 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Cat Anecdotes / March 2007Killfile john sumner <josumner1964@cs.com>
He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. Jill > He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh god, > it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. > > Jill I 42 jill and i am not some pervert she was happy as a clam when she was licking my toes, so please before you go off calling me a sick whatever, i am not a pervert > He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh > god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. > > Jill He should not even be private emailing you. It's a breach of netiquette unless you ask first if it's okay anyway. This is a bad start on the group for john. How about copying and pasting the mail to the group? He seems to be defending himself about it, so let's see it, eh? I won't killfile him until I see the mail in the context. Tweed > He should not even be private emailing you. It's a breach of netiquette > unless you ask first if it's okay anyway. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Tweed What i wrote to her i put the wrong way, i emailed her because of what she said about her cats and birds, i have been doing NGs fro a long time and i have killfiled more trolls, then i can remember >> He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh >> god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Tweed I probably took this the wrong way and this wasn't even the actual email that made me take offense: > john sumner wrote:> >> >>> Thanks! She's a sweetie. A natural snuggler. >> When i first got my cat she wiould snuggle too, what clinched it for >> me was one day i was asleep because i worked the midnite shift, and >> all of a sudden a felt this tounge on my legs took the covers and >> there was happy at a clam<G> I do apologize if I misunderstood. Apparently I did. I have heard the term clam used to describe other things, feminine body parts, as it were. Jill >>> He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh >>> god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I probably took this the wrong way and this wasn't even the actual > email that made me take offense: So let us see the actual email. >> john sumner wrote:> >> >>>> Thanks! She's a sweetie. A natural snuggler. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jill there was nothing offensive about this IMHO. There was an obvious typo "as happy at a clam" should have read "as happy as a clam" but we all make typos sometimes. Even so, private posts are a no-no without permission . Accidentally I've replied to sender instead of replied group a few times myself. Followed by an apology when I realised. <snip> Even so, private posts are a no-no without permission . Accidentally I've > replied to sender instead of replied group a few times myself. Followed > by an apology when I realised. I don't agree with your statements that private emails are somehow a violation of netiquette (although I have seen others post similar claims). I certainly agree that email should be off-bounds if someone *requests* no email, but I don't see any reason why email -- just like snail mail -- should automatically be sacrosanct. I very rarely send private email to someone on the Internet, but I have done so on occasion if I want to send some additional information to someone. On the other hand, I have *never* done so to "snarl" at anyone or to make demands. MaryL > <snip> > Even so, private posts are a no-no without permission . Accidentally I've [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > MaryL Reasonable or not, it is a long standing part of netiquette. Its been a long time ago, but when I first discovered Usenet I pretty much jumped right in on a medical support group. I was thrilled to have found them and so glad to meet others with a problem similar to my own that had some experience in dealing from a personal point of view. The next day I had a 'welcome to the group' email in my inbox and it honestly kind of freaked me out. As in "who is this guy and why is he writing to me personally." OK, he was a very nice guy and a long standing member of the group. Funny and irreverent and smart. As well as fighting a tough and painful fight he finally lost. I never met him but I still miss him like crazy. But at that time if felt like when a new acquaintance steps over the bounds. I know it isn't a great comparison, but I sort of think about group members like the people I see every day at the park with Kayla. I like them, but I wouldn't call them on the phone or stop by their homes for coffee or anything. Some of them I may know that well some day. Or I may not. Jo >> <snip> >> Even so, private posts are a no-no without permission . Accidentally [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Jo I have met several "Internet friends" through email -- people I have never met in person, most do not have my real name or address, but people I enjoy corresponding with. Some originally contacted me, and I was the originator in a few instances. *None* of us asked "permission" first (which would have to be done through the *very open* Usenet forum and would be visible to everyone else). There have been several instances when I offered to send Duffy's information on introducing cats *if* I received an email request from the person who first posted a message describing a problem. That is somewhat different because I am not trying to send that long description to someone who may not want it, but I put that in a different category from sending a simple message. MaryL > "Christina Websell" <spamfree@tinawebsell.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> Even so, private posts are a no-no without permission . > I don't agree with your statements that private emails are somehow a > violation of netiquette (although I have seen others post similar claims). > I certainly agree that email should be off-bounds if someone *requests* no > email, but I don't see any reason why email -- just like snail mail -- > should automatically be sacrosanct. I agree with you, Mary. I've been reading (and posting to) Usenet for 20 years, and while there are lot of do's and don'ts, I've never heard of any rule against privately emailing someone who's posted on a newsgroup. In fact, if your message is way off topic (eg, "I saw your post on rec.pez.pikachu, and I was wondering if you were the same John Q Smith I went to grammar school with..."), responding privately is encouraged. I've been doing it for years and have never received a complaint. Joyce On Mar 13, 4:10�pm, jXwXeXrXmXoX...@sonic.net wrote: > > "Christina Websell" <spamf...@tinawebsell.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Joyce I agree, Joyce. Of course, the obvious exception would be harassing- type e-mails, or general nasty stuff. I never mind a friendly line or two from someone. E-mail addresses are really easy to fake on newsreaders. I guess I always figured if e-mail was not welcome, the address wouldn't be listed with the post. Sherry > > "Christina Websell" <spamfree@tinawebsell.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > I've been doing it for years and have never received a complaint. I agree, Joyce. One member of one of my music groups used to ALWAYS use "Reply all" when answering a specfic post - not everyone checks newgroups every day, and he wanted to be sure the individual poster saw his response. If you object to getting e-mail from strangers (and don't have a spam-catcher like Earthlink's, which throws them into a "Suspect E-mail" file so you can examine them before downloading) all you have to do is alter your "return address" when posting to newsgroups, so that it will simply bounce back to the sender. >> > "Christina Websell" <spamfree@tinawebsell.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote in >> message >> Even so, private posts are a no-no without permission . [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > alter your "return address" when posting to newsgroups, so that it will > simply bounce back to the sender. It's also very easy to simply click on unwanted email and delete it *unopened.* That's what I do with anything that looks like spam, and it would be a simple matter to do the same thing if anyone does not want to hear from someone on our newsgroups. MaryL >>>> He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh >>>> god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > I've replied to sender instead of replied group a few times myself. > Followed by an apology when I realised. This wasn't the original email... I sent it to the deleted items file. But I do acknowledge it was a knee-jerk reaction to something that sounded offensive at first. And I apologized for that. Jill >>>>>He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh >>>>>god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > I do acknowledge it was a knee-jerk reaction to something that sounded > offensive at first. And I apologized for that. I thought I'd heard most slang terms for male and female sexual organs, but "clam" is one I'd missed! (BTW, Americans should be careful about using the word "fanny" to our English-speaking friends from across the pond - it means something a bit different in England than in America!) >>>>>>He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh >>>>>>god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > using the word "fanny" to our English-speaking friends from across the > pond - it means something a bit different in England than in America!) So many words and phrases are different around the world like using the word fag it means a cigarette over in England -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: "Matthew" <Iamacatslave@proudtoserve.com> >So many words and phrases are different around the world like using the >word fag it means a cigarette over in England Try telling a group of friends that you're feeling "all fagged out" and watch how quickly some of them start moving away from you. :) And NEVER go to a beach party around San Francisco and say that you're going to "throw a couple of faggots in the fire". >>>He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh >>>god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > I do apologize if I misunderstood. Apparently I did. I have heard the term > clam used to describe other things, feminine body parts, as it were. Mr. Sumner's skill at spelling may be at fault - I think he meant "as" instead of "at"! ("Happy AS a clam" is a pretty universal simile - at least in American English.) > Jill "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evgmsop@earthlink.net> wrote in message > Mr. Sumner's skill at spelling may be at fault - I think he > meant "as" instead of "at"! ("Happy AS a clam" is a pretty > universal simile - at least in American English.) My first name is john >>> He just asked me in private email if I let my cat lick my CLAM! Oh >>> god, it's a "We're on Spring Break" pervert. Get a life, kid. [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Jill I suggest we kill this thread or re-name it "Netiquette: Good or Bad?" or some such. Let's get John's name out of it. Nuff said.  SignatureJoey DoWop Dee Remember: It is To Laugh >> john sumner wrote:> >> >>>> Thanks! She's a sweetie. A natural snuggler. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >I do apologize if I misunderstood. The typo and reaction made me laugh so hard that I wheezed. :) > >> john sumner wrote:> >> > >>>> Thanks! She's a sweetie. A natural snuggler. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >> > >I do apologize if I misunderstood. > The typo and reaction made me laugh so hard that I wheezed. :) I have to admit that "happy at a clam" makes no sense to me as any kind of double entendre. Yes, I know about the other meaning of "clam". And I realize this was a typo and was supposed to be "happy *as* a clam". But I do not understand how anyone could interpret "happy at a clam" as meaning anything at all, much less "do you let your cat lick your clam" (WTF? The things people pull out of whole cloth!) Joyce > > "jmcquown" <jmcquown@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > >> john sumner wrote:> >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Joyce You didn't see the original email. It wasn't what I posted. I deleted it in a fit of pique. But I see now John didn't mean any harm. And it definitely said something about letting my cat lick my clam! LOL All's well that ends well, at any rate. I've apologized. Shall we move on? Jill "jmcquown" <jmcquown@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > > I do apologize if I misunderstood. Apparently I did. I have heard the term > clam used to describe other things, feminine body parts, as it were. > > Jill Jill i have never heard that term before<G> Can't posts be deleted from usenet now? I may be wrong about this, someone correct me if so. I believe they can be deleted from Google's archives. Jill, you might check on that. The bad thing is, from now till forever, any time anyone googles John's name, this header is going to appear in the search results. It's really not fair, since we've all learned it was an honest misunderstanding. Sherry No we can't get rid of it. It is classic how often do we get to talk about Jill's clam < sh@t eating evil grin and evil laugh> > Can't posts be deleted from usenet now? I may be wrong about this, > someone correct me if so. I believe they can be deleted from Google's [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Sherry > Can't posts be deleted from usenet now? I may be wrong about this, > someone correct me if so. I believe they can be deleted from Google's > archives. I don't use Google to post so I have no idea. Again, I apologize. To John and everyone else for jumping to the wrong conclusion. Jill >> Can't posts be deleted from usenet now? I may be wrong about this, >> someone correct me if so. I believe they can be deleted from Google's [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Jill Try not to let it bother you too much. You have helped to keep us all entertained for a few days. That isn't such a bad thing. Almost like having the Dave's back. Jo >>> Can't posts be deleted from usenet now? I may be wrong about this, >>> someone correct me if so. I believe they can be deleted from [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Jo I know I'll never be able to think of clams in the same way again. ;-) SignatureAdrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera) Cats leave pawprints on your heart. http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk >>>> Can't posts be deleted from usenet now? I may be wrong about this, >>>> someone correct me if so. I believe they can be deleted from [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > I know I'll never be able to think of clams in the same way again. ;-) Clams and mussels are two of my favorite things. Seriously. No joke. SignatureJoey DoWop Dee Remember: It is To Laugh >>> Can't posts be deleted from usenet now? I may be wrong about this, >>> someone correct me if so. I believe they can be deleted from Google's [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Jo Actually, it *is* a bad thing in a case like this. Jill took private email and made it very public through this forum. Worse, she interpreted the email incorrectly and told all of us (without first giving John a chance to respond) that we should killfile him and identified him as a "pervert." Jill has apologized and John has graciously accepted that apology, but great harm is done to people with this type of public -- and unfounded -- accusation. In my opinion, at least, that does not pass as "entertainment." MaryL On Mar 14, 7:10�pm, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> wrote: > >>> Can't posts be deleted from usenet now? I may be wrong about this, > >>> someone correct me if so. I believe they can be deleted from Google's [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > MaryL- Hide quoted text - I am not trying to be difficult, but I also think it wouldn't hurt to at least try to delete that first post. Google (I'm not talking about *posting* thru google-I'm talking about the archives, where *all* posts are archived forever). Suppose someone does a search for this poster's name. One of the first hits to come up is going to be "Killfile [poster's name]. Then the first post they read is Jill's accusation about the clam-licking. *No one* is going to bother reading the entire thread to find out it was all a mistake. Suppose this guy's relatives, friends, boss, etc. etc. run across it? Yeah. I think a false accusation made *globally* is a big deal. Sherry On Mar 14, 7:10?pm, "MaryL" <stanco...@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> I am not trying to be difficult, but I also think it wouldn't hurt to at least try to delete that first post. Google (I'm not talking about *posting* thru google-I'm talking about the archives, where *all* posts are archived forever). Suppose someone does a search for this poster's name. One of the first hits to come up is going to be "Killfile [poster's name]. Then the first post they read is Jill's accusation about the clam-licking. *No one* is going to bother reading the entire thread to find out it was all a mistake. Suppose this guy's relatives, friends, boss, etc. etc. run across it? Yeah. I think a false accusation made *globally* is a big deal. Sherry I like the idea, but -- unfortunately -- I think it is now impossible. As far as I know, only the author of a *specific* article can delete that article (and even that is often impossible because it resides in "archives"). This means that only Jill could delete her article, and she has said that she does not know how to do it. Even so, that would only delete her original message. By now, there are numerous other messages in this thread that copied the original message. They would still remain on file. MaryL > I like the idea, but -- unfortunately -- I think it is now impossible. As > far as I know, only the author of a *specific* article can delete that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > this thread that copied the original message. They would still remain on > file. Yes, they will be in the Google archive. I recently posted a post to the wrong ng by mistake (sent the post about Caliban look-alikes to the Finnish cat group instead of here). I realised what I'd done a few minutes later, and deleted the post from that newsgroup, but it had already been archived in Google. SignatureMarina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki. Stories and pics at http://koti.welho.com/mkurten/ Pics at http://s120.photobucket.com/albums/o185/frankiennikki/ http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/frankiennikki/ http://community.webshots.com/user/frankiennikki > > I like the idea, but -- unfortunately -- I think it is now impossible. As > > far as I know, only the author of a *specific* article can delete that [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > -- > Marina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki. Marina, if you ever need to delete a post from the archive, try this link: http://groups.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=46493 Or if it's an old post, and you don't use the same e-mail address anymore, here's that info.: http://groups.google.com/groups/msgs_remove Of course, just posting to the wrong newsgroup like you did isn't a big deal and not worth the hassle. You have to make a request for them to remove it, tell them why you're removing, etc. etc. People could theoretically be sued for libel over such a slanderous post. I don't know of any cases where it's actually happened, but I bet somewhere, it has. Sherry > Marina, if you ever need to delete a post from the archive, try this > link: > > http://groups.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=46493 Thanks, Sherry, I've bookmarked the page in case I need it in future. Yeah, I don't think I'll bother this time; it was, after all, on topic, though I would normally write in Finnish to the Finnish cat group. :) SignatureMarina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki. Stories and pics at http://koti.welho.com/mkurten/ Pics at http://s120.photobucket.com/albums/o185/frankiennikki/ http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/frankiennikki/ http://community.webshots.com/user/frankiennikki -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: "MaryL" <stancole1@yahoo.comTAKE-OUT-THE-LITTER> >Actually, it *is* a bad thing in a case like this. Jill took private email >and made it very public through this forum. Worse, she interpreted the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >MaryL Actually, if John wanted to push the issue, he's got reasonable grounds to file a lawsuit. It wouldn't be all that hard to convince a jury that Jill acted in a malicious manner to defame him. Maybe, in the future, some people here could learn that if they've got a hair trigger, they should be damn sure of their target. You can't unshoot a bullet. > "jmcquown" <jmcquown@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > >> > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> Jill > Jill i have never heard that term before<G> I hadn't either. Joy >> "jmcquown" <jmcquown@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > >>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Joy Must be a southern Usian thang! I've heard it called a "hair taco" before, too. Heard that one? Anyway, my deepest apologies to John. I misunderstood. Wish I knew a way to delete my post from all of Usenet but unfortunately I don't. Jill >>> "jmcquown" <jmcquown@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Jill So stop replying to the thread that bears your admonition to kill john sumner. Every time you do retain it, you add another message. At least these last messages are in relation to the misunderstanding, but heck, give it up now. SignatureJoey DoWop Dee Remember: It is To Laugh > So stop replying to the thread that bears your admonition to kill john > sumner. Every time you do retain it, you add another message. > > At least these last messages are in relation to the misunderstanding, but > heck, give it up now. Yes, and the suggestion to change the title of the thread was also a good one. That, at least, would stop the proliferation of the name used in the original title. Ironically, this whole thread is also a good illustration of why something like this would have been *better* handled via private email. That way, Jill could have learned that it was a simple typo, and we would not have had everything posted (incorrectly, albeit followed with an apology) and available to the huge numbers who use the Internet. MaryL |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.