Why Care ?

[take3wraps]

Why ? Why ? Why? IF YOU DON'T WEAR A SEATBELT TO WORK ARE YOU A SAFE CLIMBER ? this is nothing but a broke man's country club !

 

[Stumper]

What did I miss? The word 'why' usually precedes the object of a question. What, pray tell, is being asked?

 

[geofore]

Why wear?

You are judged by the way you do things, I see you come to work not wearing your seatbelt should I trust you will tie yourself in, in the tree? No. Careless about the way you do things on the ground tells me you will be careless in the trees. Even if you aren't, I will have doubts because I saw you being careless on the ground, therefore you would not be the first choice to send up in the tree or drive my trucks. If you worked for the Post Office and got caught not wearing your seatbelt you get written up after a few write ups you get fired. Get the point?

 

[treeman82]

Have any of you guys heard the new saying? "Click it, or ticket?"

 

[trees4life]

Nick, I find your latest post offensive & threatening.

 

[che]

Thank-you, Trees4life. There aren't many women on the AS, but we're here. Tasteless is one thing, that is offensive....and very sad.

Che
(in real life it's just as ugly as that image)

 

[hillbilly]

Some of us (men) also find that posts like netree's has very
little to do with arboriculture.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Well, it's gone now.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Looks like D'man got board with the real estate biz and came back to torment us.

No he's not Erik, unless he has 2 different ISP's

One thing I liked about D-mans postings a few years ago was that he did get people thinking and talking about some good things. Even though he's a big mouthed idiot from Philly.

Looks like I may have some fun with the delete key on my day off. 5 people with beefs in the email bin and 2 PM's and it aint been 12 hours (over night) since he first posted.

Guess he did what he wanted.

If you dont like him, hit the ignore button while we work something out.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

The Troll odor from the old, original, ISA forum just got thick. TTW had several monikers. Different names same bad breath.

The best way to deal with his spray is to not react. In the past, everyone just shunned his posts. 100%, even when he was lucid. Eventually he got tired of being ignored and went away. His meds must be wearing off.

I know that I'll get sprayed for this. Such is life, I can take a shower This will be the last public mention that I'll make about TTW/Dman. JPS will be wearing out his DELETE key I think

Tom

 

[Bob Wulkowicz]

As I've said, I prefer to be the one who decides what's tasteless and offensive for myself. I don't need a Mom deciding for me.

I do care.


Bob Wulkowicz

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Sorry Tubs, this is a case of the boards image. Once again this is a private enterprise open to the public under certain terms of use.

I'll probably delete all referances to it tonight.

 

[Bob Wulkowicz]

Originally posted by John Paul Sanborn
Sorry Tubs, this is a case of the boards image. Once again this is a private enterprise open to the public under certain terms of use.

I'll probably delete all referances to it tonight.

You've already deleted one chunk, and where in the remainder is any concern for the Board's image?

Once again this is a private enterprise open to the public under certain terms of use.


How poignantly prissy. Censorship is a petty tyranny much beloved by the shallow and those frightened of change.

Being able to do what you want, is no proof of value; it's only the assertion of that moment of power. Move it to the off-the-topic thread.


Bob Wulkowicz

 

[TREETX]

Yeah!!!

Oh boy!! I checked my calendar and yes, time for the bi-annual censorship debate.

It is OK to throw things away. That includes this thread!!

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Your one chunk was a picture of no relavance to the forum that went beyond poor taste.

Petty tyrany of a shallow mind?

Now that is silly Bobby, why should a private enterprise not have the inalienable right to control content?

If you want to see pictures that are beyond vulgar, then go to the newsgroups.

 

[NeTree]

OOps...forgot to be politically correct again.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Erik, that went beyond politicaly incorrect. That was like taking a dump in someones lawn.

Uncouth does not discribe it well.

Unfamiliar; strange; hence, mysterious; dreadful; also,odd; awkward; boorish; as, uncouth manners. ``Uncouth inguise and gesture.'' --I. Taylor.

Websters online

 

[Bob Wulkowicz]

Originally posted by John Paul Sanborn

Your one chunk was a picture of no relavance to the forum that went beyond poor taste.

Petty tyrany of a shallow mind?

Now that is silly Bobby, why should a private enterprise not have the inalienable right to control content?


Inalienable right--like the ones flat flow from God as noted in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence?

Inalienable, god-issued rights for a tree forum controlling content? There's a skipped gear here somewere. A few hundred readers are hardly the definitive cross-section of humanity that needs the protection of inalienable rights of a vendor.

The framers of the Constitution, et al, were thinking of people, oddly enough, when they spoke of rights. Later on, the definitions got all fugged up and confused:

http://www.mecgrassroots.org/NEWSL/ISS19/20CorpBirth.html




If you want to see pictures that are beyond vulgar, then go to the newsgroups.

I can't generally get them to work, so I'm here.

And I must feel better at being pre-un-uncouthed; it just hasn't settled in. Tell me, do you get vaccinated against the immorality and offensive savagery you protect us against? I mean, is there a serum you have to take before you click on the computer?

If so, should we have one for the counter cyberterrorism I keep reading about?


God bless you, JPS, for the wonderful work you do, and for the safe world you keep us in. Is all the web a state of orange these days?


Bob soon to be deleted...

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Mr. Wulke,

i am a fan of yours; for your intelligence, flair, energy and championed causes.

But i also try to paint with a chainsaw, to bring out beauty as well as utility in trees, finding it a natural thing.

i believe that wimmens are the flowers of our kind; finding their shape, color, silkiness, intoxicating scents etc. that they don to be calling across the fields just the same as non-animate sisters. So i see the picture in question as directly offensive and distorted; taking power and grace, using it agianst itself to break it. Perhaps their is such a place for such things; but i think staying to beauty, is more in keeping on topic with nature, trees and art that this place presents itself for. If someone says i am just talking chit to the ladies, i just flow along, perhaps that it is a diffrent kinda fertilizer, to make a diffrent kind of flower shine brightly. i don't think that the ladies should have been the first to rally here, in fact find it quite embareassing that i myself fell back to less direct methods, and quietly watching that in the foreground, as well as forming issues in the background.

Also, i didn't take it as to raise awareness of anything, but even put out as a threat; which i beleive is even stated as contrary to postings here by stated rule of expected co-operation; not just understood.

So i hope you will save the power of your searing sword on this topic, to a more deserved recipient. Certainly, not that the fabric that knits your arguments needs that help; but rather yourself to have power and use it with grace, for their are few things better than that balance.

i don't look at this as bi-anal (yuk) debate, but a quest for the commonness of common sense; amongst all these that come here from all over seeking a likeness and common base that they don't find around them.

Or something like that!
:alien:

 

[Bob Wulkowicz]

Originally posted by TheTreeSpyder
Mr. Wulke,

i am a fan of yours; for your intelligence, flair, energy and championed causes.

But i also try to paint with a chainsaw, to bring out beauty as well as utility in trees, finding it a natural thing.

i believe that wimmens are the flowers of our kind; finding their shape, color, silkiness, intoxicating scents etc. that they don to be calling across the fields just the same as non-animate sisters. So i see the picture in question as directly offensive and distorted; taking power and grace, using it agianst itself to break it. Perhaps their is such a place for such things; but i think staying to beauty, is more in keeping on topic with nature, trees and art that this place presents itself for. If someone says i am just talking chit to the ladies, i just flow along, perhaps that it is a diffrent kinda fertilizer, to make a diffrent kind of flower shine brightly. i don't think that the ladies should have been the first to rally here, in fact find it quite embareassing that i myself fell back to less direct methods, and quietly watching that in the foreground, as well as forming issues in the background.

Also, i didn't take it as to raise awareness of anything, but even put out as a threat; which i beleive is even stated as contrary to postings here by stated rule of expected co-operation; not just understood.

So i hope you will save the power of your searing sword on this topic, to a more deserved recipient. Certainly, not that the fabric that knits your arguments needs that help; but rather yourself to have power and use it with grace, for their are few things better than that balance.

i don't look at this as bi-anal (yuk) debate, but a quest for the commonness of common sense; amongst all these that come here from all over seeking a likeness and common base that they don't find around them.

Or something like that!
:alien:

Painting with a chainsaw to bring out beauty is an interesting image. How much beauty ends up in the chipper and what becomes rot later? I say that not as any criticism, but simply questioning each perspective from the different ends of the tool.

Women caught in the beauty of foot binding should be viewed from what result? The vogue of the crushed foot or the agonies of the victim?



I didn't see the purported picture. I wasn't allowed to by a greater force that made my decision for me. In the larger consideration or war, death, and level orange, I'm sure it's insignificant, but, I'll never know.

A long time ago, the ISA forums had a few threads that were sexist, vulgar, and stupid--and attacked women like wolverenes with an attitude. There were only 2 or 3 women writing then and they were surprised and hurt. But, they began to write back and by anyone's measure they clearly outwitted the bozos as better writers and funnier in the long shot.

Viewing the unfolding of those threads, the dim-bulbs finally retreated and shut up. A trimph, ultimately of what should next be the workplace. However, the ISA decided, for the thread's image, to remove the offensive dialoges, god forbid anyone would think that women had vaginas and men talked bitterly about them...

So, in their bumbly way, the ISA pulled some posts, which had everything following disappear, and some excellent writing and barbs of the women drifted off into oblivion.

Was that loss worth the purging of some idiot's day labor of drooling into a keyboard? Women can stand up and fight for themselves. I learned from their posts a few new tips on aggressive writing. But they're gone in that November's Massacre, and I left those forums for some time.


We can't control serial killers, the recreationaly impaired, terrorists, the military-industrial complex, or the overwhelming mass of the profoundly stupid that litters our population. Solutions are not going to happen by gestures; we need to get to the roots. And since that's too much trouble for us to contemplate seriously, we engage in postural masturbation; the rubbing of our pretending to do something.


We hit the delete button and expel a 4-year kid for pointing his finger as if it were a gun. We hit the really big delete button and move every Afganistan issue off the pages of the media--unless of course we need a reference to the return of Al Qweedo to maintain our new delusions.

Hit the button here and some fool arcs off into the distance, deservedly perhaps, I won't know. Then, I'm treated to a lecture on the inalienable rights of private enterprise. Talk to me of those rights again when someone introduces a bill for the death penalty of businesses caught in crimes we have to pay a price for.

Is any of this of significance? The moment may not be; the principle is however always deserving of a good fight.



Bob Wulkowicz soon to be deleted