rosie wrote:

>
> no, lets leave that to the "good ole boys", ok?
>
rosie wrote:
> p.s. feeling a need to name call again?
> why not call your sponsor first?
>

Hahahahahahaha

"Kai R" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:c7qhsc$3tj$1@phys-news1.kolumbus.fi...
> Gail wrote:
>
> > "JB" <JBCatRB@coldman.com> wrote in message
> > news:c7q2jg$v2t$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> >
> >>Dear Gail,
> >>
> >>At one time all that you have recently said to me would have upset me;
> >>you comments may have angered me. They haven't.
> >>
> >>Comparing your recent posts with those you sent to me privately some
> >>weeks ago, I get the impression that you are not as well today as you
> >>were then. I don't expect you to agree.
> >>
> >
> > LOL..The feeling is mutual, JB.
> > Best,
> > Gail
> >
>
> What if you're both right and you're both doing worse than some weeks
> earlier? This obviously leads to the question of whether you both,
> assuming you're worse off than earlier, are capable of objectively
> evaluating the wellness of each other. ;-)
>
> --
> Kai
>
> "Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines."
> - General "Buck" Turgidson -

I would be telling a lie if I said I don't take other's inventory. I would
also be in denial if I thought that other's didn't take mine. I guess time
will tell if either of us is making any progress.

Best,
Gail

God, i'm responsible, for instigating all this, wow!
rockhound <user@null.org> wrote in message
news:ff1d5130ac94fdd0a7c9f29932c5ab4c@news.teranew s.com...
> On Sun, 9 May 2004 11:24:07 +0100, "JB" <JBCatRB@coldman.com> wrote:
>
> >"Robert McGregor" <robert_mcgregor@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> >news:2g65urF4lr0mU1@uni-berlin.de...
> >> hahahah I did miss this:-
> >>
> >> "In September, 1937, the three* concluded that perhaps their
> >technique
> >> would be better if they would do their work with drunks outside of
> >an
> >> affiliation with a religious organization. Having arrived at this
> >> decision, the trio formally resigned from the Oxford Group and
> >> concentrated all their efforts on working with alcoholics in Town's
> >> Hospital, using Bill's home as a defogging station.
> ><snip>
> >
> >> I can email a copy of that too, (if you want to continue spending
> >> energy on being semantically "right," at the expense of time that
> >> could otherwise be utilised actually taking those 12 sequential
> >steps
> >> of recovery;-)
> >>
> >> Bob
> >
> >Dearest Bob,
> >
> >Thank you for the offer. I'll not it take up now.
> >
> >All the best.
> >
> >JB
>
> Perhaps you historians can explain why the original manuscript was
> written in objective language 'you should' 'you must', while after
> some time went by it became subjective 'we should' 'we have found'?

gary,
don't let what threads "morph" into, keep you from
posting..................................


--



CLICK DAILY TO FEED THE HUNGRY
United States: http://www.stopthehunger.com/
International: http://www.thehungersite.com/








"gary" <gary@marsden74.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:c7t8el$3up$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
: God, i'm responsible, for instigating all this, wow!
: rockhound <user@null.org> wrote in message
: news:ff1d5130ac94fdd0a7c9f29932c5ab4c@news.teranew s.com...
: > On Sun, 9 May 2004 11:24:07 +0100, "JB" <JBCatRB@coldman.com>
wrote:
: >
: > >"Robert McGregor" <robert_mcgregor@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
message
: > >news:2g65urF4lr0mU1@uni-berlin.de...
: > >> hahahah I did miss this:-
: > >>
: > >> "In September, 1937, the three* concluded that perhaps their
: > >technique
: > >> would be better if they would do their work with drunks
outside of
: > >an
: > >> affiliation with a religious organization. Having arrived at
this
: > >> decision, the trio formally resigned from the Oxford Group
and
: > >> concentrated all their efforts on working with alcoholics in
Town's
: > >> Hospital, using Bill's home as a defogging station.
: > ><snip>
: > >
: > >> I can email a copy of that too, (if you want to continue
spending
: > >> energy on being semantically "right," at the expense of time
that
: > >> could otherwise be utilised actually taking those 12
sequential
: > >steps
: > >> of recovery;-)
: > >>
: > >> Bob
: > >
: > >Dearest Bob,
: > >
: > >Thank you for the offer. I'll not it take up now.
: > >
: > >All the best.
: > >
: > >JB
: >
: > Perhaps you historians can explain why the original manuscript
was
: > written in objective language 'you should' 'you must', while
after
: > some time went by it became subjective 'we should' 'we have
found'?
:
: