Dear Chris,

We all do things sometimes without properly thinking them
through - especially when the right buttons are pushed -
I know I do. I tend to jump the gun at times - and then
live to regret it. Often times too, on the forum, I've
stated things that I've not expressed the way that I had
intended. I don't mean to waffle on - but
I'm sure that you're a nice guy - who's simply reacted
because OUG may have rubbed you the wrong way.

However let me tell you that OUG has been a poster on this
forum for ages, and he has a very unique style of posting.
He has a heart as big as all outdoors - and you should
give him a chance.

If you can't. Well then simply scroll past his posts.
But your suggestion of us vetoing OUG - I think you'll find
very few (if any) posters who would support such a move.
We may not always agree with each other - but we certainly
would not approve of what you're suggesting.
Deep down, I don't think you're really for it either.
Veto OUG - No - he doesn't deserve it!

That's very charitable of you, one under god.

>>i only just noticed the thread..how can i be upset...
dont the saying go..as long as they..got your name right..etc[its all good]<<

Especially considering that chrisgaff1000 did actually get your name wrong...

"Veto Under One God"

Ignorance so often goes hand-in-hand with intolerance, eh.

I don't know about the rest of you, but every now and then I find a real 'pearl' amongst OUG's contributions. So, I usually tend to 'skim', seeking out those ethereal threads of 'vision' coming from that inner heart-felt sanctum which is the essence of OUG.
Few are as honest or as free-rein in giving immediate voice to their thoughts and ideas, free from so many of the constraints most of us suffer, as we struggle within the bubble of our limited conscious awareness of what is, and of what may be.

And, OUG is never belligerent or derisive, which is a lesson many others would do well to take to heart.

Poirot,

>We all post here hoping someone will find some value in our "rantings".<

I feel this statement verges on huge generosity to some posters, on more than a few occasions. There unfortunately remain some who only appear to believe in rattling their own drum, or in stirring the pot, in hopes of getting a 'rise' out of anyone foolish enough to take them seriously.
Still, each to his own.

In closing, I am very pleased to see that OUG lets this attempted and unwarranted aspersion slide as easily off the shoulder as a butterfly taking a sip of nectar before effortlessly drifting to the next beckoning blossom.

Onward and upward.

Mind you, OUG, I sometimes get the impression there are two of you, with quite distinctive styles.

Pericles..<<..ignorance so often goes hand-in-hand with intolerance, eh.>>..

ignorance..in this case was bliss
but even now..its pointed out..
my eyes tear up,,with laughing at how i..could have missed it..
[cause im a little dialectic dyslectic..and the words were all there]


Saltpeter..[sorry spellcheck..corrected..lol

Saltpeter..<<..slide as easily off the shoulder as a butterfly taking a sip of nectar before effortlessly drifting to the next beckoning blossom.>>>

i love that
it was [is]..necter,,to hear the kind words
i wish everyone..ever complained about..felt it

god bless olo

<<>.Mind you, OUG, I sometimes get the impression..there are two of you, with quite distinctive styles.>>>

me is the freestyle[nc apitals]
the rest is partial quotes..with links..commas full stops capitalised no puns/names

[i got no clue how they are supposed to use
..they are often rewritten..in parts..[or otherwise corrected..to balance the impression..the words make in my mind]..

heavily edited you might say..
often mid sentence..following the
*key word..staggering its re-action..into word

how ever the word was supposed to read triggering

i copied bellies style
i think belly wanted to start..this thread..at many times
but now knows i love his spunk..like singer/sells..said much the same their last post's

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15394&page=0

being ignored is painful..
you dont know where it went wrong
its not pain as much as self disappointment..that i couldnt say it better

or to..the right person..in..the right way
at the right time/right place/right words..adjective or noun
if its a big or strong SPELL/word..that hype-notarizes..i dispel the spell.

i was once put on a pension
docter said i talked for a solid hour
[which wasnt true..we just..never got to his second question

We may disagree with what UOG says sometimes, in fact we may disagree with what any person says. This time we disagree, next time we agree. There are some people we agree with more times than others & some we don't. Such is the nature of a debate. Sometimes we may even get a bit hot under the collar over a subject. So what we are all entitled to our own opinion & views. I'm glad we live in Australia & not in the M.E.

As regards not reading someone's post, just because you don't like the persons views. I really don't see the point. Even someone with whom we violently disagree may have a salient point. Besides, It's rude. There are many here amoungt you I disagree with but I still read your posts, regardless, & look up your Links, either to agree or disagree with. How else can you have a debate?

Should we veto Poirot because she loves Muslims or me because I don't or runner or Belly for their Political Party affiliations. I don't think so. The idea is silly & repulsive.

I personally find it sad that someone should be proposing a veto system. Unless someone's comments are beyond the usually accepted bounds (advocating violence against an individual or group, for instance), they should be free, subject to Graham's discretion, which I trust, to express their views, even when I dislike them intensely. That is what this kind of open forum is for.

It harms none of us to be exposed to opinions at variance from our own; on the contrary, we can learn about people from this.

Tonyo