Search results

Reference was not to you, but to our editing program. And, since you people are a different type of group compared to actual discussion groups, I have to ask. Did someone really think that the RCG person was referring to a $100k total retirement? It's so hard to get past the pages of...

Heading out, but thanks for more golden moments and your insight.

Hopefully final note for this week or so, who knows with this group. 1. The test group reacted as predicted. No reading, didn't even bother to check this posters political affiliations. Assumed as a liberal for noting of odd behavior. 2. Same test group thought we were some other poster...

51312 Move from weird to obsession. Note: add to those from the UK thread, can't recall the name right now.

51312 Regarding Phoenix Trading. After some review, perhaps a bit more sane and informed than previously thought. Opinionated, sure, but not showing so much weirdness as the 3 or 4 extremeists here. Probably PP3.

Still undecided about this thing. A veteran with a good job being hated by someone, points to a lack of self worth on the part of the poster initially. But, even so, why the need? As in our first assumptions, pspr needs the other person for some sort of validation. Much like the bully complex...

More gold for the report, thank you.

51312 This is just too easy and sad to bother with. I'm sure his schtick works well with the fairer sex. Just as predictable.

51312 Even for one of the smarter ones, came back with what we noted in earlier perspectives. Attack, not read, and assume we are someone else. This is gold. Name calling not too bad, but so assumptive and predictable. See yahoo gems notes.

51212 Another non reader. Didn't even bother to read my political preference. But since it didn't fit his cubbyhole, he makes up things. Put in 4a.

51212 Backup of both language and women. Using the word puss, pretty much sums it. Add to Addendum.

Even though a foolish argument, since all tests like this involve being involved with subject, I am merely acting as a conduit to the actual researcher.

51212 - perfect example. Same two, but still wonder about the ignore thing. Why are people afraid of words?

OK, fair enough.

51212 (4a) OK, we have a name calling thing. Odd again in that, if this person read the above, the obvious would come to him. "Again, nothing to do with our little treatise, but I think that if we were all honest with each other, that both sides use inconvenient facts. The liberal slant...

We have 2 yahoo boards in the mix as well. I did notice some censorship, not really sure why.

Again, nothing to do with our little treatise, but I think that if we were all honest with each other, that both sides use inconvenient facts. The liberal slant is easily read, of course. The right is seems to be the same, only louder, and perhaps too conservative in that we really want to win...

Bad choice of wording, hiding I mean. I meant to say you are all protected, not a bad thing. I'm sorry for that. And, yes, another thing we found odd, and not on all the sites, but some, is the no show or ignore capacity. Odd, in that these are discussion boards. How can one discuss...

Glad to have some help. I've spent a bunch of time on many of the forums, just trying to help. I have no horse in this or the political slant. I voted for Bush, I voted for Paul. I do think Obama got a pretty bad rap from my side, and dislike the whole political climate the last few years...

Off topic, sort of. Just addressing the sub topic of cherry picking an article, and seeing the other jump on board to follow along. Without reading the article. This is pretty common, on many boards. We found this from the extreme right and left. On this one, I noted that the...