Nick, the idiot wand is at it again,

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gluck

"What a hacker who has been officially expelled from the association and banned from the message board is able to post can hardly be considered private or privileged by anyone able to operate more than one brain cell at a time."



Now I am confused. Has Mr. Lott been expelled too?

Absolutely not.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by klott

I posted wand's Pm, because he is no longer a member,so I don't believe the rules apply, never the less, if requested by those in authority, I will remove the PM. But if you want to talk about balanced, why do you not get upset when a non-member,(wand) post lies about a member,(lott)? Can it possibly be that your emotions, are clouding your judgement? It's no secret, that you like wand, and dislike me.

Ken I have never said I do not like you and have no opinion on that. I do not like some of the things you have said about me many far from nice.
Please send me the lies that Raymond has said about you I did not see them and you are stepping over the line as you too have said things about me that most certainly are not true.
To say Raymond is not a member of NACHI is correct but does that say we should treat non members and different then members.
Going back to my original statement I see nothing wrong with your posting Raymond's letter .
( Your and I and many others have posted other persons letters)
What I have difficulty understanding how some get upset from one person posting a received email and ignoring others when we have done the same thing.
Far from balanced way of handling things.
all the best Ken...Cookie

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Whatever is left of him when the courts are through you can disparage and humiliate to your heart's content.

James can you tell me why you wish to make a post that has no proof other then a useless bit of hear say information.
These are the sort of things that do absolutely no good for the NACHI association.
I am so sure you are incorrect that I am will to cover a small bet from you of ten dollars at ten to one odds my $100;00 and I will donated the $10;00 I win from you to the NACHI charity and My $100;00 to the NACHI Charity
..Cookie

6 months limit Sept first 2008 I will give it to NACHI

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by rcooke

James can you tell me why you wish to make a post that has no proof other then a useless bit of hear say information.

I can, but I won't.

I do not have the plaintiff's permission to post the information he provided me.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by jbushart

I can, but I won't.

I do not have the plaintiff's permission to post the information he provided me.

Gee NACHI looses again James does not want to see our Charity get money from Him.
I do not see why you need Joe Farsetta's permision to make a bet with me.
...Cookie

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by rcooke

Gee NACHI looses again James does not want to see our Charity get money from Him.
I do not see why you need Joe Farsetta's permision to make a bet with me.
...Cookie

You should be very careful whose name(s) you bring in to your nonsensical posts, Roy. From what I am understanding, you are not far from the litigious fate of your hapless, brain dead buddy.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by jbushart

You should be very careful whose name(s) you bring in to your nonsensical posts, Roy.
From what I am understanding, you are not far from the litigious fate of your hapless, brain dead buddy.

Sorry James I thought we where talking about a small wager.
Thanks for your concerns I am a big boy and do stand behind all my posts .
Not Nice the things you say about other people but that is your method.

...Cookie

nonsensical
Date: 1614 1 a: words or language having no meaning or conveying no intelligible ideas b (1): language, conduct, or an idea that is absurd or contrary to good sense (2): an instance of absurd action2 a: things of no importance or value : trifles b: affected or impudent conduct <took no nonsense from subordinates>

[klott]

Originally Posted by jbushart

What a hacker (Wand) who has been officially expelled from the association and subsequently banned from the message board is able to post can hardly be considered private or privileged by anyone able to operate more than one brain cell at a time.

Carry on, Mr. Lott.

There is nothing in the ethics code that protects non-members with this slug's record of activities conducted with the intent to bring harm upon our members. Whatever is left of him when the courts are through you can disparage and humiliate to your heart's content.

I don't know if that's possible, he has done such a good job himself, he is a tough act to follow, but, maybe he can go to Minnesota, and join up with that org. I heard they are smuggling self inflated devices, over the border. Of course, I have no evidence, it is just hearsay for now.

[Nick Gromicko]

I think that if you are going to call someone an idiot, you should do it in a forum where he can respond.

[George A. H. Luck]

"I think that if you are going to call someone an idiot, you should do it in a forum where he can respond."

HEAR, HEAR !

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

I think that if you are going to call someone an idiot, you should do it in a forum where he can respond.

This particular idiot has been expelled from our membership and banned from our message board.

The forum you are referring to will have to be either with Hannigan's hooligans or over at Mike O'Handjob's obscure little space on the internet.

[George A. H. Luck]

"This particular idiot has been expelled from our membership and banned from our message board."

That's darned nice of you James. For a minute there we thought you were talking about Ray Wand. Nice of you to extend the olive branch even if in an oblique way.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

George I find it so sad, to see some, who are gloating so much about Raymond being gone .
I think they should hang their heads in shame.
You would think Raymond had destroyed a bus load of people, the way they seem to carry on.
Yes Ray was wrong, but no more wrong then many others have been.
Most members had no idea what rule he had broke and when shown, many did not see how he had broke that rule.
He has done more to help this industry then many of the nay sayers.
It is unfortunate saner heads had not prevailed .
This defiantly should have and could have been handled much better.
Many NACHI members will loose all the great posts Raymond would have made and they also have lost all the ones he had made previously.
It sure has not worked out as an improvement for NACHI.
Yes I am a friend of Raymond's and No I have not lost my reasoning.
...Cookie

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by rcooke

Yes Ray was wrong,
...Cookie

Correct.

And the remedy was offered to correct the wrong....
and it was offered over and over....

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

Ditto.

Yes he did say a lot of things better left unsead.
But I can understand Rays response when I saw how many jumped on him and continued to poke and make fun of him.
I expect you might have responded even more strong then he has.

...Cookie