Thread: OT: Ah, the lengths they'll go to...

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...0a57-032d-45fd

On Aug 6, 8:36 am, Michel Boucher <alsand...@g.mail.com> wrote:
> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...a23a0a57-032d-...

I can't get your URL to work.

LeoS <[email protected]> wrote in news:6fdc4630-5795-4782-8a88-
[email protected]:

> On Aug 6, 8:36 am, Michel Boucher <alsand...@g.mail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...a23a0a57-032d-...
>
> I can't get your URL to work.

I having been having trouble with that...the link is not broken, it just
won`t paste as wrapped.

Michel Boucher <[email protected]> wrote:
> LeoS <[email protected]> wrote in news:6fdc4630-5795-4782-8a88-
> [email protected]:
>
> > On Aug 6, 8:36 am, Michel Boucher <alsand...@g.mail.com> wrote:
> > > http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...a23a0a57-032d-...
> >
> > I can't get your URL to work.
>
> I having been having trouble with that...the link is not broken, it
> just won`t paste as wrapped.

I copy/pasted the whole link and it says the URL is invalid.

Jill

"jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote in news:jY-
[email protected]:

> I copy/pasted the whole link and it says the URL is invalid.

Ok, I guess something is not right (I can get it to work).

http://starturl.com/rspbu

The URL it directs you to is:

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/n...e4c-51eb-4ba9-
8acc-77f8bf1402f5

Michel Boucher <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected] :

>
> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...0a57-032d-45fd
> -b779-2cdf85ab9bde
>

worked just fine for me...


http://tinyurl.com/63obm4

--

The house of the burning beet-Alan

On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:09:34 GMT, hahabogus <[email protected]> wrote:

>Michel Boucher <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected] 1:
>
>>
>> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...0a57-032d-45fd
>> -b779-2cdf85ab9bde
>>
>
>worked just fine for me...
>
>
>http://tinyurl.com/63obm4

Which is what he should have done in the first place.

Funny article.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Aug 6, 12:31*pm, sf wrote:

> >http://tinyurl.com/63obm4
>
> Which is what he should have done in the first place.

Actually I did post a short link to the Vancouver Sun's article as I'm
sure you've realized by now. However, I eschew short links on the
whole. There was a discussion some time back where some posters
indicated that they never used short links for fear they may be led
into a trap. Above and beyond the paranoia which short links seem to
engender, I do actually like to see the address where I am being sent
simply for the purpose of information, before I even decide to go
there.

So I didn't do it first off, or even third off...I did it when someone
complained. I've posted long links before and it went fine. I have
no idea what the matter was here.

On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:31:30 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:09:34 GMT, hahabogus <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Michel Boucher <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected] 31:
>>
>>>
>>> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...0a57-032d-45fd
>>> -b779-2cdf85ab9bde
>>>
>>
>>worked just fine for me...
>>
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/63obm4
>
> Which is what he should have done in the first place.
>
> Funny article.

hope they work up something nice for bush when he visits the hague.

your pal,
blake

On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 09:50:59 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:

> On Aug 6, 12:31*pm, sf wrote:
>
>>>http://tinyurl.com/63obm4
>>
>> Which is what he should have done in the first place.
>
> Actually I did post a short link to the Vancouver Sun's article as I'm
> sure you've realized by now. However, I eschew short links on the
> whole. There was a discussion some time back where some posters
> indicated that they never used short links for fear they may be led
> into a trap. Above and beyond the paranoia which short links seem to
> engender, I do actually like to see the address where I am being sent
> simply for the purpose of information, before I even decide to go
> there.
>
> So I didn't do it first off, or even third off...I did it when someone
> complained. I've posted long links before and it went fine. I have
> no idea what the matter was here.

not that i'm afeard, but i don't much like tinyurls either. more 'is this
gonna be worthwhile? than 'is this gonna be dangerous?'

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:54:41 GMT, blake murphy
<[email protected]> wrote:

>not that i'm afeard, but i don't much like tinyurls either. more 'is this
>gonna be worthwhile? than 'is this gonna be dangerous?'

What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
seems to be a new one for you two.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sf wrote in news:[email protected]:

> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:54:41 GMT, blake murphy
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>not that i'm afeard, but i don't much like tinyurls either. more 'is
>>this gonna be worthwhile? than 'is this gonna be dangerous?'
>
> What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
> seems to be a new one for you two.
>
>

So if somebody has never posted here before don't trust him; but if it is
a member who has a long time posting history trust them enough to believe
a tiny url is safe.

--

The house of the burning beet-Alan

sf wrote in news:[email protected]:

> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:54:41 GMT, blake murphy
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>not that i'm afeard, but i don't much like tinyurls either. more 'is
>>this gonna be worthwhile? than 'is this gonna be dangerous?'
>
> What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
> seems to be a new one for you two.

I posted both. Did I miss something here?

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 17:29:48 -0500, Michel Boucher
<[email protected]> wrote:

>sf wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:54:41 GMT, blake murphy
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>not that i'm afeard, but i don't much like tinyurls either. more 'is
>>>this gonna be worthwhile? than 'is this gonna be dangerous?'
>>
>> What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
>> seems to be a new one for you two.
>
>I posted both. Did I miss something here?

No, I missed your tinyurl when it was posted.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:34:59 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:54:41 GMT, blake murphy
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>not that i'm afeard, but i don't much like tinyurls either. more 'is this
>>gonna be worthwhile? than 'is this gonna be dangerous?'
>
> What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
> seems to be a new one for you two.

i bracket ( < > ) the u.r.l.s i post, which most newsreaders can handle.
if not, there's cut 'n' paste.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 17:29:48 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:

> sf wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:54:41 GMT, blake murphy
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>not that i'm afeard, but i don't much like tinyurls either. more 'is
>>>this gonna be worthwhile? than 'is this gonna be dangerous?'
>>
>> What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
>> seems to be a new one for you two.
>
> I posted both. Did I miss something here?

i was responding to alsandorz and in general, michel. don't worry, i still
love you.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>>> What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
>>> seems to be a new one for you two.
>>
>> I posted both. Did I miss something here?
>
> i was responding to alsandorz and in general, michel. don't worry, i
> still love you.

Seeing as alsandorz is me...:-)

On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:41:51 -0500, Michel Boucher
<[email protected]> wrote:

>blake murphy <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>>>> What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
>>>> seems to be a new one for you two.
>>>
>>> I posted both. Did I miss something here?
>>
>> i was responding to alsandorz and in general, michel. don't worry, i
>> still love you.
>
>Seeing as alsandorz is me...:-)

He's not a mind reader. We know you as Michel, not alsandroz... you
could at least keep one pen name for an entire thread.

I'm really tired of all the new names for old posters who aren't
giving us clues about who they are/were. Getting ready to KF them
all, no matter how nice or friendly. I'm done with petty games of cat
and mouse. Alasndroz is hitting the KF first.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 14:48:47 GMT, blake murphy
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:34:59 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:54:41 GMT, blake murphy
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>not that i'm afeard, but i don't much like tinyurls either. more 'is this
>>>gonna be worthwhile? than 'is this gonna be dangerous?'
>>
>> What's so hard about posting both long and short urls. This concept
>> seems to be a new one for you two.
>
>i bracket ( < > ) the u.r.l.s i post, which most newsreaders can handle.
>if not, there's cut 'n' paste.
>
I'm over cut & paste. If people want me to click on, they can provide
an unwrapped url along with the original huge one.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West