No Fake Sam, the conversation changed and it would have been improper
to have posted under an incorrect header. Just because others are lazy
does not mean that I will do the same.

samsloan wrote:
Rob wrote:
Mike Murray wrote:
On 25 May 2006 07:28:05 -0700, "Rob" wrote:


Mike Murray wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 12:55:41 GMT, (Sam Sloan)
wrote:

...We
can never sell the building because Harry Sabine put in a zoning
restriction that the building can only be owned as the headquarters
for a national not-for-profit organization recognized by an
international sporting organization. In other words, only the USCF can
ever own this building unless some other national not-for-profit
organization can be found .... Also, we do not have clear title to the land
under the building.

I hadn't heard these two claims before. I thought we got clear title
once we built and moved in.

Mike,
You are correct.
Rob

Rob,

I'm assuming you're answering the question of clear title. Are you
also addressing the zoning issue?
Mike,
I was referring to clear title. As I understand it, once they build
the land is theirs.
Land values around Crossville are exploding pricewise. Depending on
what the economy does, I magine they could roll the property in a few
years if needed and make a tidy profit.

There is a portion of the property that had drainage issues. It was not
in a position to adversely effect construction or require the purchase
of flood insurance. I would , however advise that flood insurance would
be prudent as ground water encroachment is not a covered peril under
property policies. They are a seperate policy entirely.
Rob

Again, Rob, stop changing the subject headers. If you want to start a
new discussion, please go right ahead. I will welcome it.

However, the discussion here pertains to improper payments made by Bill
Hall to Beatriz Marinello and to zoning restrictions which make it
impossible for us to sell the building in Crossville. You claimed above
that the information I provided was incorrect. When asked to explain
your statement, you instead started wrinting about drainage issues,
insurance and other matters which have nothing to do with the topic
here.

So, it seems that you have no idea what you are writing about because
your statement above, "As I understand it", when you are not privy to
the situation demonstrates that you know nothing about it.

When you are completely ignorant about a subject you should be quiet
and wait to see what others who know more than you have to say.

Sam Sloan

Rob wrote:
No Fake Sam, the conversation changed and it would have been improper
to have posted under an incorrect header. Just because others are lazy
does not mean that I will do the same.

samsloan wrote:
Rob wrote:
Mike Murray wrote:
On 25 May 2006 07:28:05 -0700, "Rob" wrote:


Mike Murray wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 12:55:41 GMT, (Sam Sloan)
wrote:

...We
can never sell the building because Harry Sabine put in a zoning
restriction that the building can only be owned as the headquarters
for a national not-for-profit organization recognized by an
international sporting organization. In other words, only the USCF can
ever own this building unless some other national not-for-profit
organization can be found .... Also, we do not have clear title to the land
under the building.

I hadn't heard these two claims before. I thought we got clear title
once we built and moved in.

Mike,
You are correct.
Rob

Rob,

I'm assuming you're answering the question of clear title. Are you
also addressing the zoning issue?
Mike,
I was referring to clear title. As I understand it, once they build
the land is theirs.
Land values around Crossville are exploding pricewise. Depending on
what the economy does, I magine they could roll the property in a few
years if needed and make a tidy profit.

There is a portion of the property that had drainage issues. It was not
in a position to adversely effect construction or require the purchase
of flood insurance. I would , however advise that flood insurance would
be prudent as ground water encroachment is not a covered peril under
property policies. They are a seperate policy entirely.
Rob

Again, Rob, stop changing the subject headers. If you want to start a
new discussion, please go right ahead. I will welcome it.

However, the discussion here pertains to improper payments made by Bill
Hall to Beatriz Marinello and to zoning restrictions which make it
impossible for us to sell the building in Crossville. You claimed above
that the information I provided was incorrect. When asked to explain
your statement, you instead started wrinting about drainage issues,
insurance and other matters which have nothing to do with the topic
here.

So, it seems that you have no idea what you are writing about because
your statement above, "As I understand it", when you are not privy to
the situation demonstrates that you know nothing about it.

When you are completely ignorant about a subject you should be quiet
and wait to see what others who know more than you have to say.

Sam Sloan


A primer of how to post on the usenet:

http://www.gweep.ca/~edmonds/usenet/ml-etiquette.txt


How do I post to the list?

When you subscribed, you probably received an information file about
the list. Included in this information is usually the mail address
to
which posts should be mailed. Typically, if you contacted the
address
to subscribe to the group, then the
posting address will be . Or, if you contacted
a
LISTSERV or Majordomo server at mail.server.site to subscribe to the
list betty, then the list address will likewise be
.

When replying to messages you receive from the list, you should
acquaint yourself with the reply options of your mail reader. Most
mail programs will have at least two reply modes: private and group.
A
private reply will go only to the person who sent the original
message. A group reply by default should go to the original author,
the list, and to any people who received private copies of the
original message. You should be able to edit this list of addresses
to
reduce it to just the list address, plus any other people you think
should receive private copies.

Please make sure that your postings have a meaningful subject line,
as
many people use this to help determine which posts to read and which
to ignore when they're operating under time constraints. If you're
replying to a message and the topic of your reply is drifting from
the
original subject, then edit it. A common convention is to change a
subject of ``Wilma's hair'' to ``Betty's hair (was Wilma's hair)''
when you do this to provide continuity between the threads. Try to
snip off any obsolete ``was'' bits though, or subject lines can get
unmanageably long.

Finally, do not use deceptive subject lines that you think may help
attract attention. It may work once or twice, but like the boy who
cried wolf, if you keep wasting people's time in this way, they'll
soon start ignoring your posts entirely. Honesty, clarity and
conciseness are the best policy when composing your subject line.
__________________________________________________ _______________

Is there anything I should not post to the list?

The basic rule is that as long as your post has some content related
to the primary subject of the list, and does not contain much
off-topic material, then it is fine for the list. Specifically, for
almost every list, this will immediately rule out many or all
commercial ads, postings on how to make money (such as MAKE MONEY
FAST), sociology surveys, help with homework, hot international
news,
and requests for people to send birthday greetings to your friend.

Also, you should not post inflammatory (aka flame) mail to the list.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with people publicly, but be
careful
how you do it. For example, if you think someone is lying on a
subject, it may be fine to say ``Betty's claims about Wilma's hair
stylist are a lie,'' but it is over the line to say ``Betty is a
liar''.

On the flip side, if someone posts something with which you are in
particular agreement, that's great. You should not, however, follow
up
to the list with a post containing no more than ``Me too!'' or
``Right
on, brother!'' If you have something of substance to add to the
discussion, then by all means do so, but if you simply wish to
express
a simple agreement, then do it in private mail.

You should not post subscribe or unsubscribe requests to the list.
They won't do any good there, and will do little more than annoy
other
subscribers (unless they're filtered out by the list server, in
which
case they will only annoy the list owner: not exactly a winning move
either). When you subscribe to the list, you should receive a file
explaining among other things, how to unsubscribe: keep this! If
worst
come to worst, and you really cannot figure out how to leave the
list,
contact the list owner and ask (politely) for help.

You should also not repost private email to the list unless you have
obtained prior consent from the author. Such reposting is at best
considered extremely rude, and in some legal jurisdictions may be a
violation of copyright, or other rights of the original author.


__________________________________________________ _______________

Posted by Rob from a netiquette link:

...Also, you should not post inflammatory (aka flame) mail to the list.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with people publicly, but be
careful
how you do it. For example, if you think someone is lying on a
subject, it may be fine to say ``Betty's claims about Wilma's hair
stylist are a lie,'' but it is over the line to say ``Betty is a
liar''.

According to Google, there have been at least 1,280 rgcp posts
containing the word "liar".

"Larry Tapper" wrote in message
oups.com...

Posted by Rob from a netiquette link:

...Also, you should not post inflammatory (aka flame) mail to the
list.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with people publicly, but be
careful
how you do it. For example, if you think someone is lying on a
subject, it may be fine to say ``Betty's claims about Wilma's hair
stylist are a lie,'' but it is over the line to say ``Betty is a
liar''.

According to Google, there have been at least 1,280 rgcp posts
containing the word "liar".

Is it just the word "liar" or would those cases where one refers to "Liarry"
count?

Randy Bauer

WHAT BAUER FORGOT

According to Google, there have been at least 1,280 rgcp posts
containing the word "liar." Is it just the word "liar" or would those
cases where one refers to "Liarry" count? -- Randy Bauer

Randy Bauer is our work of art. Still, he is strictly
fourth-rate art. He forgot to mention "the two Liarries."

Tush.

wrote in message
oups.com...
WHAT BAUER FORGOT

According to Google, there have been at least 1,280 rgcp posts
containing the word "liar." Is it just the word "liar" or would those
cases where one refers to "Liarry" count? -- Randy Bauer

Randy Bauer is our work of art. Still, he is strictly
fourth-rate art. He forgot to mention "the two Liarries."

Tush.

On cue, our second rate editor and third-world author checks in. As usual,
rather than answering the question, he hurls an insult.

The guy is a beaut.

Thanks, Larry, for telling it like it is. Once again you have
hit the nail on the head.* (jr)

*Thanks, jr, for once again telling us that you think Larry's
nail coincides directly with your head.* (Bauer)

*On cue, our second rate editor and third-world author
checks in. As usual, rather than answering the question,
he hurls an insult.* (Bauer)

Randy didn't ask a question.

As usual, he cast the first stone -- and it boomeranged.

Sally Fitz wrote:
"The USCF is like a dog that is full of self-serving ticks. The
directors
just make sure the USCF has enough money to pay its bills (and their
salaries) and the rest goes to themselves in sweetheart deals,
kickbacks,
and "reimbursements."

Yes ma'am. 'Tis a gruesome, pitiful picture but accurate from what I've
observed.

-----"Randy didn't ask a question.," jr., Liarry's dittohead.

Jr. , reading seems to be a problem for you:

----Is it just the word "liar" or would those cases where one refers to
"Liarry"
----count?

----Randy Bauer

Randy Bauer wrote:
"Larry Tapper" wrote in message
According to Google, there have been at least 1,280 rgcp posts
containing the word "liar".

Is it just the word "liar" or would those cases where one refers to "Liarry"
count?

That would be another 246 --- and I think these searches actually yield
undercounts, because if I'm not mistaken they often don't count
multiple messages in the same thread.

"Liarry", as you know, was a tiresome epithet invented by Jerry Bibuld
and copied by a few others. JB however is far from being the rgcp
leader in the tiresome epithet department.

LT