Re: Regarding BARD

Sat, 12 Aug 1995 03:41:18 GMT

In article <40av9l$>, Dave Keeny <> wrote:
>Personally, I am not bothered by Bard's posts or his sense of humor.
>Some of his posts, IMO, *are* humorous -- but, then, I have a somewhat
>bent sense of humor. Others have posted irreverent articles here,
>poking fun at the subject matter and at people who *appear* at times
>to take things a bit too seriously, without stirring up so much
>animosity. I guess it's the frequency and the in-your-face content
>of his posts that bother many of this group's readers. I understand
>that; I just don't react the same way.
>My unsolicited two cents? If he annoys you, use your kill file or other
>filter. Most newsreaders have this feature. If you can't, then just don't
>read his posts or the followups, and don't followup yourself (followups
>complaining about Bard's posts or making snappy rejoinders outnumber Bard's
>own posts by probably 3:1). Look into forming a moderated group -- there
>is a FAQ available in news.answers.
>(Also, sending E-mail to those who have responded to Bard's posts asking
>them to stop, and thanking them for their cooperation in the matter,
>is a little presumptuous and *not* a little irritating in itself, P.N.).
>Maybe I'm alone in not being bothered by this guy's posts, but those who
>are bothered have ways to deal with it.
> (preferred)

I must admit I'm usually not bothered by people who don't like
my posts, but Phil's activity has really begun to irk me.

I guess it's because I can't fathom it.

Why is he so obsessed with censoring me?

I mean, is anyone really threatened by my satanic verses?

Perhaps he sees me as a higher species and resents me on a primal
level he doesn't understand himself.

A resentment, no doubt, precisely of the same type experienced by
the mighty Australopithecine upon the advent of Homo habilis.

A harbinger of his own demise...

A changing of the guard...

Deja vu all over again....