(OT) : Off-Topic "Sick-O" Post

RHF wrote:

On Sep 16, 6:12 am, msg wrote:
RHF wrote:
(OT) : Off-Topic "Sick-O" Post

What the heck does this refer to? Why didn't you preserve the original
header or include a partial quotation so we could determine the context?

Regards,

Michael

MSG - Here is a Link to the original 'sick' Message; since
you seem not to be able to simply follow this Thread.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...8d8245e2de8de4

now go vomit on a sick-o like the orignal poster ~ RHF
-or- maybe you enjoy that topic and ideas - I DON'T [.]
.


Actually, RHF, it is you who can't seem to understand that others do not see
threads that same as you do. Google displays threads differently than other
usenet readers. Most readers group threads based upon the subject. When you
change the subject, you create a new thread.

You view the world from your distorted perspective. Try thinking about the
other readers of the group.

RHF wrote:

On Sep 16, 6:12 am, msg wrote:

RHF wrote:

(OT) : Off-Topic "Sick-O" Post

What the heck does this refer to? Why didn't you preserve the original
header or include a partial quotation so we could determine the context?

Regards,

Michael


MSG - Here is a Link to the original 'sick' Message; since
you seem not to be able to simply follow this Thread.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...8d8245e2de8de4

now go vomit on a sick-o like the orignal poster ~ RHF
-or- maybe you enjoy that topic and ideas - I DON'T [.]
.


How can I follow a non-existent thread; I am not on 'Google Groups'.
In Usenet, the header determines the threading logic for many
newsreaders. If you create a new header, it begins a new thread.
I had no idea what you were talking about with no references to
any previous posts by message ID or to previous threads by
name.

I have no interest in the content of any perverse postings; just
expect that Usenet conventions be maintained so we're not kept
guessing.

Regards,

Michael