MennoNet.com

ohio jones wrote:

Josh wrote:Holdemans, for example, have a rather high standard about excessive joking around, to the point a convert I know got put out for a year for his un-serious speech.

I'd never survive...

To tie the subjects together, perhaps being in a profession not known for the reduction of its practitioners to penury has enabled you to escape the scrutiny of Brian and the boys. Or maybe they don't peruse this forum.....

Gene wrote:

ohio jones wrote:

Josh wrote:Holdemans, for example, have a rather high standard about excessive joking around, to the point a convert I know got put out for a year for his un-serious speech.

I'd never survive...

To tie the subjects together, perhaps being in a profession not known for the reduction of its practitioners to penury has enabled you to escape the scrutiny of Brian and the boys. Or maybe they don't peruse this forum.....

'Penury' ? Not layman enough for this old brain. Penury - extreme poverty; destitution. 'Brian and the boys' haven't found that one yet.

Gene wrote:

ohio jones wrote:

Josh wrote:Holdemans, for example, have a rather high standard about excessive joking around, to the point a convert I know got put out for a year for his un-serious speech.

I'd never survive...

To tie the subjects together, perhaps being in a profession not known for the reduction of its practitioners to penury has enabled you to escape the scrutiny of Brian and the boys. Or maybe they don't peruse this forum.....

The old saying is, how do you become a millionaire in my profession? Marry a girl worth two million and keep working for a few years.

I broke bread (and other yummies) with Steve a week or two ago and can confirm that he appreciates good humor. So I might be okay for a little while yet, perusal or not.

Sudsy, don't try too hard, he's being intentionally obfuscatory (as usual).

I have to concede defeat, as in the world of CMC name-dropping, "breaking bread with Steve" indubitably trumps a vague, distant reference to "Brian and the boys" though I don't know if the new administration would be entirely enamored of the implication that the baton has not entirely transferred as yet, perhaps causing me, rather than everyone's favorite architect, to be in dutch. My interaction with Steve did not seem to bring out his humorous side though that could have been due to what may have been legitimately characterized as my harassment of the gentleman over a local disaster in a way that apparently circumvented ecclesiastical protocol, the existence of which I was not aware, and involved neither bread or other yummies but a series of digital communications.

Gene wrote:I have to concede defeat, as in the world of CMC name-dropping, "breaking bread with Steve" indubitably trumps a vague, distant reference to "Brian and the boys" though I don't know if the new administration would be entirely enamored of the implication that the baton has not entirely transferred as yet, perhaps causing me, rather than everyone's favorite architect, to be in dutch. My interaction with Steve did not seem to bring out his humorous side though that could have been due to what may have been legitimately characterized as my harassment of the gentleman over a local disaster in a way that apparently circumvented ecclesiastical protocol, the existence of which I was not aware, and involved neither bread or other yummies but a series of digital communications.

Gene, do you talk like this in person? I'd love to have coffee with you the next time you visit Alberta.

The same is true for others on this board, of course. But I'm fascinated with Gene's word usage.

[quote="lesterb"[/quote]
Gene, do you talk like this in person? I'd love to have coffee with you the next time you visit Alberta.

The same is true for others on this board, of course. But I'm fascinated with Gene's word usage.[/quote]

I've wanted to visit Canada for a while, I've got a few friends up there to meet now including you. Maybe some day when I'm one of the wealthy among us

Soloist wrote:

lesterb wrote: Gene, do you talk like this in person? I'd love to have coffee with you the next time you visit Alberta.

The same is true for others on this board, of course. But I'm fascinated with Gene's word usage.

I've wanted to visit Canada for a while, I've got a few friends up there to meet now including you. Maybe some day when I'm one of the wealthy among us

I'd love to meet up with you Soloist. We're long overdue for a visit in your direction too.

Gene wrote:I have to concede defeat, as in the world of CMC name-dropping, "breaking bread with Steve" indubitably trumps a vague, distant reference to "Brian and the boys" though I don't know if the new administration would be entirely enamored of the implication that the baton has not entirely transferred as yet, perhaps causing me, rather than everyone's favorite architect, to be in dutch. My interaction with Steve did not seem to bring out his humorous side though that could have been due to what may have been legitimately characterized as my harassment of the gentleman over a local disaster in a way that apparently circumvented ecclesiastical protocol, the existence of which I was not aware, and involved neither bread or other yummies but a series of digital communications.

[bible]1 cor 14,27[/bible]

[quote="lesterb"
Gene, do you talk like this in person? I'd love to have coffee with you the next time you visit Alberta.

The same is true for others on this board, of course. But I'm fascinated with Gene's word usage.[/quote]
Lest anyone draw the erroneous conclusion that I have been the victim of that noble experiment in social engineering known as higher education, let me quickly assure one and all that not only is my background devoid of advanced education, what I did get was some four decades past, and then not taken particularly seriously by the recipient thereof. Further, my career has been of a kind that even skilled blue collar tradesmen may disdain my profession as lacking in intellectual rigor, and while sufficiently lucrative to enable me to support my spouse and offspring without resorting to a life of crime or going on the dole, certainly not one where vocabulary is of any particular benefit. For some reason, it amuses me to write in a style I call faux pompous intellectual. Probably a birth defect. My wife would likely tell you not to encourage it. If I talked like that, I would likely be lynched or something. By my family.

But since most on this forum do not know me, and some are too distant to affect me anyway, (Is Canada really a country?! Or just some huddling, shivering body lurking to our north like some malignant gelatinous mass of left over geological waste, good for timber and oil and the occasional supply of wheat, and not much else, unable to decide if it is French or still in love with the Queen.) this activity can be undertaken with impunity. Life is a pretty serious business for the most part, engaging in small self amusements will hopefully be viewed with a fair amount of tolerance. At least until some line is crossed which provokes OJ to exploit his close relationship with Steve in order to initiate some double-secret-probation sort of church discipline, creating the need for me to wrestle my pastor to procure the bread and cup come next communion. Though, on second thought, since we seem to be part of a group which increasingly loathes the drawing of any lines whatsoever, I am, in all probability, safe.

Gene wrote:

lesterb wrote: Gene, do you talk like this in person? I'd love to have coffee with you the next time you visit Alberta.

The same is true for others on this board, of course. But I'm fascinated with Gene's word usage.

Lest anyone draw the erroneous conclusion that I have been the victim of that noble experiment in social engineering known as higher education, let me quickly assure one and all that not only is my background devoid of advanced education, what I did get was some four decades past, and then not taken particularly seriously by the recipient thereof. Further, my career has been of a kind that even skilled blue collar tradesmen may disdain my profession as lacking in intellectual rigor, and while sufficiently lucrative to enable me to support my spouse and offspring without resorting to a life of crime or going on the dole, certainly not one where vocabulary is of any particular benefit. For some reason, it amuses me to write in a style I call faux pompous intellectual. Probably a birth defect. My wife would likely tell you not to encourage it. If I talked like that, I would likely be lynched or something. By my family.

But since most on this forum do not know me, and some are too distant to affect me anyway, (Is Canada really a country?! Or just some huddling, shivering body lurking to our north like some malignant gelatinous mass of left over geological waste, good for timber and oil and the occasional supply of wheat, and not much else, unable to decide if it is French or still in love with the Queen.) this activity can be undertaken with impunity. Life is a pretty serious business for the most part, engaging in small self amusements will hopefully be viewed with a fair amount of tolerance. At least until some line is crossed which provokes OJ to exploit his close relationship with Steve in order to initiate some double-secret-probation sort of church discipline, creating the need for me to wrestle my pastor to procure the bread and cup come next communion. Though, on second thought, since we seem to be part of a group which increasingly loathes the drawing of any lines whatsoever, I am, in all probability, safe.