> Robert of St Louis wrote:
>

>> Fuck You David....I am bowing out of this group...you have ruined it
>> and made it the the David Know It All group. I have nothing to learn
>> from your domination of the group. I plan to find some sincere folks
>> interest in Quakers instead of being full of themselves. You can
>> have this group on a silver platter and I will tell any of my
>> friends ,who might show an interested in FRIENDS, not to waste their
>> time here listening to your bullshit.

>
> Alas, I feel the same way. For a while, I had hope that we could
> agree to not respond to him or to the crossposted flamewars he
> invites here, but it seems that is not to be. The sad irony is
> that the same people who stubbornly resist the idea of not replying
> (and I am NOT talking about the one wise soul who tried replying
> only to non-abusive posts; that was a good idea even if it didn't
> work out) -- or who stubbornly resist the idea of not joining in when
> David invites some jews and Atheists to do their fighting here --
> are the first to throw up their hands and quit when they see the ...

>
> So is this group effectively dead (or would The Light best
> be served if we declared it dead and let it lie?) Do
> Whiskers, jeb, Ian & Jenny agree? What about Faith, haven't
> seen her for a while but would like to before we part ways
> (if we do)? Still, if it *is* Dead, there are other Quaker
> forums to fall back on (although I'm not as active there).
>
> Group discernment, please ( if I have the right to ask for
> it. )
>
> Yowie
>

>
>Engineer wrote:
>

>> Robert of St Louis wrote:
>>

>>> Fuck You David....I am bowing out of this group...you have ruined it
>>> and made it the the David Know It All group. I have nothing to learn
>>> from your domination of the group. I plan to find some sincere folks
>>> interest in Quakers instead of being full of themselves. You can
>>> have this group on a silver platter and I will tell any of my
>>> friends ,who might show an interested in FRIENDS, not to waste their
>>> time here listening to your bullshit.

>>
>> Alas, I feel the same way. For a while, I had hope that we could
>> agree to not respond to him or to the crossposted flamewars he
>> invites here, but it seems that is not to be. The sad irony is
>> that the same people who stubbornly resist the idea of not replying
>> (and I am NOT talking about the one wise soul who tried replying
>> only to non-abusive posts; that was a good idea even if it didn't ...

> Engineer wrote:

>> Robert of St Louis wrote:

>

>>> Fuck You David....I am bowing out of this group...you have ruined it
>>> and made it the the David Know It All group. I have nothing to learn
>>> from your domination of the group.  I plan to find some sincere folks
>>> interest in Quakers instead of being full of themselves.  You can
>>> have this group on a silver platter and I will tell any of my
>>> friends ,who might show an interested in FRIENDS, not to waste their
>>> time here listening to your bullshit.

>

>> Alas, I feel the same way.  For a while, I had hope that we could
>> agree to not respond to him or to the crossposted flamewars he
>> invites here, but it seems that is not to be.  The sad irony is
>> that the same people who stubbornly resist the idea of not replying
>> (and I am NOT talking about the one wise soul who tried replying
>> only to non-abusive posts; that was a good idea even if it didn't
>> work out) -- or who stubbornly resist the idea of not joining in when
>> David invites some jews and Atheists to do their fighting here -- ...

> On Apr 7, 2:13 pm, "Yowie" yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>> Engineer wrote:

>>> Robert of St Louis wrote:

>>

>>>> Fuck You David....I am bowing out of this group...you have ruined
>>>> it and made it the the David Know It All group. I have nothing to
>>>> learn from your domination of the group. I plan to find some
>>>> sincere folks interest in Quakers instead of being full of
>>>> themselves. You can have this group on a silver platter and I will
>>>> tell any of my friends ,who might show an interested in FRIENDS,
>>>> not to waste their time here listening to your bullshit.

>>

>>> Alas, I feel the same way. For a while, I had hope that we could
>>> agree to not respond to him or to the crossposted flamewars he
>>> invites here, but it seems that is not to be. The sad irony is
>>> that the same people who stubbornly resist the idea of not replying
>>> (and I am NOT talking about the one wise soul who tried replying
>>> only to non-abusive posts; that was a good idea even if it didn't
>>> work out) -- or who stubbornly resist the idea of not joining in ...

> No, its not a church, or a meeting house or a fellowship, but Usenet groups
> are often communities of people who have
> whatever-the-topic-of-the-newsgroup-is in common.
>
> You may think of SRQ as 'just another newsgroup', but it isn't to me, isn't
> to Engineer, isn't to Whiskers or Jeb, and even to David or Hendry in their
> own ways. Its something we care about and wish to contunue with as we found
> some benefit in talking about Quaker issues on a forum that is about the
> Quaker religion.
>

>> Usenet is like talk-radio:  don't take it so doggone seriously because
>> when you get down to the core it's really just entertainment.

>
> Its not *just* entertainment. For some of us - me - it is the closest thing
> I've got to a Quaker meeting as I can't practically get to one in real life,
> and has been a wonderful and informative forum to explore the faith in Jesus
> that I thought I had to give up because I couldn't stand main stream
> churches and thought (mistakenly) that Wicca was about as good as
> spirituality got. Its a sounding board, a discussion forum, a place to ...

> I wonder why you are
> posting to a Quaker forum at all. Do you have any interest in Quakerism at
> all or did you just come here because playing with David (and Rod before
> him) amused you?

> On Apr 8, 4:18 am, "Yowie" yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> Yowie - I think you really don't get Usenet; at least what it has
> become.

> Usenet in its present, and likely forever manifestation, is
> entertainment.

> On Apr 8, 4:18 am, "Yowie" yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>

>> I wonder why you are
>> posting to a Quaker forum at all. Do you have any interest in Quakerism at
>> all or did you just come here because playing with David (and Rod before
>> him) amused you?

>
> Oh, and BTW - I don't see communication with David amusing (nor
> really anyone else in here, for that matter) and if you think that
> "playing" with him was a motivation, you completely misunderstand. As
> far as my interest in Quakerism, I am actually quite versed in a
> number of religions and know enough to understand that your
> confrontation here is pretty much non-Quaker-like in nature.

> A John 3:16 Whosoever wrote:

>> On Apr 7, 2:13 pm, "Yowie" yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>>> Engineer wrote:

>>>> Robert of St Louis wrote:

>>>>> Fuck You David....I am bowing out of this group...you have ruined
>>>>> it and made it the the David Know It All group. I have nothing to
>>>>> learn from your domination of the group. I plan to find some
>>>>> sincere folks interest in Quakers instead of being full of
>>>>> themselves. You can have this group on a silver platter and I will
>>>>> tell any of my friends ,who might show an interested in FRIENDS,
>>>>> not to waste their time here listening to your bullshit.

>>>> Alas, I feel the same way. For a while, I had hope that we could
>>>> agree to not respond to him or to the crossposted flamewars he
>>>> invites here, but it seems that is not to be. The sad irony is
>>>> that the same people who stubbornly resist the idea of not replying
>>>> (and I am NOT talking about the one wise soul who tried replying
>>>> only to non-abusive posts; that was a good idea even if it didn't
>>>> work out) -- or who stubbornly resist the idea of not joining in
>>>> when David invites some jews and Atheists to do their fighting here ...