Re: A little more about Amanda, my new *flame*

On 1 Dec 2003 21:17:32 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (amanda) wrote:

>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (bob) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> amanda panda, who said she was never going to respond to me again,
>> wrote:
>> 
>> > bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wroteL
>> > > On 29 Nov 2003 14:49:31 -0800, amanda panda wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (bob) wrote:
>> > > >> amanda panda wrote:
>> > > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bob) wrote:
>> > > >> > > amanda wrote some more stuff. I'd include it but ...
>> > > >> > 
>> > > >> >  Include it bobbee boy, instead of lying. 
>> > > >> 
>> > > >> Context, slow one, context.  I was referring to the fact that I didn't
>> > > >> include any of the words you had written in your recent post.
>> > > >> 
>> > > >
>> > > >Then, no need to display my email account. Do you even understand your
>> > > >own context.
>> > > 
>> > > You don't make much sense.
>> > 
>> >   What was your intention was displaying my email address to the ngs
>> > groups I never knew existed?  It couldn't be good.
>> 
>> My newsreader does that automatically. If you'd like me to remove your
>> email address when I flame you I will. Just ask! That covers my
>> intentions (or lack thereof) regarding your email address. 
>
> What's the point of asking you to remove when you already initiated
>the flame in those ngs too. 

If you'd like, I will have google purge the posts from their database.
It might take me a while to get around to it but I will do it if you
ask. I always do this if asked and I don't even expect wild sex though
... it'd be appreciated. Are you cute?

>Have you ever seen my posts in those
>groups for you to flame me in those groups? May eeb 

Do you talk like this?

>there was one to
>Ilya's post long time ago, when I stumbled in there.  Not that I read
>any more lines from his post than up to where I cut it off to say what
>I said.
>
>BTW, I agree with you on your comment to hanson, saying that Ilya
>would have sent him an email if he were a female. I am sure you knwow
>why I agree.

I'm not sure I know. Ilya is an OK guy deep down where it counts. If I
needed his ear he'd be there for me. I hose on him without mercy but I
respect him more than most people I know.

>> alt.thanatos - I've been neglecting the group for years
> 
>Years or days? Too much suger from pecan pie blurring your thinking? 

Years. It was a fairly active group until I chased away a bunch of the
charter posters several years ago.
 
>> I don't recall copying alt.angst. You seem to have taken your bobee
>> crusade there.
>> 
>> alt.romance - seemed fitting. You are looking for love, aren't you?
>
> What are you smoking now?   You were the one who included alt.romance
>when you initiated the thread.

Yes, and?

>It's OK to look for love even when you are already married.  Extra
>love is not going to harm you.

Are you married?

>> > This is it. I am really p***ed off 
>> 
>> That's a bummer. Take a few deep breaths.
> 
>It seems you have picked up some breathing meditation. Good for you. 

I went through my "new age" period the latter half of the summer of
'81. "must have been the roses"

>> > This is it. No more response from me.
>> 
>> I remember reading a similar statement yesterday.
> 
> It became very entertaining since yesterday, and more so today, to
>watch hanson and you getting defensive. *That* poem really helped.

I'm not sure what you mean. You seem to be confusing explaining
certain things to you (that we probably both feel shouldn't be
required) with being defensive.