05 May 2008 22:55:01

Douglas W. Popeye Frederick

Re: Oh how I LOVE THIS TOWN!

What Futile John said: "A few years back a few of us were also posting to another scuba board run by a fairly controlling individual. Popeye took exception to something there and raised some hell. I stood up for him and got myself in some trouble for it. No big deal. The other board wasn't that good anyway." "My problem was that later Popeye took delight in bragging here about how he went to that board for the sole purpose of getting himself banned to make some kind of statement. Then in the next breath he tears into me personally for not taking up his cause there with enough ferocity or something. I'm not sure how much more defence he expected than getting myself banned as well, albeit without the sturm und drang he managed to raise. I never fully understood his issues with me at the time but I realized then for certain that he was a peculiar personality, with some kind of disconnect between reality and his perception of it, along with a totally skewed sense of personal ethics, for all his grandiose self promotion. Things kinda went downhill from there between us." What -I- said: >A few years back a few of us were also posting to another scuba board >run by a fairly controlling individual. Popeye took exception to >something there and raised some hell. I stood up for him and got >myself in some trouble for it. No big deal. The other board wasn't >that good anyway. That's a lie. Neither did you stand up for me, to any degree, or get in any trouble for it. You were posting there long after I left. You did, in fact, make mitigating comments about all your friends here at Rec.scuba, and something to the effect of, that's the best that could be expected of "those people over there". And -that's- what I took you to task about, as I have many others. >My problem was that later Popeye took delight in bragging here about >how he went to that board for the sole purpose of getting himself >banned to make some kind of statement. That's a (rediculous) lie. I had a pretty decent posting history there, and was kicked by a moderator over a personal disagreement about scuba ESA technique. >Then in the next breath he >tears into me personally for not taking up his cause there with enough >ferocity or something. I don't remember you taking it up at all, although you may have given me a weak one liner. What I tore into you about was your remarks about your fellow Rec.scubans. Better hope I can't get into the Scubaboard archives. <weg > Lucky for you, they may be long gone. >I'm not sure how much more defence he expected Oh, I got about what I expected. >than getting myself banned as well, albeit without the sturm und drang >he managed to raise. I never fully understood his issues with me at >the time but I realized then for certain that he was a peculiar >personality, with some kind of disconnect between reality and his >perception of it, along with a totally skewed sense of personal >ethics, for all his grandiose self promotion. Things kinda went >downhill from there between us. Things went down hill for us because you tell these kinds of lies, and then, -scurry-. The thing is, no matter how factually I refute it, we'll be hearing it again and again. What was said: ============================== John Francis View profile More options Jul 23 2003, 3:37 pm Newsgroups: rec.scuba From: John Francis <johnfran...@sympatico.ca.remove > Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 15:20:43 -0400 Local: Wed, Jul 23 2003 3:20 pm Subject: Re: More Scubaboard Fun On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 17:51:01 GMT, "Jon C" <j...@jonnythan.com > wrote: >It's pretty obvious from the irc logs and the rec.scuba discussions that >you guys hang around SB just to cause trouble. >It's like the 7th grade bad boy who gets detention all the time... it's not >because he's a constant troublemaker, it's because the Principal is out to >GET HIM! I've taken to reading scubaboard recently and was pleasantly surprised to see Popeye pop up. I forget the thread in which I first saw him there but his comments were germane and worthwhile and his contribution was appreciated by the other folks involved. After that I saw him in a few others, same reception. Perhaps because I'm innured to the confrontational style of rec.scuba I didn't see anything amiss in the thread referred to here until the comments about Popeye getting the boot etc. I was surprised at that reaction to a thread, even a somewhat combative one. Personally I had no trouble understanding Popeye's reasoning and wondered why certain others were being so obtuse. I mean, given the choice between breathing off the bcd and drowning, I'll suck the bladder out if it will help. A few chose to deal with the issue as a simple matter of better dive planning and others suggested that this ain't a perfect world, so why assume everything will stay in it's proper orbit and tanks won't find themselves mysteriously empty on occasion. For arguing that the world is less than perfect, to me an irrefutable argument, Popeye got the hook. I chuckled that the regulators felt the need to come here and to some chatrooms undercover to gather evidence against the Tennesseean miscreant. But all that being said, SB is really not a bad source of information and entertainment. They even let matters degenerate into gun talk now and then. But be forewarned, even I seem to be a trifle too "relaxed" for some of them, so don't be surprised if you encounter a somewhat tight-assed reaction from time to time. There's a hint of paranoia at the possibility of SB turning into another rec.scuba, perhaps for good reason (do we really need another, and for that matter is the world ready for another?) and sometimes the regulators seem to go a tad overboard in maintaining standards, but it's their back yard, so their rules. Respectfully JF http://www3.sympatico.ca/johnfrancis/scubachat.htm ====================================== Popeye View profile More options Jul 23 2003, 4:30 pm Newsgroups: rec.scuba From: buzcutt...@aol.com (Popeye) Date: 23 Jul 2003 20:29:43 GMT Local: Wed, Jul 23 2003 4:29 pm Subject: Re: More Scubaboard Fun >From: John Francis johnfran...@sympatico.ca.remove For arguing that the >world is less than perfect, to me an irrefutable argument, Popeye got the >hook. I chuckled that the regulators felt the need to come here and to some >chatrooms undercover to gather evidence against the Tennesseean miscreant. >There's a hint of paranoia at the possibility of SB turning into another >rec.scuba, perhaps for good reason (do we really need another, and for that >matter is the world ready for another?) and sometimes the regulators seem >to go a tad overboard in maintaining standards, but it's their back yard, >so their rules. Yours, was a noticable absence at my defense, I might add. And I think you're giving the impression that I was kicked for a rules/standards violation. I wasn't. But I'm glad you think that place is so fuzzy warm. Popeye "Here's to swimmin' with bowlegged women" -Quint ===================================== Newsgroups: rec.scuba From: "Mad Dog Hog" <m...@owningstevespencer.com > Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 16:56:40 -0400 Local: Wed, Jul 23 2003 4:56 pm Subject: Re: More Scubaboard Fun > Yours, was a noticable absence at my defense, I might add. > And I think you're giving the impression that I was kicked for a > rules/standards violation. > I wasn't. > But I'm glad you think that place is so fuzzy warm. Ya know...I was thinking the same thing- You have Goddard over there defending you and these other fence sitters(Alan Street) and yet where is our Canadian friend....? I guess the same place most canadians were during the war. Bro- You know I would be there and up in somebody if I were allowed. MDH ==================================== John Francis View profile More options Jul 23 2003, 7:22 pm Newsgroups: rec.scuba From: John Francis <johnfran...@sympatico.ca.remove > Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 19:05:43 -0400 Local: Wed, Jul 23 2003 7:05 pm Subject: Re: More Scubaboard Fun On 23 Jul 2003 20:29:43 GMT, buzcutt...@aol.com (Popeye) wrote: >>From: John Francis johnfran...@sympatico.ca.remove >>For arguing that the world is less than perfect, to me an irrefutable >>argument, Popeye got the hook. I chuckled that the regulators felt the >>need to come here and to some chatrooms undercover to gather evidence >>against the Tennesseean miscreant. >>There's a hint of paranoia at the possibility of SB turning into another >>rec.scuba, perhaps for good reason (do we really need another, and for >>that matter is the world ready for another?) and sometimes the regulators >>seem to go a tad overboard in maintaining standards, but it's their back >>yard, so their rules. > Yours, was a noticable absence at my defense, I might add. Well, for what it's worth, I hadn't even been following the thread until I read that you'd been booted and then I went back and caught up. Leaping to yer defense was unlikely as I wasn't aware you needed my help. It may come as a shock to you to learn that as much as I respect much that you have to say about diving, I don't hang on your every word on the subject. I agreed with your initial premise that if there's air available, use it rather than dying. I didn't have any interest in following the GI3-like arguments that properly trained and/or prepared divers don't run OOA. I got your point first time. > And I think you're giving the impression that I was kicked for a > rules/standards violation. Perhaps your comprehension of what others write is what causes some of your problems in other forums. > I wasn't. So I understood by my reading. > But I'm glad you think that place is so fuzzy warm. Did I say fuzzy warm? Read again. Part of my point that obviously blew over yer head was that it's people like you who make it a worthwhile forum and they made a mistake by stubbornly refusing to read what you were writing, not unlike you may be doing with what I'm writing here. JF http://www3.sympatico.ca/johnfrancis/scubachat.htm ======================================= http://deadsmall.com/3K9 ======================================= When I attacked him about Scubaboard (there was more than one): Anyone remember Chris Wolf? :-) Popeye NCAT3 View profile More options May 25 2004, 7:09 am Newsgroups: rec.scuba From: buzcutt...@aol.comByteMe (Popeye NCAT3) Date: 25 May 2004 11:09:34 GMT Local: Tues, May 25 2004 7:09 am Subject: Re: Snuba - Bad Idea >From: John Francis jfran...@orc.delete.ca <about Chris Wolf > >Oh, I'm sure he's well aware of how ignorant he's being, and he's getting >off on raising some ire. I don't think so. > Ya gotta hand it to him. Feel free. >Nice to see a newby who can dish it out with a modicum of control. Nice to see the dickhead has a fan club. At least you know where to buy his book (if you already haven't). >Unfortunately it appears we've reached standoff status in which everyone >thinks they're on top, so perhaps it's time to call it a draw and move on. That's the last thing your naive post facilitates. If you can read the flow of posts and see parity, you must be daft. >We just have to give him credit for being as much of an asshole as the best >we have to offer, and in case you don't know it, Chris, that's high praise >in rec.scuba terms. Hardly. As far as assholes go, he may be on your level, but no where near many here. He's been caught in a score of half truths and lies, and several instances of blatant stupidity. If you choose to believe that you are on par with this hebetating fool, don't count the rest of us in. >This place is something of a contradiction. I'm sure your type is just happy as a peach over at Scubaboard. >You've proven yerself ignorant enuf to fit right in and you've got the hang >of spending lots of >words to say nothing. Ignorant enough to fit right in? Speak for yourself. I guess he fits in with you. You've dissed this place more than once lately, John, if we're all such ignorant assholes, trot your ass over to those fuckin pussies at SB and stay there (now there's a place where you're ignorant enough to fit in). Popeye "You should also know that I've already passed along your threats to the local police department, and to my lawyer.-Chris Wolf" =================================== http://deadsmall.com/3KA =================================== Douglas W. Popeye Frederick Newsgroups: rec.scuba From: "Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" <Buzcutt...@aol.com > Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:13:36 -0400 Local: Sun, Apr 10 2005 11:13 am Subject: Re: Texas Bans Remote Huntin "JOF" <johnfran...@sympatico.ca > wrote in message news:d4di51pv1mmni0udhjc8sfg2fflirvkk5d@4ax.com... > On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 22:24:37 -0400, "Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" > <Buzcutt...@aol.com> wrote: > >> > I caught the armed game thing, but thought we were referring to > >> > rational discourse. > >> This is rec.scuba > > Set your goals low enough, and, sure enough, you'll acheive them. > Now who's insulting rec.scubans? Actually, I was talking about you. Not as an insult. Your "This is Rec.scuba" comment, indicating that this place is somehow different than everyday life. Lower grade and less intellectual (which begs the question, why are you here)(which I've answered). In fact, you've made apologies and excuses for Rec.scuba in at least one other forum as well. Like all the -real- divers are over at Scubaboard. <cough > Luckily I was under an assumed name. Like I always say, you get out of this place what you put into it. Maybe you should couch your dissapointment with that fact. > >> > You've made several indefendable statements, so far indicting yourself, > >> >and your uncle the Great White Hunter. > >> I don't know that he ever characterized himself as a great white > >> hunter, > > He didn't, but he fits all the derogatory definitions you've assessed the > >title you introduced. > Was I referring to all hunters? Yes, quite specifically, after your grenade-like pot-shot at the second amendment. I've provided you with a lovely excerpt below. >Sorry. I must have misunderstood myself. Or someone threw a bullshit flag, and you're backpeddling. > I'm often guilty of self-delusion though, so it's entirely possible. Funny how someone I consider a smart and worldly guy keeps having these little freudian literary faux pas. > I'll be sure to pay more attention in the future to what rec.scuba tells > me I'm thinking. You obviously need to. You ranted in your second post: "I don't hunt period, so I suppose in that sense you could say I have a problem with hunting of any kind. It's not that I'm against hunting in principle, just that I guess I had enough killing when I worked a few summers in a slaughterhouse killing pigs, cattle and sheep because the idea of killing for sport holds no appeal for me. Kind of unmanly I know, but it's just the way it is. Seems to me that using a remotely operated killing device isn't very sporting, but then one could say the same about some of the other weapons and methods used in hunting today. I'd like to see some of our great white hunter types go up against a Kodiak, or even a little bitty Grizzly, mano a mano, or even armed with knives. Methinks many of our fine camo-bedecked hunters' cojones would shrivel to peas and their feet would be blistered from the pace they set scootin' in retreat. But that's another story." What that flatly says, and clearly implies, is easily seen. It's specifically derisive to hunters in several ways. If you need any help deciphering the perfectly obvious, I'm always here for you. I'm going to do a seperate post on this beauty. > > He'd be proud, I'm sure. > Actually he probably would. Of you calling him a coward with manhood issues? Check. > He'd have a grand time here. He's even windier and more opinionated than > me, and he's a gunsel to boot. He'd be in hog Heaven. > >> Which statements are "undefendable"? I'm a tad curious about that one. > > Every premise you've offered in this thread, referring to hunting or > > weapons. > Wow. I'm appalled. Are you saying I got absolutely nothing right? That's > hard on the old ego. > > From hand-to-hand Grizzly combat to shriveled peas to every truck having a > >remote weapon on the roof, to your society of killers. > > Start with your very first post, and watch it snowball. > I try not to reread my own posts. I know. That's what you got me for. >They're boring. If only some of you would see the light and agree with me >in the first place I wouldn't have to reiterate. > > Especially compared to your lifestyle, using as much or more animal > > byproduct as anyone. > Yuk. To me by products are the things that the slaughterhouse sells for > mink feed and fertilizer. Because you're so open minded and forthright with yourself. > I've hated mink since i used to trap them as a kid, and I'm allergic to > gardening. I have to concede to being partial to leather car seats though. Whenever you climb in the new car, and someone compliments you on the fine leather interior, remember to share with them all the sights and sounds of your slaughterhouse job. And the smell, don't forget the smell. > > "Hunting is distastful, but I got more leather than a Frisco biker bar" > Thanks a heap. Now I'm left with driving from my mind's eye this vision of > you clad in a black leather thong and silver studded leather suspenders. Gold studs. They have gold studs. And you promised not to tell. -- One million Marines cannot seize Tarawa in a thousand years. Admiral Keiji Shibasaki, 4 days before his death. =============================== http://deadsmall.com/3KB