Hello Damon,   
      
    >> President Obama reads messages that are posted in this echo.  You   
    >> know that, don't you?  Keep in mind this is fidonet.  Not internet.   
    >> Some fidonet systems are not dependent on internet at all, having   
    >> dial-up only.  As such, even when the internet goes down, fidonet   
    >> will still be here, keeping communication between sysops and other   
    >> participants safe.  However, since Uncle Sam is still fighting a   
    >> war on drugs, no users will be safe at all.  Remember that.   
      
   DG>You are still an idjit, I will maintain and persevere on this point.   
      
   Aren't we all an "idjit"?  Especially when compared to The One?   
      
   DG>Either way, we both know that the feed for this echo trickles up the   
   DG>chain, just like every other digital media (except probably for his   
   DG>own private facebook feed), going through NSA workers through PRISM   
   DG>hardware, up through the NSA Advisor, through a proper cabinet   
   DG>member, and is given to him in summarized digest form.   
      
   Each and every morning, The One gets a briefing from his National   
   Security Advisor.  This briefing is always classified "Top Secret" -   
   except when The One decides to share it with others (usually members   
   of Congress when they start asking questions about his sex life).   
   But that is the official version, given out by the White House.   
      
   What really happens is The One receives information instananeously   
   on his Blackberry.  Now this is no ordinary Blackberry ...   
      
   DG>Yeah, I know he can read anything, almost certainly recent versions   
   DG>of PGP & GPG encrypted messages included.   
      
   The One knows everything.   
   He knows when you are sleeping.   
   He knows when you're awake.   
   He knows if you've been naughty or nice,   
   So be good for your own sake!   
      
   Oh!   
      
   You better watch out!   
   You better not shout!   
   You better not pout   
   I'm telling you why -   
   Barack Obama's coming to town!   
      
   DG>You might want to be a little more clear next time on the fact that   
   DG>you're responding to the content, and not the poster.   
      
   I did note at the top I was addressing the rest of the message as if   
   I was addressing it to the author of the article on the web page.  My   
   apologies for any misunderstandings.   
      
   DG>Your opinions are noted and logged by both myself and the NSA, of   
   DG>course.  You really made that sound like you were talking to me, and   
   DG>I'm pretty sure you've done that before.   
      
   Only on rare occasions, if the article was suitable for that form.   
   It is not intended to be seen or viewed as a personal attack, but   
   rather a form of address.  When using that form, I note at the top   
   of my message that I am addressing the author of the article, not   
   the individual who posted the article in a message forum.   
      
   DG>A little bit of understanding of the grammatical concept of 'direct   
   DG>address' wouldn't kill you.   
      
   In this kind of forum, a didactic form of debate is normally used,   
   due to its ease of use given the medium.  This is not the optimal   
   form of debate, as there are better formats that can be used.  In   
   most cases, perceived personal insults are not insults at all, but   
   rather misunderstandings.   
      
   Flame wars are a different matter, in which both parties are   
   deliberately throwing insults at each other, and sometimes entire   
   tribes.  Gosh, I miss the Flame echo ...   
      
   --Lee   
      
   --- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb   
    * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)