>At 09:24 AM 6/17/97 PDT, Adam Rifkin wrote:
>>I just wanted to take this time to thank the newbies -- five in just this
>>past month! -- for putting up with all of our stupid rants and raves. Feel
>>free to lurk all you want; we'll make more.
Thank me? Thank you. These postings kept me awake during an 18 hour shift
>>Also, someone asked why so many people feel the need to insult me on
>>this public, Web-indexed forum, such as
>>To this I can only respond, it's because I have the peace of mind and
>>inner spirit that these fellows fear they can never possess.
So true Adam. To know you is to love you.
>> close with a frightening thought. Rohit expects that any woman who
>>will eventually become his significant other, will not just be willing,
>>but actually *want* to read this 3800+, 22MB arsenal of FoRKspew.
>Which reminds me. I recently posted
>a 'shadchan' (matchmaker) list of options for Rohit. But I now
>realize that we have an eligible bachelor with a list full of eager
>matchmakers, and we have Rohit's best friend with an eligible
>sister. Hmm, Adam and Rohit become brothers-in-law? This
>has potential. Then again, by the description of Ms. Rifkin
>I've seen, I doubt she's the type to read the FoRK archives.
>And I'm not sure she'd be Rohit's type, though maybe that's
>best left to them to decide.
>So Adam, are you posting that private thread you now
>have public permission to post?
>>We've already ascertained that no one on this list actually reads
>>everything posted here (gentlefolks, get your delete finger ready!). To
>>expect that --- nay, even hope that --- some woman would love Rohit enough
>>to slog through thousands of emails about shooter girls, enough jargon
>>to make Bob Metcalfe comfortably numb, and occasional goodnatured
>>flamefests (call me the master baiter: JoeK, you wuss, by listening to
>>only melodies and harmonies you aren't giving your ear the workout
>>they'll need to survive the sound and fury of the nuclear armageddon
>>coming in 1999 since your eyes will be closed for fear of turning into a
>>pillar of salt) is tantamount to expecting that one day through science
>>and engineering someone will invent a method of nailing a piece of Jello
>>to a tree. Or a method of pushing toothpaste back INTO the tube. Or a
>>method of lighting a match on a piece of soap. Or a method of dribbling
>>a football. Or a method to ski through revolving doors.
>>Give it up, TravelMan. Bitboy's here to give you a pocket full of
>>PS - Rohit, is my subject line good enough for you? Maybe someday you'd
>>like to see my object line, too?
>>My God, he takes everything that's good about the Web and perverts it!
>> -- Adam Rifkin about Tim Byars
>See Rule #1 above. Catching on, us grasshoppers, huh Tim?