dmiller

Hmmmmm. I don't have that feature on my screen. Matter of fact, the smilies to the left are not clickable for me either. I have to type in the bbcode for any and all *alterations* like color, italics, etc.

:) :) :) :) :) David

Seth -- Congratulations On Your Anniversary!! B) B) B) B) B) David

Yup. Yeshua = Jesus. And I am certain He would have an entirely different point of view from either the one you espouse, or the one I espouse. 'nother words -- I don't know if either of us is right, but I suspect that there will be a day when we find out. I've got my fingers crossed for all of us! :D And I will say this (for the benefit of the folks that think they are absolutely right) --- there is only ONE who is right. Sure -- everyone here seems to know the *truth* (in all it's various forms), but as Oak just said, he and I are worlds apart (doctrinally speaking), yet both of us are willing to acknowledge the fact that there is an intangible entity that cannot be grasped (physically), and we do our best to understand it as best we can. Civility may not be mandatory here, but it sure would be a nice addition. :D :D David

Found this when I googled Skip: Since when was TAKIT an L.A. band?? Me thunk they were based outta New Knoxville!! But then again -- what do I know? :D David

Wow!! Glad you like it!! I really like the Believer link page on the Cortright site. Have found a lot of folks I used to know there, that I have lost track of over the years. Am pleased I was able to help you out. :) David

I'm not feeling *warm and cozy* for saying what I said. All I said was "Tell that to Yeshua. He might have a slightly different opinion." And in case you missed it -- I said that in response to what Oak said (doubtfully) about one person's experience being good enough for the whole world. I personally think that that one person's experience was enough for the whole world. And suffice it to say, He isn't posting on this site, or sending folks to a fiery place because of a difference of opinion! :D (again --- just an IMO -- but I do think that all *accusations* of personal experience, should go all the way up to the top, and not just be relegated to those of us here on GreaseSpot. What do you say, eh?) David

This here also drives home the point that not all editing is done to correct spelling, etc. Honest mistakes are made (I've made many myself), and the chance to go back and rectify matters only makes sense. As Psalmie says -- she noted in her latter posts that she would go back to edit that which she considered objectionable. I've done the same thing in the past on the other board. There's a lot of things that factor into one's decision to edit a post, and not all entities are readily recognizable within a certain time limit. :) David

Tell that to Yeshua. He might have a slightly different opinion. :)

Laleo -- my guess is that no one would have stuck around very long. I'm not sure of the meaning of that either, but that is what I think it to mean. Wingnut -- did I get it right?? :unsure:

Ahhhhhhhh. Got it! :) (ps -- I always remain silent in the church. That way they don't know when I skipped out early!) :D heh heh!

I was in a band once, that required everyone to wear ties. I can't play fiddle with that knot around my neck, so I refused. They kicked me out, and my replacement was so bad, they wanted me back. I told them I would, if they got rid of the ties. They didn't, and I didn't. Matter of fact -- I have a hard time breathing with a tie on. Screw em. Don't know how the *professional guys* do it day after day. Guess that is why they get the *big bucks*. As far as *sitting with testicles* goes, it is done gently and with great care!! :D :D

Rascal -- good point, and while I agree with it --- the book doesn't end at the last page. :) It continues on and transcends the folks of that time, even though it concerns the folks of that time as well. Not trying to be arguementative here. I don't see it as *just* a history book only, even though some do. Perhaps the people mentioned then were finite, but the thoughts put forth are applicable for all ages, not just back then. As usual --- just an IMO. :) David

Nope! :D (you'll turn blue with a tongue waggin out of your mouth, unable to speak!)

That is a topic that I have never thought about. Nor do I wish to.

I think this says it best. While some misuse the edit feature, most do not. Most use it honestly and without malice or ego-centered ambitions of making themselves look better. Speaking for myself only, I find the edit feature a useful tool. I agree with Satori about the *archiving* of posts, before the thread itself is archived. Until a thread is archived, I would like to be able to act as *moderator* on what I said. For those who don't care about it, don't use it. :) For those of us who would like the option, it would be nice to have it ((cough!!)) Available!! :D :unsure: :D David

I agree rascal. I don't think docvic ever did envision the day that *special permission* would be needed to access hdqtrs. Administrations come, and administrations go -- and the one in power now doesn't go by any set of rules except those of their own making. Sadly -- they seem to make them stick. :( Sami -- it pleases me that you got to do what you wanted, even if you had to jump through a coupla *hoops* to do it. Perhaps because of what you did, there will be less hoops for others in the future to jump through. I hope so. David

Jeannette -- If you are looking for music by ex-way folks, go to THIS PAGE for cd's and such. You'll see a lot of familiar names there. The Cortright Site is a wealth of information for ex-twi folks. Hope this helps. :) David

well --- yes, and no. :) Docvic did a good job of taking from others, and purported it to be his own *research* (as you know). I have to agree, I didn't pay real close attention (back then), but now that I do (these days), I have no problem identifying a *problem*, and calling it by it's real name. :unsure: So if any topic (like plagiarism) from twi is now *suspect*, perhaps it is because some of us *woke up*, and are not as guillible (sp?) as we used to be, eh?? Just an IMO on my part. B) David

Woops -- I mis-spoke a few words, or missed some coyrect punctuation there. Regardless -- do what you will! David

Heh heh -- you do what you want to do. :) I think both suit you well. The choice is yours. (Ps. --- took me a while to find the Fiddlehead avatar I wanted, but the wait was worth it. As* they say* (whovever they are say, go for what you want!!!) They both look good. :) David

Sam (Bush for president!) :D :lol: And Sammy Shelor for vice-prez!! :D (If we have to *pick and choose* our battles, let us pick first, and choose later.)

Hmmmmm. Scott Vestal and Russell Moore are the musical *offshoot* equivilants of what was the foundation of bluegrass. Like following *religious* off shoots, one gets a better perspective of the music by following the off shoots that come from that genre, while respecting the original. Earl re-wrote how banjo was to be played, but Scott Vestal (and others) took it to new heights. Father Bill invented the music and sang the *High Lonesome Sound*, but Russell walks all over him in the vocal department. Flatt and Scruggs were a premier band, but The Lonesome River Band transcends, and surpasses all that has been done before. Well -- I like the old as well as the new. Even though Father Bill called the mandolin *first child*, I bet he never did expect the likes of Sam Bush to come to the forefront, and re-define mandolin like no other has done. :)

I agree -- I don't see it as a censorship, but I do see it as a detriment (of sorts). What Abi said makes sense to me. There's many reasons for wanting to edit, besides the CYA aspect of it. I'll go along with it either way, even if it means really looking over what I say, before I hit the *enter* button.