A Very Memorable Dive in Cozumel

ronleenospam@pcisys.net (Ron Lee) wrote in message news:<4057e3b5.15908723@news.pcisys.net>...
> Having another bad day Bob? What "felony" did I commit?

The one Jason caught you doing, in the post you included below.


> That almost sounds libelous.

Besides childishly idiotic, you are severely humor impaired too.

> Get help Bob

For your Obcessive Compulsive Syndrone? That's YOUR problem.
> Ron Lee

Go back to your non-scuba ng sandboxes and play there.

-- BOb.
>
>
> Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com (Reef Fish) wrote:
>
> >ronleenospam@pcisys.net (Ron Lee) wrote in message news:<4056ffea.1097401@news.pcisys.net>...
> >> jor@soda.csua.berkeley.edu (Jason O'Rourke) wrote:
> >>
> >> >umm, I basically ignore Ron. Even took him to task for bait you
>
> >>
> >> Jason, Your scolding of me was based upon you not knowing the facts.
> >> Yes I did use a thread that was one of Bob's unusually good posts to
> >> berate him for childish name-calling. However, I had just moments
> >> before read the unprovoked name calling
> >
> >Ron, what you referred to was the post in which I called ARNE an
> >Aldora IDIOT, in his LU post.
> >
> >So, now you admitted you started the pollution of one of a very
> >few posts that talked about DIVING, because you had read
> >something else in an entirely unrelated post.
> >
> >If you wanted to bitch, why didn't you go, or go back THERE?
> >
> >This is how IDIOTIC you are, Ron.
> >
> >And you have the audacity, after having admitted to being a felon,
> >berate Jason for taking you to task on your felony, and you
> >CONTINUE your childish role in ALL the posts related to MY
> >post about diving that was polluted by YOU, Ron Lee.
> >
> >What kind of low-lying bottom-dwelling scum are you?
> >
> >> Ron Lee

Ron Lee <ronleenospam@pcisys.net> wrote:
>Having another bad day Bob? What "felony" did I commit? That almost
>sounds libelous. But considering the source, it is just ramblings of
>a person who has serious issues.

hey, it sounds like you got a new title. I've long been CRIMINAL,
but don't think I ever got FELON.
--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com

> Having another bad day Bob? What "felony" did I commit? That almost
> sounds libelous. But considering the source, it is just ramblings of
> a person who has serious issues.
>
> Get help Bob
>
> Ron Lee
>
>
Ron,

Just more dribble Bob adds to the posting archive....so that he can "invent"
his own history later. I'm sure the posts (his posts) will be used as a
reference later. Makes me smile. Bob you 'ol trickster. What a lame
manipulator of data. You really do give the statistics profession a bad
image.

Forest Aten

" H. Huntzinger" <{NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba@huntzinger.com> wrote in message news:<{NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba-36E7B4.08254017032004@news-east.ash.giganews.com>...


> > > > Didn't that include two pictures of whalesharks by Hugh that had
> > > > NOTHING to do with Las Palmas just to show what a great photog
> > > > Hugh Huntzinger is?
> > >
> > >
> > > Nope.
> >
> > Yup! Read it VERY carefully. "by Hugh" didn't say "taken by
> > Hugh". It was PUT THERE "by Hugh". They weren't placed there
> > by ME that's for sure.
>
>
> Such utter bullshit...you really are a clown, Bob.
>
> Afterall, if we actually are to believe your requested revision,

I requested NOTHING from you. I gave you PERMISSION to edit the
pix I put in the Yahoo web, as I did everyone who requested or implied.
Lamest excuse I've heard.


> > Your "most viewers" "probably gave up" is your declarative statement
> > WIHTOUT any shread of evidence.
>
>
> Yes, it is my personal opinion, Bobo....er, Robert F Ling.

A completely baseless opinion, as all yours in the earlier posts were!

Are you doing a Lee Bell impersonation now? You are making a
pretty good damned fool all by yourself, with your "copyright
violation" bullshit.


> > > > When an expert UW photog heard about this, he had this to say
>
> > > > *> And anyone shallow enough to criticize others' photography -
> > > > *> without being specifically asked to provide such criticism -
> > > > *> is best left alone anyway.
> >
> > If you think the STATEMENT itself is wrong -- shoot it down
>
>
> I have no problem with the statement itself - but it gets "shot down"
> when you cite it in the current context

It was exactly in THIS (the current) context! It was not shot down
by anyone, including yourself.



> And since they haven't degraded sufficient to cause JPG Artifacts, your
> entire arguement about the file format you used is _still_ irrelevant.

Mis-direction by you FAILED miserably.
>
> The use of the JPG format will NOT cause images to uniformly go out of
> focus.

I was paraphrasing (and later shown verbatim) Bjorn's GENERAL
statememnt about .jpg images in PhotoShop editing.

It had NOTHING to do with the seahorse in question nor uniform
out of focus.

You know, Hugh -- in been in the army barracks too long. It REALLY
showed -- your "military intelligence" (the oxymoron one).



> > If you think a DIGITAL camera uees film, negatives and slides,
> > what else can one say, or needs to be said?
>
>
> Besides that its wrong? How about:
>
> Bob Ling is a lair who is continuing to invent new, false claims in an
> extremely transparently lame attempt at revisionist history.

Shameless obfuscation. Hugh, YOU were the one who broght out the
notion of "negatives" and "slides" in YOUR bitching about MY pix.

My piz were taken with a DIGITAL camera which used NO film, no
negative, and I made NO slides from them, to put up the Yahoo web
page pix.

Now RE-READ what I said in that context, and your lame, LIAR excuses.




> > I am finished with you now, Hugh.
>
> Bob is pathologically incapable of that;

Hey, I defend myself against LIARS. See the above.

YOU are the one holding the GRUDGE that is pathelogically incurable!
Look at the mirror and review the archives.

>
> I was going to predictively say that Bob will be absolutely unable to
> resist giving me further attention

RF> Hey, I defend myself against LIARS. See the above.


> BTW, sorry for my delay in responding, Bob:

Could it be possible that you tried to goad Bjorn into charging me
copyright violations, and/or that Bjorn agrees with everything I
said about his article as being an accurate paraphrase?


> you're a low priority.
>
>
>
> -hh


You are just LOW. But, congratulation, you are NOT as LOW as
your stooge, Lee Bell -- who played your hatchet-man on Scuba-SE,
when you're too cowardly to show up there.

-- Bob.

" H. Huntzinger" <{NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba@huntzinger.com> wrote in message news:<{NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba-36E7B4.08254017032004@news-east.ash.giganews.com>...


I have already responded to Hugh's LIES and misdirections in his post.


> Bob Ling is a lair who is continuing to invent new, false claims in an
> extremely transparently lame attempt at revisionist history.


Here's is a post (in a PUBLIC DOMAIN) and hence has Bjorn's IMPLICIT
person to use it in this forum. You can judge whether Bob or Hugh
was doing "revisionist history":


This was the unedited post, by Bjorn, in its entirety:


========= Begin verbatim post

Reef Fish wrote:

> What Hugh actually SAID was:
>
> hh> If I get a chance, I'll write an email to Strike and Bjorn to
> hh> mention to them how you've gotten cropping, downsamping and
> hh> lossy file formats all confused - - I'm sure that they'll get
> hh> a good laugh out of it.
>
> What Hugh acctually DID was sending Bjorn the email goading Bjorn
> to act against my "copyright violoation".

He did send me a mail, and because it was private, I will not quote it -
some of us have ethics

I replied along exactly the same lines as I have done in this forum, which
is that I chose to place something I wrote in the public domain. It may be
used, abused, misunderstood or misquoted by anyone, and that is the price I
pay for my 15 minutes of fame. I don't know whether it WAS in fact abused,
misunderstood or misquoted, but I have Bob's word (100% backed up by Hugh's
e-mail) that he quoted me verbatim and with credit to me and the site that
posted it. That's plenty good enough for me. With any luck, some people
actually went and read the whole article, which is a good thing, because
they would perhaps have learned something, and they would have become
acquainted with Nekton.

When challenged, Hugh replied that he was NOT trying to entice me to go on
rec.scuba and refute anything, and that's good enough for me, too.

Bjorn
============= end verbatim post


So, Hugh came on rec.scuba and rec.scuba.locations to make up his
LIES, in Hugh's revisionist history, regarding my paraphrase of
what Bjorn said in his article (Bjorn knows that verbatim too
elsewhere in THAT public forum).

Hugh's version somehow doesn't QUITE agree with the gist of
what Bjorn said about the PRECISE issue.

Readers can judge for themselves on WHO is LYING and WHO is telling
the truth, regarding what I said about editing and Bjorn's article.

I gave the exact reference to the article in http://www.e-nekton.com


Given what Bjorn posted, I heartily endorse his modest statement:


BVJ> With any luck, some people
BVJ> actually went and read the whole article, which is a good thing,
BVJ> because they would perhaps have learned something, and they
BVJ> would have become acquainted with Nekton.


That would certainly be the "silver lining" of the UGLY DARK CLOUD
single-handedly created by Hugh Huntzinger himself.

Enjoy Bjorn's full article, and THEN come back and re-read the
entire thread in rec.scuba.locations and rec.scuba, if you really
want to decide for YOURSELF (rather than listening to either Hugh
or me) who is the LIAR here.

-- Bob.

"Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8fb7380b.0403171213.24ac1c3b@posting.google.c om...

> Readers can judge for themselves on WHO is LYING and WHO is telling
> the truth,

I don't think any readers care Bob.

By virtue of your incessant psychotic carping,.........if someone was shot
dead and Hugh was found standing over the body with a smoking gun in hand, a
smirk on his face and written confession taped to his chest..........I think
the ng would vote to hang *you*.

You are far to unsympathetic for anyone to care about right or
wrong.....accuracy and error. Don't you see that?

"Forest Aten" <forestaten@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<Nq16c.29725$J05.197424@attbi_s01>...

> > Ron Lee
> >
> >
> Ron,
>
> Just more dribble Bob adds to the posting archive....so that he can "invent"
> his own history later. I'm sure the posts (his posts) will be used as a
> reference later. Makes me smile.
>
> Forest Aten

Yes, Forest. This post should make you smile. It was in the
thread "Ranting Robert", started all by Forest himself denying that
he is a "travel agent".

This was my follow-up.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=fo... le.com&rnum=1

Here's a shorter URL for the same:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com


Ah, your DF (Dear Friend) Hugh Huntzinger is going to drop in here
and rant about how he can shorten the URL in HIS browser.

But the message is the same.

Forest says,
> P.S. Bob...I'm not a travel agent. That propaganda kind of reeks


My post cited ALL the various times that FOrest BRAGS about his
travel business, and booked CLIENTS, such as:

FA> I told you that the boat the week before you was full of people
that
FA> were in the dive travel business (including me), I told you that I
sold
FA> trips, that I supervised divers in the water and and
and.......hahahahaha

And you say you are NOT a "travel agent", Forest? Forest NEVER
responded to that post. Perhaps you can do so now.

That was Forest Aten, not talking to ME, but flaming Chris Flaum,
who posted a nice and accurate trip report about the Tobago
liveaboard.


Forest, did I "invent" all those quotes preceded by "FA"?


-- Bob.

"Luca Cappelli" <nosp@mplease.com> wrote in message news:<JQ46c.75$OT.57977@news.uswest.net>...
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:8fb7380b.0403171213.24ac1c3b@posting.google.c om...
>
> > Readers can judge for themselves on WHO is LYING and WHO is telling
> > the truth,
>
> I don't think any readers care Bob.

Who cares what YOU think?

>
> By virtue of your incessant psychotic carping,.........if someone was shot
> dead and Hugh was found standing over the body with a smoking gun in hand, a
> smirk on his face and written confession taped to his chest..........I think
> the ng would vote to hang *you*.

That's a fairly good portrayal of SOME rec.scubans, the noise
makers that gives rec.scuba a bad reputation that it has.

Your statement is a self-indictment of YOUR mentality, Luca.

It's an INSULT to many intelligent (silent majority, many of
whom I know over the years) readers and posters in rec.scuba.


> You are far to unsympathetic for anyone to care about right or
> wrong.....accuracy and error. Don't you see that?

No. And certainly not going to take the word of a Mentle Midget
like yourself who has written his self-indictment in his post.

-- Bob.

Oh...my bad...I didn't recognize the delusional component of your
personality. I need to thank you for exposing it in such a way that even a
"Mentle Midget" would recognize it.


"Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8fb7380b.0403172020.246930f@posting.google.co m...
> "Luca Cappelli" <nosp@mplease.com> wrote in message
news:<JQ46c.75$OT.57977@news.uswest.net>...
> > "Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:8fb7380b.0403171213.24ac1c3b@posting.google.c om...
> >
> > > Readers can judge for themselves on WHO is LYING and WHO is telling
> > > the truth,
> >
> > I don't think any readers care Bob.
>
> Who cares what YOU think?
>
> >
> > By virtue of your incessant psychotic carping,.........if someone was
shot
> > dead and Hugh was found standing over the body with a smoking gun in
hand, a
> > smirk on his face and written confession taped to his chest..........I
think
> > the ng would vote to hang *you*.
>
> That's a fairly good portrayal of SOME rec.scubans, the noise
> makers that gives rec.scuba a bad reputation that it has.
>
> Your statement is a self-indictment of YOUR mentality, Luca.
>
> It's an INSULT to many intelligent (silent majority, many of
> whom I know over the years) readers and posters in rec.scuba.
>
>
> > You are far to unsympathetic for anyone to care about right or
> > wrong.....accuracy and error. Don't you see that?
>
> No. And certainly not going to take the word of a Mentle Midget
> like yourself who has written his self-indictment in his post.
>
> -- Bob.

> > Ron,
> >
> > Just more dribble Bob adds to the posting archive....so that he can
"invent"
> > his own history later. I'm sure the posts (his posts) will be used as a
> > reference later. Makes me smile.
> >
> > Forest Aten
>
> Yes, Forest. This post should make you smile. It was in the
> thread "Ranting Robert", started all by Forest himself denying that
> he is a "travel agent".
>
> This was my follow-up.
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=fo... le.com&rnum=1
>
> Here's a shorter URL for the same:
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...g.goog le.com
>
>
> Ah, your DF (Dear Friend) Hugh Huntzinger is going to drop in here
> and rant about how he can shorten the URL in HIS browser.
>
> But the message is the same.
>
> Forest says,
> > P.S. Bob...I'm not a travel agent. That propaganda kind of reeks
>
>
> My post cited ALL the various times that FOrest BRAGS about his
> travel business, and booked CLIENTS, such as:
>
> FA> I told you that the boat the week before you was full of people
> that
> FA> were in the dive travel business (including me), I told you that I
> sold
> FA> trips, that I supervised divers in the water and and
> and.......hahahahaha
>
> And you say you are NOT a "travel agent", Forest? Forest NEVER
> responded to that post. Perhaps you can do so now.
>
> That was Forest Aten, not talking to ME, but flaming Chris Flaum,
> who posted a nice and accurate trip report about the Tobago
> liveaboard.
>
>
> Forest, did I "invent" all those quotes preceded by "FA"?
>
>
> -- Bob.

Bob,

Your post did make me smile. A lot. hahahaha

Owning a dive travel business doesn't make me a travel agent. You are such a
card. You really dodge the important stuff don't you Bob? Your mind is all
over the place. When the mind goes..it goes. hahahah It's not so good for
those around you. You probably haven't noticed. I hope you have tried to get
help simply for the benefit of those that have to be around you.

And I didn't "flame" Chris Flaum. The dialog was extremely reasonable. I
guess you missed that part. Chris seems to be a nice guy. I think without
you in the mix he would have enjoyed his trip a lot more. I'm sure your
presence on a boat would be like the plague. I think it's probably best for
the charter operations and/or the land based dive companies you use, that
you not broadcast when or where you'll be at a particular location. It's not
going to be so good for their business. Think about it Bob. I'd go on the
sly if I were you...just to protect the companies you like to use.

Forest Aten