Re: 707 Roll.

["FIRETEK" <firetech(change-the-ch-to-k)@telus.net>]

In line (again).

"I brive a dus" <alarminstall@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1169356049.549173.158130@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> Well if you google it you'll understand why today's flamefest is
> annoying at best compared to that flamefest masterpiece of years past.
> There was always something new to fight about but you guys are
> rehashing shit that's 6 years old.

"Flames" usually involve lies, innuendo and other nasty shit.



> Yes. When it involves a company in their jurisdiction I certainly
> expect it as should the taxpayers of that state.

I think Frank found out "different" too.  They don't give a shit.



> Which kills the quality of a good net brawl.

Some of us would rather not go there.



> And when he did nothing happened to him which makes it even sillier for
> some to claim they can harm him now that he doesn't offer monitoring.

I haven't seen anyone here claim "they harmed his business", except Bass.



> Nobody is doing any kissing up.

And if he's got lipstick on his ass and it happens to be your shade, you're
going to deny that too, right?  :)

> Robert has called me an asshole and I
> have called him an asshole. How many more times should we exchange
> those greetings before it becomes old? We've been at it for 8yrs and
> exchanging insults has accomplished nothing.

Ummmm...  I wouldn't say that.  For every "newbie" that posts into the
group, it would be nice for someone to point out the people to avoid.  Bass
posts here for one reason.  Should he be given "special treatment" because
he happens to advocate for DIY in a forum of security professionals?  I
think (in a large part) he gets what he deserves.  As you sow, so shall ye
reap.


> Nothing has or will change. Does that mean I am fishing buddies with
> him because we don't exchange insults? Which one of the fucksticks here
> decided that for me?

Oh please.  The "kissy-kissy-make-nice-to-Bass-show" will continue after
these messages...



> See this is where you are wrong. His posts are always a target, and at
> times rightfully so,

Really?  Well, I do agree.  His posts usually have a "target", but
"rightfully so"?  I don't think so.

>  but there are people who search for his posts just
> to fight.

I agree.  And there are people who question his veracity as well.  Bass
seems to think asking for proof is a "personal attack" or a prelude to "a
fight".  Do you think so too?

> Hell there are people, myself included, who tracked him to
> other newsgroups. Now he's no saint by any means, and caused more than
> his share of turmoil here, BUT is he really wrong on 100% of what he
> says?

Like I said the ratio's about 8 or 9 to one.

> Have you ever seen anyone agree with him that didn't have the
> last name Campbell?

Yes, I have.  Frank's agreed with him.

> Yes Robert Bass made his bed but how many here
> check his sheets 10 times before they check their own?

I wouldn't go near Bass' bed for a million dollars.



> Frank's been singing the same shit for years. So has Robert. It's like
> I said, the material is OLD. The record is broken. How many times do we
> need to read about 737's, BBB reports, credit checks, licensing board
> hearings, and calls to suppliers?

How about as many times as Bass brings it up?  Check all the posts in the
last few months.  You should be directing this statement at Bass, not me or
Frank (Olson).


> Contrary to whatever they may post about their conquests I am certain
> the cure for what ails both of them is a piece of tail (preferably not
> each others but given their conversations one could mistaken them for
> married).

I know for a fact that Frank doesn't swing that way.


> Yes he's an expert at posting absurd accusations just like many of us
> but it's easy to tell when he's posting bullshit and when he's posting
> fact.

Not to many newbies (like myself).  Frank actually suggested I have a look
at the group.  I did for several months but didn't post any responses.  And
like Frank, I thought Bass was getting a raw deal at first.  Frank sent me
some links and I spent some time Googling.



>
> Now if the guy that emailed you was a guy who one of your employees was
> annoying via the internet and late night drunk dials wouldn't you, as
> the owner of the business, become concerned at how your company is
> being viewed?

This is a Newsgroup.  Now if that employee was posting such nonsense on _my
time_, I certainly would.  If he also referenced the company I would also be
a tad concerned, but not overly much.  I would think the people we hire have
some common sense and won't use their real names or post company
information.

> Imagine finding out that one of your employees has a
> psychological disorder and an issue with alcohol?