Re: 2-3-04

[Robert McGregor]

" rosie" <readandpostNOT@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:qE6Ub.29265$M81.11698@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> kevin,
> dishonest?
>
> NOT!
> do you address your HP as god?
> i generally do not.............................
> http://www.crcny.cc/prayer_studies/the_names_of_god.htm
> http://www.religioustolerance.org/god_devel.htm
>
Oh, so you are not contemptuous of AA Tradition to suit your own ends,
merely plagiarising AA literature to suit your own ends?

Ironic that AA is suing German AAers for putting God back in their
literature, http://www.heise.nu/AALawsuit/ while rosy takes God out of
their literature, so far with impunity.

AA Daily Reflection that rosie purported to post:- "God and
spirituality were meaningless academic exercises."

" rosie" <readandpostNOT@yahoo.com> deliberately wrote "HP and
spirituality were meaningless academic exercises. "

hahahahahah

Bob

>
> "Kev" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:xn0de4g3y14r0b000@news.cis.dfn.de...
> > Why do you change the wording of text that you are quoting? Is
> this not
> > a bit dishonest?
> >
> > --
> > Kev
> > Brighton UK
>
>

[Craig S.]

"Robert McGregor" <robert_mcgregor@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:bvqusg$sl3qi$1@ID-49289.news.uni-berlin.de...
> " rosie" <readandpostNOT@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:qE6Ub.29265$M81.11698@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> > kevin,
> > dishonest?
> >
> > NOT!
> > do you address your HP as god?
> > i generally do not.............................
> > http://www.crcny.cc/prayer_studies/the_names_of_god.htm
> > http://www.religioustolerance.org/god_devel.htm
> >
> Oh, so you are not contemptuous of AA Tradition to suit your own ends,
> merely plagiarising AA literature to suit your own ends?
>
> Ironic that AA is suing German AAers for putting God back in their
> literature, http://www.heise.nu/AALawsuit/ while rosy takes God out of
> their literature, so far with impunity.
>
> AA Daily Reflection that rosie purported to post:- "God and
> spirituality were meaningless academic exercises."
>
> " rosie" <readandpostNOT@yahoo.com> deliberately wrote "HP and
> spirituality were meaningless academic exercises. "

It may just be a matter of time until we see Rosie in a news headline:

'AA Sues Text Altering Plagiarizer'

[rosie]

> It may just be a matter of time until we see Rosie in a news
headline:
>
> 'AA Sues Text Altering Plagiarizer'
>
>

craig,
do you think its really that serious?

[Moonraker]

" rosie" <readandpostNOT@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:858Ub.29276$M81.3861@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>
> > It may just be a matter of time until we see Rosie in a news
> headline:
> >
> > 'AA Sues Text Altering Plagiarizer'
> >
> >
>
> craig,
> do you think its really that serious?

I'm not Craig, obviously.

But the answer is a resounding YES. It IS a copyright violation, and
altering a few words here and there won't get you off the hook. It's one
thing for someone to quote the BB or another AA publication as part of a
discussion. It's quite another for you to continually post copyrighted
material on Usenet. And you have been warned numerous times by others on
these groups.

Frankly, I'm surprised that lawyers from Hazelden haven't written you a
letter, with a cease and desist demand. As well as the GSO. But you
probably can skate with the GSO, what with you being such an important
speaker on prescription drugs at World conventions, and the like.



>
>

[Charks]

rosie wrote:
>> It may just be a matter of time until we see Rosie in a news
>> headline:
>>
>> 'AA Sues Text Altering Plagiarizer'
>>
>>
>
> craig,
> do you think its really that serious?

Well, IMHO, it's just where you at present at in your spiritual quest. No
right. No wrong. Keep trudging that road of happy destiny, eh?

[Charks]

Moonraker wrote:
> " rosie" <readandpostNOT@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:858Ub.29276$M81.3861@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>>
>>> It may just be a matter of time until we see Rosie in a news
>>> headline:
>>>
>>> 'AA Sues Text Altering Plagiarizer'
>>>
>>>
>>
>> craig,
>> do you think its really that serious?
>
> I'm not Craig, obviously.
>
> But the answer is a resounding YES. It IS a copyright violation, and
> altering a few words here and there won't get you off the hook. It's
> one thing for someone to quote the BB or another AA publication as
> part of a discussion. It's quite another for you to continually post
> copyrighted material on Usenet. And you have been warned numerous
> times by others on these groups.
>
> Frankly, I'm surprised that lawyers from Hazelden haven't written
> you a letter, with a cease and desist demand. As well as the GSO.
> But you probably can skate with the GSO, what with you being such an
> important speaker on prescription drugs at World conventions, and the
> like.

Lighten up, already. I'm no bud of rosie's BUT, those who overreact like you
have are apparently either newcomers or dry drunkers.

[Kai]

Charks wrote:

> Moonraker wrote:
>
>
> Lighten up, already. I'm no bud of rosie's BUT, those who overreact like you
> have are apparently either newcomers or dry drunkers.

LOL I don't think you could've willingly hurt the little bastard more
than by what you just did. And he's even a fellow fascist so you'd
probably like him.

Kai

[Charks]

Kai wrote:
> Charks wrote:
>
>> Moonraker wrote:
>>
>>
>> Lighten up, already. I'm no bud of rosie's BUT, those who overreact
>> like you have are apparently either newcomers or dry drunkers.
>
> LOL I don't think you could've willingly hurt the little bastard more
> than by what you just did. And he's even a fellow fascist so you'd
> probably like him.
>
> Kai


Fascist???!! But, according to various tests, I am moderately to the left of
the economic spectrum and a trifle away from Authoritanian, on the
Libertarian side. Not terribly far from the Dalai Lama or Nelson Mandela.

My comments about newcomers and dry drunkers come from my own
experiences--looking into the mirror.

[Craig S.]

"Charks" <Charks@Charkstank.com> wrote in message
news:j4bUb.3945$213.2801@edtnps89...

> Fascist???!! But, according to various tests, I am moderately to the left
of
> the economic spectrum and a trifle away from Authoritanian, on the
> Libertarian side. Not terribly far from the Dalai Lama or Nelson Mandela.

You took that test, too, huh?