Tom Strange

aw niKa... I also trust you know I'm only about three hours away! (I'm not saying that in a "stalking" sort of way but a "helpful" way) :D-->

Zixar, if that's how you view it (I'm not arguing against that view with you)... why do you "feed the beast" by responding? Trolls post to get a reaction right? Why give them the reaction they desire? Why not just let it go? It'll disappear...

If I may, I'll put my responses in bold within the quote. I also "broke up" the quote for the responses (I don't think it ruins the context). Here we go...

oh zix! ...but are you old enough to know that it was synonymous with "premium"?

I don't know ex... what's a titfer?

I thought they were part of the SBC giant (SW Bell, Ameritech, PacBell, etc)

It's SBC Garth... (essentially the same guys you deal with I guess)... I was checking around, I suppose I can get the super duper version for about $10 more than I'm paying for the cable now... in which case, why should I switch yet? The cable seems to be Okay...

niKa... I always swallow the seeds (without chewing them)... I can never eat a watermelon without thinking "the life is in the seed"...!!! How's about that! Watermelon! You're right niKa... just the sound of it...!

Thanks for the replies guys. What you're saying is exactly how I understood it to be... that's why I kept pressing him... all of his claims were direct responses to me pressing him on these items... I'll check out the site as well... And you're correct Steve!, it's purely money... if I can get "close to" what I have now for half the price, I'll switch... but I'm beginning to think I'm not going to get "close to"...

The SBC DSL salesman called. (I currently have cable). I have questions that maybe you guys can help me with. 1) He said that I was within 12,000 feet of the switch so I should always experience good speed. I asked him what that meant and he said I should always be around 1500 or 1600 kbps. 2) I told him right now, I fluctuate between 1100 and 2200, it just depends on the time of day. I do experience some additional slowdown when more than one of us is "online". (we have 2 laptops and a desktop, at times all 3 are in use) He claims that there will be no slowdowns from additional users within the house being online, that my 1500 to 1600 will be constant and will be fully available to each user. (this is a concern as most of my wife's time online is working via Citrix and it seems to hog a lot of bandwidth) 3) He also claims that I won't experience the fluctuations that I do when other households "downstream or upstream" are using their cable to access. 4) I'll need to "chuck" my Linksys cable modem, but they will supply me (free) with a DSL modem. I should be able to just connect that to my Linksys Wireless Router right? 5) I questioned him about the phone wiring within my house. I think it's between 10 and 15 years old (it was my wife's prior to us being married). The reason I asked is because I have a friend who's house was built 3 years ago and he was told that his internal phone lines were not compatible with DSL. He claims there should be no problem. Is there something I can check by pulling off a wall plate and looking? I don't want to get into this thing if he's not telling the truth. I'm happy with the cable, it's just that the DSL is half the price. Thanks in advance for your help.

well Kit... you ARE a woman! Of course you liked them! :D--> My wife watches all of his movies whenever they're in the "rotation" on the movie channels... and I buy them for her when they come out on DVD!

niKa, I'm not arguing with any of your points in the post above. Geez, I haven't had any contact with JL for centuries. I think what Steve did was "in the spirit" of what Jeff did in starting this thread, i.e. public communication with/from JL. Jeff posted a letter from John to us. It was pointed out that this was not a "new" letter but a reposting of an old form letter. It raised a lot of questions with different people. Jeff either said, or alluded, that John had full knowledge of his posting of the letter. Jeff said that John would welcome emails from anyone who had questions. Could it all have been handled differently, and in a better fashion? YES. In the first place, if John wanted to address "the GSC crowd" he could have done it himself... but, in reading his response to Steve, and the way he references GSC, I don't know if I'm getting the feeling that John really 'authorized' the posting of that letter or if Jeff just thought it would be a good idea. Either way, Steve was quite open in his email to John. Although Steve, by telling him you're going to post his response (or lack thereof) you're kind of backing him into a corner publicly that I don't think he had anything to do with creating. I think this was a posting by Jeff (with good intentions) that went terribly wrong.

That's what I'm talking about. He11, I know the "legal stuff"... it would be morally unacceptable for me to keep that cure from the public. It might cost me my job and my future employment and probably some money... but it is something I would HAVE to do. Lives are at stake.Do you see any similarity to what John S. did? It was morally the right thing to do, regardless of "policy" or "who owned the rights"... how many lives were destroyed up to that point? how many did publishing the paper save?

So, applying your logic MJ, if I work for a company in their research department and I discover a cure for AIDS and that company doesn't want it to be made available. I shouldn't do it. It would be wrong to save the lives of thousands of people because the company doesn't want it. Is that about right?

Well PiMan, wait until you see her in invisible clothes! (you can check her out on here or here)

Really, I've not heard this before. I was under the impression (maybe errantly) that he took it upon himself to write and was subsequently "asked to leave"...

:D--> Thank you Radar... you are too kind! alas... I am old now... :(--> Of course we welcome the new lurker! Any friend of Mrs! is a friend of ours!

OUCH! (why did I have to do that?) :P-->

(looking around) Well... where is this "new poster"??? Mrs!, are you undershepherding?

oooh... well don't tell them about GSC or JWO! that's nice she gets to go with you... but you need to figure out how to go north during the summer and south during the winter!

Thanks Galen, take care... "see ya" around.

MasterP, does the espoza get to travel with you to these assignments?

Thanks for sharing brother Lingo... I think that describes what it was like for a lot of us... not all... but a lot.

Don't we all know that Lifted Up! Johnyouare, when the Bartman incident happened last year... couldn't you just see it (the panic, the "oh no", the curse) spreading from player to player like a black cloud? I know that I did... or at least thought I did...

Well... here I go again... I really think it depends on the perspective... (duh, of course it does)... Galen (quotes are from Galen): Like Alfakat, I was not around to experience most of the LCM years. I felt that I "saw" what he was and where he was headed and that wasn't my idea of what "God's Ministry" should be (My involvement was 74 to 80/81). As Alfakat also mentioned, it really sounds like "leadership" became hard hearted and mean spirited as the years went on. Not ALL leadership, but certainly a majority. That is truly a sad thing. See, I'm not disagreeing with you, I never have on that issue, I only disagree when you take that experience and then make the statement "ALL corps are". The "outlash" you speak of that I've seen was for taking your personal experience with some Corps and carte blanche applying it to ALL corps. I think you'd agree that applying your personal experience with individuals across every individual in the program doesn't make it true or fair. I can certainly see why you personally have an ill feeling towards Corps people, it's based upon your experience and it's human nature to think that way. I'm thinking that a large number of the active posters here who were corps would not fall into that category. Really? That is what you "heard" from those discussions? I guess something got lost in communication. You know I participated in (and read) many of the discussions you speak of. I really do not recall anyone ever saying "they were not responsible for their actions". What I do remember people trying to communicate was "they learned these behaviors from VPW & LCM." And I think the reason (JMO) that people kept focussing on the aspect that they learned how to act from VPW & LCM was because of a perception that you hold VPW in such high esteem. At least that's where I was coming from (and I think a lot of others were as well). We couldn't understand your statements blanketing ALL Corps with a high level of disdain while perceiving that you still held VPW in such high esteem. I don't ever think anyone said "Corps were not responsible for their actions", if they did they're wrong. What I heard being said was "they learned the behavior at the feet of "the teacher" and his successor. Yes, it would be. As I said above though, I didn't see it in the posts (assuming that posts are what you are referencing here). How so? I always assumed that you used to have "University of Life Grad" in your signature because it was an accomplishment you were proud of. I never took it to mean anything like "ooh, Galen's trying to seperate himself from an average believer." I notice that you no longer have "University of Life Grad" in your signature. I don't think I've ever seen ANY Corps person put "Corps Grad" in their signature, or any other example of the "puffiness" you allude to other than when people are sharing experiences that happened in residence, usually to help in understanding a story or example, I really haven't seen anyone saying "well, I was Corps". If someone is sharing an experience that happened to them "in residence" or "while on staff" etc., you could hardly fault them for mentioning it as part of the story. It's very similar to you stating in your stories "When I was under the sea" or "When we went to Italy". Could you please give an example or two? I'm thinking you want people to take this as a sarcastic comment. I could be mistaken. You were "in" for a long time. By your own admission your's was not the normal "innie" experience though was it? Someone reading your post who doesn't know your background wouldn't know that some of those years you only had contact with "leadership" twice a year... you were military and "under the sea" a lot of the time... right? I do not say this to minimize the dastardly actions of the Corps you came in contact with, only to point out that a civilian in your position of leadership would probably have the same overall contact with Corps in a year or two that you had in 18 years... maybe that's why you were able to put up with it for so long. I agree with you whole heartedly there. I don't see the "kid glove treatment" that was referred to either. I see people at times trying to be understanding of what others may have gone through and posting appropriately, but like you (I think) I don't see any "chosen" and I certainly don't see anyone holding "this power over others". Galen, I don't think anyone wants to "force you to be more apologetic"... :)--> I think (as I've stated a few times above) that EXCorps get offended when you use the ALL word. I think a lot of folks here respect you and your opinions. I know that I do. Part of the reason I've been able to gain that respect is through reading your experiences. You share your experience. That often entails relating some aspect of the military because that was a part of your life. I think it's much the same for EXCorps. It was a part of their life. Much the same way you cannot share a story without mentioning that you were "on base" or "under the sea" they cannot share a story either without saying "when in residence" or "when on staff". It's the perception. If you want to think they're setting themselves apart "carry(ing) with them the 'identity' of being seperate from an average believer" because they mention these things, so be it. I guess if I had the mindset that ALL Corps were bad, that "the only people that I ever saw within TWI who did hurt others, or mis-use others, or get into a believer's face and scream was Way-Corpse-grads" I'd probably "read" things into what they post as well. Do you consider this an "outlash"? I sincerely hope not. Take Care.