butt to swell out of all proportion to the rest of your body.

Yes, asking questions can only help you. Admittedly, you don't understand a lot of things, but many people, myself included, stand ready to help you. Just ask! :) "

Thank you for illustrating what I meant about blather. In one paragraph you write about how your writing is over peoples' heads then proceed with some gibberish about the colors on a traffic light, pharmacy bottles, and your incessant appetite for junk food.

I understand that your were trying to insult me, but I have to wade through your blather to get to your point.

"BTW, were you going to expend any effort on disagreeing with me, or did you simply want to be my punching bag? Either way is fine with me."

There is not much to disagree with someone who just spends all of their waking hours following Ain't around, posting longwinded but dimwitted responses to him.

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 08, 2001.

What about people who follow Already Done Happened around and post nonsense? At least ADH's responses have substance; thought and research has gone into them (well, when one is refuting the rantings of Ain't, not much research is really required; of course, in the Land of Ain't, ANYTHING that requires the use of a brain cell or an original thought is "research"). Yours are just ..... drivel (or is that dribble?)

-- (pot@kettle.black), June 08, 2001.

Bringing out the sock puppets are we?

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 08, 2001.

"Trust me, I'm not following you around."

Ah, but you are. Now we can add "liar" to your pathetically short list of achievements.

"When your odiferous body order offends me, I know your nearby."

The word you are looking for is "odor." And would you really have me believe that you can smell people on the Internet? Worthless hyperbole.

"Which big words would you like spelling help with?"

I need no help with spelling. You, however, are missing such "gimme" words as "odor." Which big words do YOU need help with? (grin)

"You are not worth more than 4 seconds to respond."

Yet you manifestly take longer than four seconds to respond. It is beyond the realm of possibility that you can read, comprehend, compose and respond in only four seconds. More worthless hyperbole from the troll.

"Let me try to illustrate this in a way you might be able to comprehend - Do you dress up all fancy to take the garbage to the the curb?"

You might do better if you were to explain yourself, rather than attempting illustrations. I don't dress up to take out the garbage, but in your case, you're going to the banquet with nothing on but your dirty skivvies. You really ought to be better prepared if you're planning on taking me on, and you should put more effort into it, too. Otherwise, you're just my toy leash-troll, and I'll actually get enjoyment out of abusing you.

"If I see you on another thread, I might reply to you. It depends how stupid you are acting there."

"Stupid" being a relative term, I presume you'll simply respond when you feel like it. It would be difficult -- nay, impossible -- for me to behave more stupidly than you.

"I'm sure you will be following Ain't around though."

No, and we have covered this territory already. Now, I can go back to grading your posts (and I'm sure you remember how poorly you scored before), but I'm sure you don't want that. As I told you earlier, I post on a number of threads. Sometimes Ain't is there, but over the last couple of months, he hasn't been. Therefore, my numerous posts falling in that time period cannot have been due to Ain't's posting. Clear enough?

"Perhaps if you would type something interesting, other people would be interested in replying to you as well."

I get quite a few responses when I post. Perhaps you could ask Flint and Shadow about that. However, I don't post to be of interest to you. If you don't find my posts interesting, then don't bother with them. Some other persons do, and sometimes they respond.

"Thank you for illustrating what I meant about blather. In one paragraph you write about how your writing is over peoples' heads then proceed with some gibberish about the colors on a traffic light, pharmacy bottles, and your incessant appetite for junk food."

(Actually, I wrote about how my writing was over your head, not other peoples' heads. Poor reading on your part.) Yes, all of those being things you undoubtedly cannot understand. Even a child knows to ask questions when confronted with something he cannot understand, but that simple expedient appears to have eluded you. If a Cro-Magnon like yourself terms my writing "blather," that simply encourages me to keep it up. Cro-Magnons don't have very well developed reading skills, you see.

Obviously, your taste for reading material runs more to short stories than to novels, more to Reader's Digest than to Collier's, and more to billboards than to newspapers. Quality takes time, Bunky. You can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs, and you can't write well without using words.

"I understand that your were trying to insult me, but I have to wade through your blather to get to your point."

No. It is not 'wading through blather.' It is 'reading.' Engaging in it could only help you. And do bear in mind that 'reading' does not mean simply 'seeing the words on the page.' It means that in addition to understanding and comprehending what they say, both literally and in context.

I can help you with this if it is too hard for you. Which it appears to be.

"There is not much to disagree with someone who just spends all of their waking hours following Ain't around, posting longwinded but dimwitted responses to him."

Multiple errors, troll. Let's recap.

1) I don't spend all of my waking hours on the Net, let alone posting at Ain't.

2) The fact that you read and write poorly does not mean that an erudite reader and writer (such as myself) is long-winded.

3) My responses are not dimwitted -- quite the contrary.

4) There is plenty to respond to in my posts; you simply choose not to respond. Possibly because you know I'd embarrass you worse than I already am.

"Bringing out the sock puppets are we?"

Nope. I didn't post that. Don't you recognize my writing style? Besides, I know how to use ellipses correctly, and that writer apparently did not.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 08, 2001.

You got way too much time on your hands boy. Push away from the keyboard and try getting laid once in while, if you can.

-- Lay Down (on@the.couch), June 08, 2001.

ADH,

I am glad that I can be of ammusement to you (although I suspect that watching your next door neighbor mowing his lawn would also be highly amusing to you).

I do have to give you credit in that you do put a lot of thought and effort into all of your posts, which unfortunately I do not have the time to do right now, as I need to be getting to work.

Seeing that you took the time to respond to every one of my remarks, I will repay you the favor. You will have to wait anticipatingly though until tomorrow, unfortunately.

I will leave you with this: odiferous was a correct adjective to use in that sentence. Perhaps a bit redunant as I also used the word odor, but definately within the bounds of correct English grammar. Now I realize that your Elementary School Edition of Webster's Dictionary does not contain the word, but let us be frank, it does not contain an entire plethora of words. This could be why you have difficulty reading and understanding peoples' posts. You think they are making up words when in reality, they are only using words that only someone who made it past the 8th grade could understand. :-)

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 09, 2001.

"You got way too much time on your hands boy. Push away from the keyboard and try getting laid once in while, if you can."

Lay Down, I just got some nasty, noisy nooky from my busty main squeeze about 2 hours ago. That good enough for you? BTW, thanks for your interest in my satisfying and active sex life. I will be pleased to serve as an example for which you should strive.

"ADH, I am glad that I can be of ammusement to you (although I suspect that watching your next door neighbor mowing his lawn would also be highly amusing to you)."

I don't bother watching. As long as they keep up their lawns, my property value won't suffer. Besides, my neighbors don't mow their lawns. They, much like myself, retain lawn and gardening services to perform that function. Large houses, large lawns, better to hire a professional to do it.

BTW, the word you are looking for is "amusement." With one "m," not two.

"I do have to give you credit in that you do put a lot of thought and effort into all of your posts,"

Pah. Takes little thought or effort to deal with a blockhead like yourself. You make it too easy. If you would actually try to disagree with something I have said, and post evidence thereof, THEN I would have to put thought and effort into my posts. If you're going to troll me, then make it harder on me. You're nothing but morning calisthenics to me, Dudley. And I've got chunks of trolls like you in my stool.

"which unfortunately I do not have the time to do right now, as I need to be getting to work."

Begone with you then, foul and swarthy troll! Harsh labor awaits you in the mines! :)

"Seeing that you took the time to respond to every one of my remarks, I will repay you the favor. You will have to wait anticipatingly though until tomorrow, unfortunately."

Good attempt at adverb construction, troll, but "anticipatingly" is a rather tortured stretch of the language, much like that entire sentence. Would you like for me to show you some alternate constructions of that paragraph that would convey your meaning more eloquently?

"I will leave you with this: odiferous was a correct adjective to use in that sentence."

I know that. I was commenting on your incorrect use of the word "order" where you obviously meant "odor," and apparently you missed that -- twice. Further, you misused the word "your" in that sentence when the correct usage would be "you're." You obviously cannot find your own errors even when they are pointed out to you, dumbass.

Do not even think about trying to argue the English language with me, troll. You will lose.

"Perhaps a bit redunant as I also used the word odor, but definately within the bounds of correct English grammar."

You used the word "order," and that's not within the bounds of correct English grammar. That's within the bounds of a barely- literate, chronically-misspelling troll.

Also, in your immediate previous sentence, you misspelled "redundant" and "definitely." If you are going to try to defend your butchery of my mother tongue, then you really should try harder to spell correctly when you do it. Otherwise, you're going to come across as a sub-literate moron.

Oops! Too late!

"Now I realize that your Elementary School Edition of Webster's Dictionary does not contain the word, but let us be frank, it does not contain an entire plethora of words."

Oh, stop it, troll. My comment was directed at your misuse of the word "order." All response from you on that score is simply so much hot air.

Moreover, I don't use Webster's unless I am checking on American standard usage. For daily linguistic support, I rely on the the OED. Do you know what that is, troll?

Also, the expression "an entire plethora" is redundant. It is like saying "an aquatic fish" or "a liquid soup" or even "a foolish idiot." Please strive for greater accuracy in your posts, but do not use words unnecessarily. That would fall under the heading of "blather," and we wouldn't want any of that, would we?

Do try harder, Mr. Malaprop.

"This could be why you have difficulty reading and understanding peoples' posts. You think they are making up words when in reality, they are only using words that only someone who made it past the 8th grade could understand. :-)"

If you could use the right words in the first place, you wouldn't have to post desperate corrections in order to try to smear your opponents. You misused the word "order," and you don't even recognize it. BTW, you really shold have used the singular possessive "people's," rather than the plural possessive "peoples'" in that last sentence.

Here's a hint -- see if you can find where I objected to your use of the word "odiferous" in that post. My objection was obviously to the noun, not the adjective.

Pathetic, troll. You've tried to insult me, but your failure to recognize your own errors when I point them out to you has only made you look more desperate and more pitiful. And you compound your errors by including even more linguistic monstrosities and outright mistakes in your denials.

Acknowledge your errors, and I may choose to be merciful.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 09, 2001.

"...I know how to use ellipses correctly, and that writer apparently did not."

Please explain "ellipses" (?) and how they were not used correctly. (Genuine request; no sarcasm, not facetious.) Thanks.

-- posted as... (pot@kettle.black), June 09, 2001.

"Please explain "ellipses" (?) and how they were not used correctly. (Genuine request; no sarcasm, not facetious.) Thanks."

By all means, Anonymous Poster. Ellipses, sometimes also yclept "points of ellipsis," are to be rendered as three (no more, no less) evenly spaced periods. Most purists will insist that each period be set off by spaces, like this_._._._

Also, ellipses are formally used to indicate an omission in quoted matter, such as this:

"I'm gonna rip his arm off and beat him with it," shouted Kaboom, a member of the World Wrestling Federation. "I'm gonna tear his freaking head off, and . . . I'll chew on his intestines, and he'll be begging me for mercy by then!"

Ellipses may be followed by punctuation if the included punctuation was part of the original matter that is being quoted, and if the included punctuation helps to clarify matters. It is acceptable to use four ellipses so long as you are indicating that you have left out the remainder of the sentence. The fourth ellipsis serves as the terminal period for the quoted sentence. In all cases, the included punctuation, like the ellipses themselves, must fall within your quotation marks.

One may use a line-centered set of ellipses to indicate the omission of one or more complete paragraphs from quoted material, but this is rarely seen, and even then only in academic work.

Colloquial usage permits ellipses to be used in the place of a dash even when no quoted material is involved. Many grammarians feel that ellipses indicate an even longer pause than a dash (commas being linguistic speed bumps, dashes being linguistic 15 MPH speed limit signs and ellipses being linguistic "yield" signs). Your use of ellipses, Anonymous Poster, would have been both colloquially and linguistically correct had you used only three points of ellipsis (instead of five) and had you placed spaces between them.

My troll's attempt to paint you as a sock puppet of mine fails utterly, as I would know better how to use ellipses, and because I certainly would not misuse them.

You've actually made a rather common error with a somewhat uncommon punctuation item. It's nothing to be embarrassed by, and you did the right thing by asking for more information.

I can recommend an excellent and entertaining grammar book for you; it is "The Deluxe Transitive Vampire -- The Ultimate Handbook of Grammar for the Innocent, the Eager and the Doomed." The book, by Karen Elizabeth Gordon, is an excellent and highly enjoyable text which really should be used in American high schools. In fact, were it so used, I would venture to say that my troll would be a better reader and writer than he is today.

If you would like more information on the book, the please feel free to ask.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 09, 2001.

Like I said boy, you’ve got way too much time on your hands. I doubt that any sexual activity has come your way in some time…..your hand don’t count. That’s cool. Some guys like the ladies and some like to hear themselves talk. Whatever spins your bottle word boy. Like most liberals, you would rather talk about it than actually do it!

-- Lay Down (on@the.couch), June 09, 2001.

"Like I said boy, you’ve got way too much time on your hands."

Yawn. And way too much intelligence and way too much education. Sniping at me from the shadows, troll, does you no good. I am your superior in more ways than one. Bow to me.

"I doubt that any sexual activity has come your way in some time…..your hand don’t count."

Your doubt is irrelevant. I got some this morning. She has big ta- tas. Jealous?

BTW, you incorrectly used ellipses there. Please try again, and this time, read my post on the correct usage of ellipses before hitting the SUBMIT key.

"That’s cool. Some guys like the ladies and some like to hear themselves talk."

And some people have the time and skill to do both. Like me.

"Whatever spins your bottle word boy."

If you're proud of your shared English shortcomings with my troll, then that's fine. However, you should both be ashamed that you can't read and write better. Perhaps you two are a good argument for school vouchers, n'est ce pas?

"Like most liberals, you would rather talk about it than actually do it!"

You moron, I am not a liberal. I have never voted Democrat in my life. Further, you should notice that my initial post on this thread observed that Cherri should expect to get the kind and amount of shit she dishes out -- hardly a liberal position.

We could talk about my political positions vis-a-vis your own, but that would probably be a waste of time, you having already shown your colors. Like most conservative ignoramuses, you would rather make up accusations than actually find anything on your opponent. Labeling me a liberal when you don't actually know where I fall is just an example of how ignorant, hopeless and foolish you actually are.

Be sure to hurry back for more abuse. You too, leash-troll. I can take on a platoon of you shitheads without help.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 09, 2001.

Thank you, ADH. Found the book at amazon.com and will click the "purchase" button as soon as I am finished here :-)

I had no idea they were called "ellipses". I was a bit confused as to the manner in which to convey a "pause" and your description via "speed limit" was wonderfully helpful. (I will further remember to count and space at all times!)

How does one convey "drifting off" at the end of a sentence? Is it the same/similar?

-- posted as (pot@kettle.black), June 09, 2001.

Labeling me a liberal when you don't actually know where I fall is just an example of how ignorant, hopeless and foolish you actually are.

I have observed over the past few months that these types seem to label anyone who doesn't fall in strict lock-step with their "train of thought" (such that it is) gets labeled as a "liberal". It doesn't seem to matter where one actually sits on the political spectrum. (It also doesn't seem to matter that their "train of thought" seems to consistently contradict itself depending on the subject matter.)

It's quite enjoyable to watch you "work", ADH. I don't always agree with your "philosphies", but you are impressive and I have been learning a great deal from your style.

-- previously posted as (pot@kettle.black), June 09, 2001.

"philosphies"?

Wanna buy an 'O'?

-- Lay Down (on@the.couch), June 09, 2001.

Ah, yes; sue me, shoot me, string me up by my thumbs. A TYPO!!!! Oh woe is me!!! How will I EVER go on?

Thank heavens you're here to point out my failings. Can I now be secure in the knowledge that you will follow me around to be my Personal Spell Checker? (There's no money in it; only the satisfaction of knowing you NEVER make a typo and you are thus a Much Superior Anonymous Poster.)

BTW, don't you think ADH did a rather complete job of handing you your ass here? I certainly thought so. I was quite impressed.

-- posting on this thread as (pot@kettle.black), June 09, 2001.

"Thank you, ADH. Found the book at amazon.com and will click the "purchase" button as soon as I am finished here :-)"

Glad you found it. I hope you like it; I have found it tremendously entertaining, as well as educational.

"your description via "speed limit" was wonderfully helpful. (I will further remember to count and space at all times!)"

Thank you! I have taught English at the college level, but I have far more lucrative work now. However, when I taught, I strove to make the experience painless, edifying and fun for my students, who found the "road signs" analogy easy to remember and use.

"How does one convey "drifting off" at the end of a sentence? Is it the same/similar?"

This may sound evasive, but it isn't meant to be. I simply avoid the "drifting off" device. I just don't like it personally, and I advise against it. To me, it is visual evidence of something not thought out to its conclusion.

"I have observed over the past few months that these types seem to label anyone who doesn't fall in strict lock-step with their "train of thought" (such that it is) gets labeled as a "liberal". It doesn't seem to matter where one actually sits on the political spectrum."

I have also observed this phenomenon. It appears that those individuals who use that argument believe that all conservatives are EXACTLY alike and that all liberals are EXACTLY alike. Using that sterling logic, all whites must be EXACTLY alike, as must all blacks, all Jews, all immigrants, all women, all teenagers and all (insert your favorite demographic group here).

This is how prejudice starts, and it is nothing more than an excuse for not thinking.

Of course, our partners in lockstep haven't yet figured out how to properly classify a black immigrant Jewish teenage girl, but as soon as they either meet one, hear a rumor about one or read an unsubstantiated post on an Internet message board, they will be able to tell you EXACTLY how every black immigrant Jewish teenage girl in the US behaves. And you'd better agree with them, or else you will have proven that you're a liberal.

Yeah, right. :)

"(It also doesn't seem to matter that their "train of thought" seems to consistently contradict itself depending on the subject matter.)"

Well, consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, you know. :)

"It's quite enjoyable to watch you "work", ADH. I don't always agree with your "philosphies", but you are impressive and I have been learning a great deal from your style."

I appreciate the kind words, Pot-Kettle. You certainly don't have to agree with me, or even like me, in order to learn something from me. And perhaps you will teach me something in return, hmm?

"philosphies"? Wanna buy an 'O'?"

You failed to observe that I, too, made a typo and left out a letter earlier today. It is a "u," and you will receive bonus points if you can find it and point us all to it.

"Ah, yes; sue me, shoot me, string me up by my thumbs. A TYPO!!!! Oh woe is me!!! How will I EVER go on?"

There's a difference between typos and outright spelling errors. And a further difference between those items and utter malapropisms. But don't expect our SubGenii to catch on.

"Thank heavens you're here to point out my failings. Can I now be secure in the knowledge that you will follow me around to be my Personal Spell Checker? (There's no money in it; only the satisfaction of knowing you NEVER make a typo and you are thus a Much Superior Anonymous Poster.)"

Yes, it would be different if I were chasing my troll around and correcting his spelling, punctuation and grammar. But I don't have to, as he comes to me. Our thread-trolls do not recognize this critical difference. Our gain, don't you think?

"BTW, don't you think ADH did a rather complete job of handing you your ass here? I certainly thought so. I was quite impressed."

I can hardly wait to see what he says!

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 09, 2001.

Oh my, this is an interesting thread that features some very fragile egos it would appear. For the most part, we are all strangers to each other here on this isolated way station in cyber space. Why then would it be so important for someone to ‘protect’ his or her made-up persona? I’ve noticed this personality flaw in more than one poster, but ‘Tarzan’ and ‘ADH’ seem to stick out from the crowd.

They both feature unusually lengthy and detailed retorts to any and all that might question the validity of their wisdom. I find myself trying to picture in my minds eye what kind of people they are in real life. Why is it so important for them to ‘be somebody’ on an obscure Internet forum? Pompous as they may seem, I’m certain that both of them are quite different ‘in the flesh’. At least I would hope that is so.

-- So (cr@t.es), June 09, 2001.

Socrates, it's fun to watch. :)

-- helen wants her points (found@the.missing.u), June 09, 2001.

Dragging another poster into a long, drawn out flame-fest he hasn't been involved in displays a rather pathological personality. Why is it so important for you to make a point by attacking another poster who had nothing to do with this thread?

-- Lay Down (on@the.couch), June 09, 2001.

Yes Helen, indeed it is!

-- So (cr@t.es), June 09, 2001.

OK Daddy, I've decided I want walkies.

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 10, 2001.

Will it be you or your sock puppet?

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 10, 2001.

Socrates, pleased to see you here. I think.

"Oh my, this is an interesting thread that features some very fragile egos it would appear."

Perhaps. I prefer to let the egos fall where they may.

"For the most part, we are all strangers to each other here on this isolated way station in cyber space. Why then would it be so important for someone to ‘protect’ his or her made-up persona?"

You are presuming that all online personas are made-up, and that's an unwarranted and unsupported assumption on your part.

"I’ve noticed this personality flaw in more than one poster, but ‘Tarzan’ and ‘ADH’ seem to stick out from the crowd."

(shrug) You can claim it is a personality flaw, but the fact of the matter is that you don't know whether my online personality is indicative of mt IRL personality or not. So what you're doing is engaging in guesswork, and coming to conclusions based on that unsubstantiated guesswork. Wrong in my case, Socrates. I'll let Apeman speak for himself.

"They both feature unusually lengthy and detailed retorts to any and all that might question the validity of their wisdom."

We also appear to support our points quite well, with citations, proofs, and links in many cases. So does Flint. So does Little Nipper. So do several other people on this board. In my case, I'm a consummate writer, so I write lengthy, detailed posts. Perhaps the same is true of Tarzan.

"I find myself trying to picture in my minds eye what kind of people they are in real life. Why is it so important for them to ‘be somebody’ on an obscure Internet forum?"

Why is it so important for you to know? It appears to me that you're more interested in to whom you might be responding than in what those persons happen to be saying. And unless I miss my guess, when you're online, you're matching thoughts with thoughts, not personality with personality. That being the case, Socrates, it is far more worthwhile to concentrate on what's being written than to concentrate on who's behind the distant keyboard.

"Pompous as they may seem, I’m certain that both of them are quite different ‘in the flesh’. At least I would hope that is so."

You'll probably never find out. So if I were you, I wouldn't worry about it too much. In fact, if I were you, I'd focus instead on the content of the posts here, and not on the personalities.

Hello, Helen. I don't believe we have met. I'm Already Done Happened, and I'm pleased to make your acquaintance. Seeing as how you claim to have found the missing "u," would you kindly tell everyone where you found it?

Lay Down, you make an excellent point.

"Dragging another poster into a long, drawn out flame-fest he hasn't been involved in displays a rather pathological personality. Why is it so important for you to make a point by attacking another poster who had nothing to do with this thread?"

I was thinking the same thing. Thank you for articulating it.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 10, 2001.

"OK Daddy, I've decided I want walkies."

You are already receiving walkies. You waited too long to respond, so I made the decision without your input. The same thing happens when I take the cat in to the vet. She gets three seconds to get into the carrier, and if she fails to do so, I grab her by the scruff and drop her into it.

Does your scruff feel kinda sore right now? How about your ass?

"Will it be you or your sock puppet?"

You always get direct and focused attention from me, leash-troll. I never employ sock puppets, animal by-products, cereals or fillers. What you get from me is 100% directed abuse, straight from the source. No preservatives, no additives, and no sock puppets.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 10, 2001.

seventy-three

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 10, 2001.

Hi, Already Done Happened! The missing "u" may be found in the following sentence:

"BTW, you really shold have used the singular possessive "people's," rather than the plural possessive "peoples'" in that last sentence."

Please put my points on my frequent flyer mileage plan so I can make it to the next gathering. :)

-- helen (afraid@to.get.a.real.one), June 10, 2001.

Leash-troll --

"seventy-three"

To which I say "zero."

Helen, --

"Hi, Already Done Happened! The missing "u" may be found in the following sentence: "BTW, you really shold have used the singular possessive "people's," rather than the plural possessive "peoples'" in that last sentence."

Good catch, Helen. That's right where it was.

"Please put my points on my frequent flyer mileage plan so I can make it to the next gathering. :)"

How about thumbtacks instead? They're awfully pointy. :)

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 10, 2001.

No thank you to pointy thumbtacks, Already Done Happened. I have a supply of them stored next to pointy sewing needles, pointy fish hooks, and some fairly pointy bullets. These are stored near my half-ton of rice, which serves as a pointed reminder that this is not, after all, a refugee camp. Never mind the points. Please forgive one typo of my own in the future.

-- helen (already@done.bought.that), June 10, 2001.

Helen, you may purchase one of my "typo indulgences" - LOL!

-- Pope Jammy (jammin@with.jammy), June 10, 2001.

Unleashed troll,

Ninty-two

-- Joey wasn't the only one in the cab (who@smelled.funny), June 11, 2001.

Leash-troll --

"Ninty-two"

You mean, of course, "ninety-two." And my response, once again, is "zero."

Come on, boy (whistles). Let's go walkies again.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), June 12, 2001.