Leo wrote:

With regard to your second point, though - 'obsessive' wouldn't refer
to Jim's 'treatment' of Len - it is in the relentless pursuit of
proving the individual wrong that we would find the true definition of
the word.

I disagree!

I am simply persistent. I offer strong opposition to some of
the errors of fact and reasoning presented here by Len and others.

Len gets all upset by that, and attacks the messenger (me).

Is it unacceptable behaviour for me to be persistent about getting some
things right (such as whether or not Novices and Advanceds can
renew and modify their licenses without retesting)?

I can't control someone else's posting of information and reasoning
that is in error. But I can refute it with facts and clear logic,
and resources permit I do just that. Hardly obsessive, IMHO.

You were quite persistent in coming up with proof that I was
mistaken about the use of the word "feldwebel". It's clear that
the person to whom that rank was attributed never held it. Was
that "obsessive" on your part? I don't think so, just persistence
in getting something right.


73 (to all hams) de Jim, N2EY

On 21 Jun 2005 09:13:41 -0700, wrote:

Leo wrote:

With regard to your second point, though - 'obsessive' wouldn't refer
to Jim's 'treatment' of Len - it is in the relentless pursuit of
proving the individual wrong that we would find the true definition of
the word.

I disagree!

There you go - you've finally got it! You've been disagreeing to no
avail for eight years here, on and on and on - that's the problem!

Just 11 more steps to go!


I am simply persistent.

Or persistently simple. Time will tell!

I offer strong opposition to some of
the errors of fact and reasoning presented here by Len and others.


Oh, that's nice. How's that working out for you? Changed anybody's
mind lately?

Len gets all upset by that, and attacks the messenger (me).

You don't really believe that, do you? You're not the entertainer -
you're the entertainment! He pokes and prods, and you sing and dance
- been that way for 8 long years now.


Is it unacceptable behaviour for me to be persistent about getting some
things right (such as whether or not Novices and Advanceds can
renew and modify their licenses without retesting)?

I submit that those who need to know the correct answer to those types
of questions probably already do - if they are actually interested in
the answer, then they would listen. The rest might just be pushing
your buttons.....for fun.....y'think?

Let me guess - you opted out of Psych 101 at good ol' Dreidel U too,
didn't you?


I can't control someone else's posting of information and reasoning
that is in error. But I can refute it with facts and clear logic,
and resources permit I do just that. Hardly obsessive, IMHO.

You can only control your own postings. You may also refute and argue
points. That is not obsesssive.

To do so fruitlessly for eight years, on a nearly weekly basis, is
very likely just - weeeelll - a tad obsessive.....! LOL!


You were quite persistent in coming up with proof that I was
mistaken about the use of the word "feldwebel". It's clear that
the person to whom that rank was attributed never held it. Was
that "obsessive" on your part? I don't think so, just persistence
in getting something right.

In a way, yes.

I asked you several times if being correct was important to you.

You replied that it was.

I asked if being correct was very important to you.

You replied that it was.

I confirmed this again, and you agreed that it was very important to
you.

So, I spent about 20 minutes on Google and provided you with the
correct info and a few references for you to read.

That's what you said that you wanted - and that's what I provided.

Obsessive? No. Persistent? Not really - it wasn't a lot of work -
and I knew the correct answers before Googling the references - so I
wouldn't say persistent exactly.

However - If I kept doing it every week or so for eight years, with no
success, over and over again - yup, that might be a problem - I'd be
wondering if some parts fell off the ol' brainpan on a curve a ways
back there or something.....



73 (to all hams) de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo (is it just me, or is there a diss aimed at me again in ol'
Jim's sig above? heh heh)

From: Leo on Jun 21, 6:54 pm

On 21 Jun 2005 09:13:41 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:

With regard to your second point, though - 'obsessive' wouldn't refer
to Jim's 'treatment' of Len - it is in the relentless pursuit of
proving the individual wrong that we would find the true definition of
the word.

I disagree!

There you go - you've finally got it! You've been disagreeing to no
avail for eight years here, on and on and on - that's the problem!

Just 11 more steps to go!

Antabuse might be quicker...? :-)


I am simply persistent.

Or persistently simple. Time will tell!

Obsessively persistent? :-)


I offer strong opposition to some of
the errors of fact and reasoning presented here by Len and others.

Oh, that's nice. How's that working out for you? Changed anybody's
mind lately?

:-) [with all that "parenting" he implies he's had you'd
think he changed SOMETHING at one time...]

Len gets all upset by that, and attacks the messenger (me).

You don't really believe that, do you? You're not the entertainer -
you're the entertainment! He pokes and prods, and you sing and dance
- been that way for 8 long years now.

"Poke, poke, prod, prod, oh what a fun it is," sang Seltzer.


Is it unacceptable behaviour for me to be persistent about getting some
things right (such as whether or not Novices and Advanceds can
renew and modify their licenses without retesting)?

I submit that those who need to know the correct answer to those types
of questions probably already do - if they are actually interested in
the answer, then they would listen. The rest might just be pushing
your buttons.....for fun.....y'think?

Nahhhhhh..... :-)

Let me guess - you opted out of Psych 101 at good ol' Dreidel U too,
didn't you?

?

I can't control someone else's posting of information and reasoning
that is in error. But I can refute it with facts and clear logic,
and resources permit I do just that. Hardly obsessive, IMHO.

You can only control your own postings. You may also refute and argue
points. That is not obsesssive.

To do so fruitlessly for eight years, on a nearly weekly basis, is
very likely just - weeeelll - a tad obsessive.....! LOL!

Nahhhhhh..... :-)

You were quite persistent in coming up with proof that I was
mistaken about the use of the word "feldwebel". It's clear that
the person to whom that rank was attributed never held it. Was
that "obsessive" on your part? I don't think so, just persistence
in getting something right.

In a way, yes.

I asked you several times if being correct was important to you.

You replied that it was.

I asked if being correct was very important to you.

You replied that it was.

I confirmed this again, and you agreed that it was very important to
you.

So, I spent about 20 minutes on Google and provided you with the
correct info and a few references for you to read.

That's what you said that you wanted - and that's what I provided.

Obsessive? No. Persistent? Not really - it wasn't a lot of work -
and I knew the correct answers before Googling the references - so I
wouldn't say persistent exactly.

However - If I kept doing it every week or so for eight years, with no
success, over and over again - yup, that might be a problem - I'd be
wondering if some parts fell off the ol' brainpan on a curve a ways
back there or something.....

I suspect it could be summed-up simply: "They are always right!"

[that kind of says it all...maybe...]

Or: "Leggo my ego!" [and I'm not 'waffling' around :-) ]

Twenty years doing this kind of computer-modem communications
and it is endlessly fascinating to watch the egos jumping up
and down in high agitation! Everyone always "right" and
everyone else always "wrong!"



73 (to all hams) de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo (is it just me, or is there a diss aimed at me again in ol'
Jim's sig above? heh heh)

Heh heh heh heh heh.....

Len:

Don't know about you, but this bunch is driving me to drink... let's go
have a beer! evil-grin

John

wrote in message
ups.com...
From: Leo on Jun 21, 6:54 pm

On 21 Jun 2005 09:13:41 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:

With regard to your second point, though - 'obsessive' wouldn't
refer
to Jim's 'treatment' of Len - it is in the relentless pursuit of
proving the individual wrong that we would find the true definition
of
the word.

I disagree!

There you go - you've finally got it! You've been disagreeing to no
avail for eight years here, on and on and on - that's the problem!

Just 11 more steps to go!

Antabuse might be quicker...? :-)


I am simply persistent.

Or persistently simple. Time will tell!

Obsessively persistent? :-)


I offer strong opposition to some of
the errors of fact and reasoning presented here by Len and others.

Oh, that's nice. How's that working out for you? Changed anybody's
mind lately?

:-) [with all that "parenting" he implies he's had you'd
think he changed SOMETHING at one time...]

Len gets all upset by that, and attacks the messenger (me).

You don't really believe that, do you? You're not the entertainer -
you're the entertainment! He pokes and prods, and you sing and dance
- been that way for 8 long years now.

"Poke, poke, prod, prod, oh what a fun it is," sang Seltzer.


Is it unacceptable behaviour for me to be persistent about getting
some
things right (such as whether or not Novices and Advanceds can
renew and modify their licenses without retesting)?

I submit that those who need to know the correct answer to those types
of questions probably already do - if they are actually interested in
the answer, then they would listen. The rest might just be pushing
your buttons.....for fun.....y'think?

Nahhhhhh..... :-)

Let me guess - you opted out of Psych 101 at good ol' Dreidel U too,
didn't you?

?

I can't control someone else's posting of information and reasoning
that is in error. But I can refute it with facts and clear logic,
and resources permit I do just that. Hardly obsessive, IMHO.

You can only control your own postings. You may also refute and argue
points. That is not obsesssive.

To do so fruitlessly for eight years, on a nearly weekly basis, is
very likely just - weeeelll - a tad obsessive.....! LOL!

Nahhhhhh..... :-)

You were quite persistent in coming up with proof that I was
mistaken about the use of the word "feldwebel". It's clear that
the person to whom that rank was attributed never held it. Was
that "obsessive" on your part? I don't think so, just persistence
in getting something right.

In a way, yes.

I asked you several times if being correct was important to you.

You replied that it was.

I asked if being correct was very important to you.

You replied that it was.

I confirmed this again, and you agreed that it was very important to
you.

So, I spent about 20 minutes on Google and provided you with the
correct info and a few references for you to read.

That's what you said that you wanted - and that's what I provided.

Obsessive? No. Persistent? Not really - it wasn't a lot of work -
and I knew the correct answers before Googling the references - so I
wouldn't say persistent exactly.

However - If I kept doing it every week or so for eight years, with no
success, over and over again - yup, that might be a problem - I'd be
wondering if some parts fell off the ol' brainpan on a curve a ways
back there or something.....

I suspect it could be summed-up simply: "They are always right!"

[that kind of says it all...maybe...]

Or: "Leggo my ego!" [and I'm not 'waffling' around :-) ]

Twenty years doing this kind of computer-modem communications
and it is endlessly fascinating to watch the egos jumping up
and down in high agitation! Everyone always "right" and
everyone else always "wrong!"



73 (to all hams) de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo (is it just me, or is there a diss aimed at me again in ol'
Jim's sig above? heh heh)

Heh heh heh heh heh.....

From: John Smith on Jun 21, 10:08 pm

Len:

Don't know about you, but this bunch is driving me to drink... let's go
have a beer! evil-grin

John

wrote in message

oups.com...

Thanks for the invite, John, but I already have a date with
a gal from East McKeesport to go out to the junkyard and
watch the cars rust...gonna be an exciting evening! :-)

Well, it's either than or watch my hard disk defrag.

Either one is more exciting than this "discussion" about
late leaders of a national socialist partei or the
Pennsylvanians are always right, no matter what!

Epoxy is curing in the workshop. Maybe I'll go in there and
watch it set up instead...

Len:

That girl you are taking out, does she have a sister with most of her
teeth still?

If so, I got a bottle of vodka and some orange juice--we could make it
four-some!!!

Gawd, been awhile since I have seen cars rust up close!

Any still have some backseats in 'em? grin

John

wrote in message
oups.com...
From: John Smith on Jun 21, 10:08 pm

Len:

Don't know about you, but this bunch is driving me to drink... let's
go
have a beer! evil-grin

John

wrote in message

roups.com...

Thanks for the invite, John, but I already have a date with
a gal from East McKeesport to go out to the junkyard and
watch the cars rust...gonna be an exciting evening! :-)

Well, it's either than or watch my hard disk defrag.

Either one is more exciting than this "discussion" about
late leaders of a national socialist partei or the
Pennsylvanians are always right, no matter what!

Epoxy is curing in the workshop. Maybe I'll go in there and
watch it set up instead...

From: "John Smith" on Tues 21 Jun 2005 23:20

Len:

That girl you are taking out, does she have a sister with most of her
teeth still?

If so, I got a bottle of vodka and some orange juice--we could make it
four-some!!!

Gawd, been awhile since I have seen cars rust up close!

Any still have some backseats in 'em? grin

Heh heh heh...I'm just waiting around to see who takes my
message and yours seriously. :-)

Some WILL and they will want to word-fight at the drop of
a keystroke! :-)

A few others will become quietly enraged and demand SERIOUSNESS
in responses...which are those wonderful irregulars in here
who take themselves wayyyyy too seriously. :-)

On 21 Jun 2005 17:02:04 -0700, wrote:

From: Leo on Jun 21, 6:54 pm

On 21 Jun 2005 09:13:41 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:

With regard to your second point, though - 'obsessive' wouldn't refer
to Jim's 'treatment' of Len - it is in the relentless pursuit of
proving the individual wrong that we would find the true definition of
the word.

I disagree!

There you go - you've finally got it! You've been disagreeing to no
avail for eight years here, on and on and on - that's the problem!

Just 11 more steps to go!

Antabuse might be quicker...? :-)

Hmmm - I wonder if there's a Usenet version of that!



I am simply persistent.

Or persistently simple. Time will tell!

Obsessively persistent? :-)

That works too!



I offer strong opposition to some of
the errors of fact and reasoning presented here by Len and others.

Oh, that's nice. How's that working out for you? Changed anybody's
mind lately?

:-) [with all that "parenting" he implies he's had you'd
think he changed SOMETHING at one time...]

Len gets all upset by that, and attacks the messenger (me).

You don't really believe that, do you? You're not the entertainer -
you're the entertainment! He pokes and prods, and you sing and dance
- been that way for 8 long years now.

"Poke, poke, prod, prod, oh what a fun it is," sang Seltzer.

Heh - I remember those commercials - good rewrite!



Is it unacceptable behaviour for me to be persistent about getting some
things right (such as whether or not Novices and Advanceds can
renew and modify their licenses without retesting)?

I submit that those who need to know the correct answer to those types
of questions probably already do - if they are actually interested in
the answer, then they would listen. The rest might just be pushing
your buttons.....for fun.....y'think?

Nahhhhhh..... :-)

Nahhhh - you're right. I didn't think so either!


Let me guess - you opted out of Psych 101 at good ol' Dreidel U too,
didn't you?

?

It's from another reply in this thread - made more sense back there, I
reckon!


I can't control someone else's posting of information and reasoning
that is in error. But I can refute it with facts and clear logic,
and resources permit I do just that. Hardly obsessive, IMHO.

You can only control your own postings. You may also refute and argue
points. That is not obsesssive.

To do so fruitlessly for eight years, on a nearly weekly basis, is
very likely just - weeeelll - a tad obsessive.....! LOL!

Nahhhhhh..... :-)

Not even a teensy bit?


You were quite persistent in coming up with proof that I was
mistaken about the use of the word "feldwebel". It's clear that
the person to whom that rank was attributed never held it. Was
that "obsessive" on your part? I don't think so, just persistence
in getting something right.

In a way, yes.

I asked you several times if being correct was important to you.

You replied that it was.

I asked if being correct was very important to you.

You replied that it was.

I confirmed this again, and you agreed that it was very important to
you.

So, I spent about 20 minutes on Google and provided you with the
correct info and a few references for you to read.

That's what you said that you wanted - and that's what I provided.

Obsessive? No. Persistent? Not really - it wasn't a lot of work -
and I knew the correct answers before Googling the references - so I
wouldn't say persistent exactly.

However - If I kept doing it every week or so for eight years, with no
success, over and over again - yup, that might be a problem - I'd be
wondering if some parts fell off the ol' brainpan on a curve a ways
back there or something.....

I suspect it could be summed-up simply: "They are always right!"

[that kind of says it all...maybe...]

Something pretty compelling drives this sort of behaviour - that's
probably the seed, all right!


Or: "Leggo my ego!" [and I'm not 'waffling' around :-) ]

Ouch!


Twenty years doing this kind of computer-modem communications
and it is endlessly fascinating to watch the egos jumping up
and down in high agitation! Everyone always "right" and
everyone else always "wrong!"

That pretty much sums up my experience over the last twenty years
online as well - unlike in real life arguements - things are very
black-or-white in the newsgroups.....with little compromise. Didn't
seem quite as bad on the BBS systems, though - Usenet really seems to
bring out the big egos. YMMV, of course!

I find it continually amazing what people will argue over - or how
passionate they'll get over the most simple and unimportant issue.
I'm sure that there's a group somewhere on Usenet where death threats
are exchanged over whether rotary dial phones are superior to
TouchTone phones...

Can you imagine if real-life arguements played out like some of the
ones in this little alternate reality? Somebody would end up doing
some time for assault...or worse...

But here, in Fantasyland (not the one near you - this one...heh heh),
everyone feels safe and secure, so the inhibitions drop. Look at the
folks wrassling with some tool in another thread here for the last few
days, for example - if that 'discussion' took place in a bar, he'd
probably be waking up in Emergency somewhere early tomorrow morning.
But, because it's here, and that possibility doesn't exist, it's no
holds barred. Even the most bookish guy is Tyson when he's on
here.....ding ding!

Funny thing is - people are trying to convince the guy that he's
wrong, or heartless, or insensitive, or cruel - duh, it's obviously
intentional trolling, but somehow, that got missed by several
otherwise savvy folks..... Guess some peoples' radar doesn't work
when the face-to-face interpersonal aspect is isolated from the
conversation.

I will probably never fully understand the psychology of this.....

But, I suppose, as Barnum said..."There's a sucker born every minute."

Hey - maybe that's the psychology of this!



73 (to all hams) de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo (is it just me, or is there a diss aimed at me again in ol'
Jim's sig above? heh heh)

Heh heh heh heh heh.....

He's doing it - I know he is..... and he knows that I know he's doing
it too

Oh well - that's enough bashing at this for now....have a great
evening, Len!




73, Leo

PS - before the Usenet police come to correct me on that Barnum quote
(it's controversial whether he actually said it or not...), here's a
reference:

http://www.worldofquotes.com/author/P.-T.-Barnum/1/

From: Leo on Jun 21, 11:51 pm

On 21 Jun 2005 17:02:04 -0700, wrote:
From: Leo on Jun 21, 6:54 pm
On 21 Jun 2005 09:13:41 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:


There you go - you've finally got it! You've been disagreeing to no
avail for eight years here, on and on and on - that's the problem!

Just 11 more steps to go!

Antabuse might be quicker...? :-)

Hmmm - I wonder if there's a Usenet version of that!

Hardly, ARPA's original USENET was the start of it all!

I saw it begin, clickety-clacking on a Model 33 wasting lots
of paper (that a corporation bought). Pages of sound and fury
signifying nothing much. Incurable mental disease infecting
all terminals!


I am simply persistent.

Or persistently simple. Time will tell!

Obsessively persistent? :-)

That works too!

OK.


"Poke, poke, prod, prod, oh what a fun it is," sang Seltzer.

Heh - I remember those commercials - good rewrite!

Alka-Seltzer would cure one headache, then induce millions to
have more with that commercial! It should still be in the
collection of famous commercials over at the Television Academy
on Lankershim Blvd in North Hollywood. Haven't been there for
a while...


I submit that those who need to know the correct answer to those types
of questions probably already do - if they are actually interested in
the answer, then they would listen. The rest might just be pushing
your buttons.....for fun.....y'think?

Nahhhhhh..... :-)

Nahhhh - you're right. I didn't think so either!

nodding in agreement Nudge, nudge, wink, wink...


Let me guess - you opted out of Psych 101 at good ol' Dreidel U too,
didn't you?

?

It's from another reply in this thread - made more sense back there, I
reckon!

Got it! :-) Didn't see the previous post until this download
arrived in my mail box from Google.

[Oy veh, I wasn't wearing my yarmulke...]


To do so fruitlessly for eight years, on a nearly weekly basis, is
very likely just - weeeelll - a tad obsessive.....! LOL!

Nahhhhhh..... :-)

Not even a teensy bit?

Not for a boneheadedly stubborn true morse Believer fedayin!

I liken it to an excrutiatingly slow "suicide bomber" act.

Only thing is, only the "bomber" will destruct. It's like that
Opel (?) TV ad that was circulating around the net, the one
demonstrating the "great German engineering!" Funny!


However - If I kept doing it every week or so for eight years, with no
success, over and over again - yup, that might be a problem - I'd be
wondering if some parts fell off the ol' brainpan on a curve a ways
back there or something.....


I suspect it could be summed-up simply: "They are always right!"

[that kind of says it all...maybe...]

Something pretty compelling drives this sort of behaviour - that's
probably the seed, all right!

"R U Siriusly" speaking (I'm a fan of Brewster Rockit, Space Guy),
it's the time-space insulation of the simplex communications via
computer-modem medium. Nearly everyone beginning that sort of
comms takes every word on the screen at face value...at first.

Some figure out that they can actually say ANYTHING they want
in a message (especially with no moderator there to censor them)
and they go bananas. They can say anything without fear of
reprisal. It's amazing the false courage these mighty message
warriors display! :-)

Or: "Leggo my ego!" [and I'm not 'waffling' around :-) ]

Ouch!

The pun is mightier than the sword? :-)

"When puns are outlawed, only outlaws will have puns!"

etc.

Twenty years doing this kind of computer-modem communications
and it is endlessly fascinating to watch the egos jumping up
and down in high agitation! Everyone always "right" and
everyone else always "wrong!"

That pretty much sums up my experience over the last twenty years
online as well - unlike in real life arguements - things are very
black-or-white in the newsgroups.....with little compromise. Didn't
seem quite as bad on the BBS systems, though - Usenet really seems to
bring out the big egos. YMMV, of course!

No moderator present. All can drop their social conventions and
BE "all that they can (imagine) be." War heroes, sex kittens,
"doctors" (with PhDs from a correspondence "college"), all kinds
of better-than-everyone-else! :-)

As a co-sysop on a "social" BBS, actually a couple of them,
there was a chance to meet the real person in-person and find
out some were really what they said they were while others
were totally unlike their screen personna or just total flake
faux pas-sers. Lots of stories on that subject in this ultimate
geographical collection of really-real hams (in entertainment
industry). :-)

I find it continually amazing what people will argue over - or how
passionate they'll get over the most simple and unimportant issue.
I'm sure that there's a group somewhere on Usenet where death threats
are exchanged over whether rotary dial phones are superior to
TouchTone phones...

Can you imagine if real-life arguements played out like some of the
ones in this little alternate reality? Somebody would end up doing
some time for assault...or worse...

Actually I was once quite close to a real-life argument going
on live. Was along one side of a mini-mall in Burbank, CA,
that had the local HRO outlet (now moved to the other side).
Two hams (apparently) were into the finger-in-the-chest sort
of fight foreplay when I passed close to them with some
finished dry-cleaning (neatly wrapped). Not wanting to go
through the dry-clean cycle again, I avoided the heating-up
situation. A third (ham?) guy came out and spoke to both
and I drove off to home without seeing any fracas. Something
about "sub-bands" and individual license classes seemed to be
the main thesis of the testosterone-adrenaline-pumping exchange.

Once, on a social BBS, a group of "avenger" males decided to
"change the mind" of a womanizing schmuck. They did and said
schmuck later departed for other sites of conquest. Younger
type males, one a reservist (military) helo driver. Heard from
him what went down. Not pretty.

But here, in Fantasyland (not the one near you - this one...heh heh),
everyone feels safe and secure, so the inhibitions drop. Look at the
folks wrassling with some tool in another thread here for the last few
days, for example - if that 'discussion' took place in a bar, he'd
probably be waking up in Emergency somewhere early tomorrow morning.
But, because it's here, and that possibility doesn't exist, it's no
holds barred. Even the most bookish guy is Tyson when he's on
here.....ding ding!

It's like a real macho tuffy sauntering into a bar and
announcing "he'll lick any man in the joint!" All the
patrons smile in his direction. Doesn't realize he walked
into a gay bar...

Funny thing is - people are trying to convince the guy that he's
wrong, or heartless, or insensitive, or cruel - duh, it's obviously
intentional trolling, but somehow, that got missed by several
otherwise savvy folks..... Guess some peoples' radar doesn't work
when the face-to-face interpersonal aspect is isolated from the
conversation.

I liken it to morse code mode communications. Monotonic
arrhythmic tone bursts representing words and phrases. NO
tone of voice clues, no real emotion, no body language clue,
just the beeping. The beeper could be male, female, or
some unknown species...no way to tell for sure. Some hams
say they "make lifelong friends this way." OK for them, but
that's a bit like buying a used car sight unseen.

I will probably never fully understand the psychology of this.....

Ah, but the field observation can be totally fascinating! :-)

But, I suppose, as Barnum said..."There's a sucker born every minute."

Er, you weren't IN that bar I mentioned, were you?



He's doing it - I know he is..... and he knows that I know he's doing
it too

Tsk, tsk. :-)

Oh well - that's enough bashing at this for now....have a great
evening, Len!

Thank you and you too. Re-runs on the tube now that summer ist
a cumin' in, and HBO hasn't got anything tonight that we
haven't seen. :-(