From: Glen Closson (glen_closson@earthlink.net)
Date: Thu Feb 23 2006 - 15:46:00 PST
Sound familiar?
>How many listmembers does it take to change a lightbulb?
>
>One to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been
>changed.
>
>Fourteen to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the
>light bulb could have been changed differently.
>
>Seven to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs.
>
>Seven more to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing
>light bulbs.
>
>Five to flame the spell checkers.
>
>Three to correct spelling/grammar flames.
>
>Six to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" ...
>
>Another six to condemn those six as stupid.
>
>Fifteen to claim experience in the lighting industry and give the correct
>spelling.
>
>Nineteen to post that this group is not about light bulbs and to please
>take this discussion to a lightbulb (or light bulb) forum.
>
>Eleven to defend the posting to the group saying that we all use light
>bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this group.
>
>Thirty six to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior,
>where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for
>this technique and what brands are faulty.
>
>Seven to post URLs where one can see examples of different light bulbs.
>
>Four to post that the URLs were posted incorrectly and then post the
>corrected URL.
>
>Three to post about links they found from the URLs that are relevant to
>this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group.
>
>Thirteen to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including
>all headers and signatures, and add "Me too"
>
>Five to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot
>handle the light bulb controversy.
>
>Four to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"
>
>Thirteen to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions
>about light bulbs."
>
>Three to tell a funny story about their cat and a light bulb.
>
>AND
>
>One group lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now with
>something unrelated they found at snopes.com<about:blank> and start it all over again!
>
>
-----Original Message-----
>From: Bruce Kalin <convoy@mtaofnj.us>
>Sent: Feb 23, 2006 3:09 PM
>To: Military Vehicles Mailing List <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
>Subject: Re: [MV] *SPAM* [MV] history - flame on shields are up with new anti-matter accessories - 1945 Marines raise the flag on Mt. Suribachi
>
>Everette,
>
>I have noticed that on several days you have neglected to post any
>relevant military history. I suppose on those days, that the US military
>did not utilize any vehicles, in which case not posting is certainly
>appropriate. However, I find it rather negligent on your part that you
>did not consider foreign military vehicles might have been utilized.
>Please take into consideration the many members of this list who are
>fans of German, Russian, Scandinavian, English, and even Japanese
>military vehicles. I, as well as many others on this list expect to be
>informed of the actions involving ALL military vehicles. I hope that I
>do not have to chastise you again for these omissions.
>
>PS: Some members might have an avid interest in Roman Chariots. Please
>consider this in the future.
>Bruce
>
>--
>Bruce Kalin
>East Coast Convoy Coordinator
>USMCMTA, MVPA, MTANJ, NCMVPA
>
>
>
/
Regards,
Glen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 18 2006 - 21:41:09 PDT