Snake-oil merchants and the u.r.a. lynch mob.
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message

Well, if you equate "a predictable response from the same gaggle of
familiar names" with being a lynch mob. To me the term "lynch mob"
implies a group conspiring to destroy their victim, and I haven't seen
that, or anything close, here.

You are being a little *literal* here - in this context the 'lynch mob'
seeks only to destroy the victim's reputation and/or possibly their future
trading prospects.

I wasn't being that literal! I'm more than happy to include destroying
someone's reputation or trading prospects within the phrase "destroy their
victim". But I stand by what I said, I haven't noticed a "lynch mob" on this
ng.

I have made my own views clear, but I always think there's more than a
little hint of jealousy involved when the 'snake oil squealers' see how
easily their 'target' can shake silly big money out of minted idiots'
pockets!

So are you suggesting that we should all keep our views about snake oil
products quiet because saying what we think might damage the snake-oil
merchant's reputation or trading prospects? really? I didn't know you cared
about the Russ Andrews of the world so much! I can't say I'd lose any sleep
if any of them went out of business, though I seriously doubt that comments
made on ura would ever make any noticeable dent in their profits.

Same thing with Bill Gates - even my sister in law's American husband
hates him and to my knowledge they've never met!

You mean that they are both Americans, yet have never met? Amazing, and in
such a small country too! ;-)

Actually I have quite a bit more time for Bill Gates than I do the Russ
Andrews of this world. You may not think much of Microsoft's products, and
be unhappy with their monopolistic tendencies (though in my view Apple are
worse in that respect). But at least Microsoft's software does what it says
on the tin, the sales pitch isn't based on hocus-pocus and duping the poor
sods who fall for it.

David.

Looser does playing to the gallery
 

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message

Well, if you equate "a predictable response from the same gaggle of
familiar names" with being a lynch mob. To me the term "lynch mob"
implies a group conspiring to destroy their victim, and I haven't seen
that, or anything close, here.

You are being a little *literal* here - in this context the 'lynch mob'
seeks only to destroy the victim's reputation and/or possibly their
future
trading prospects.

I wasn't being that literal! I'm more than happy to include destroying
someone's reputation or trading prospects within the phrase "destroy their
victim". But I stand by what I said, I haven't noticed a "lynch mob" on
this
ng.

I have made my own views clear, but I always think there's more than a
little hint of jealousy involved when the 'snake oil squealers' see how
easily their 'target' can shake silly big money out of minted idiots'
pockets!

So are you suggesting that we should all keep our views about snake oil
products quiet because saying what we think might damage the snake-oil
merchant's reputation or trading prospects? really? I didn't know you
cared
about the Russ Andrews of the world so much! I can't say I'd lose any
sleep
if any of them went out of business, though I seriously doubt that
comments
made on ura would ever make any noticeable dent in their profits.

Same thing with Bill Gates - even my sister in law's American husband
hates him and to my knowledge they've never met!

You mean that they are both Americans, yet have never met? Amazing, and in
such a small country too! ;-)

Actually I have quite a bit more time for Bill Gates than I do the Russ
Andrews of this world.


I sincerely doubt either of them would give a **** if they knew, but I love
the way you start a new thread with your reply to my post - real creepy
that!

Looser does playing to the gallery
 

"Keith G" wrote

but I love the way you start a new thread with your reply to my post -
real creepy that!


There was a very simple reason for it, Outlook Express (yes, a piece of
Microsoft software!) wouldn't let me post it in the original thread. It does
this sometimes when I've posted often to the same thread. Since the subject
matter had drifted well away from the original title, it seemed to make
sense to post it under a new title.

I'm sorry if this seems "creepy" to you.

David.

Looser does playing to the gallery
 

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote

but I love the way you start a new thread with your reply to my post -
real creepy that!


There was a very simple reason for it, Outlook Express (yes, a piece of
Microsoft software!) wouldn't let me post it in the original thread. It
does this sometimes when I've posted often to the same thread. Since the
subject matter had drifted well away from the original title, it seemed to
make sense to post it under a new title.

I'm sorry if this seems "creepy" to you.



Sorry to say without that explanation it did. I've had the same thing happen
a couple of times with OE but I always put in a mention to explain why I had
replied to a post elsewhere other than appending to it to save confusion.