Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Is everyone just stressed out?

This is topic Is everyone just stressed out? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003313

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 06-29-2004, 02:07 PM:

Whats the deal lately here on FT? It used to be informative and fun. Now all I read is a bunch of arguing and bickering. Whether it be about politics, telling people about extra footage on a movie, getting someones name accidentally wrong, KD's predictions, posting repeat topics, it seems like people have been arguing more and more alot lately. I am sure I have contributed in one way or another to all of these threads, but it was usually in a way to try and get people to lighten up. I would hate to see the way the next FT gathering would be like with people not getting along with each other. By the way Brad, when is that? I'm sure alot of us could use a break. [beer]

RELAX PEOPLE!! [thumbsup]

Edit: Oh yeah, and if someone feels like they have to post that this is a stupid thread, you will have just proved my point. Or if you find a quote of mine where I am arguing, that will make me look like a jackass for posting this, please do so, it will make for a good laugh, which I am sure some people could use. [Big Grin]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-29-2004, 02:11 PM:

It's mostly due to people just not paying attention. Either the topic has been covered to death before, or a new topic is posted and then the person seeking advice ignores it. Either way, it gets aggravating to the regular members. It is to be expected.

Summer may have something to do with it too, as many people in this area of work put in more hours during the summer.

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 06-29-2004, 03:12 PM:

I'm feelin' ya Jeremy... The threads haven't been all too exciting lately. I haven't started one in a long time too. I must be stressed [Big Grin]

I wish there was something I could do.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-29-2004, 03:52 PM:

Jeremy: WTF RU talkin' 'bout! Your whiney-ass post pissed me off! All families have disagreements and fights. The Film-Tech family is no different.

Brad: When the hell are you going to learn how to spell? Also, I think there is a spell checker on here for the "konveniencee" of ALL members. ("expected")

Jen: Sex is a ***GREAT*** "stress" reliever....

(Just in case some of you don't "get" the above, here are the appropriate smilies: [Big Grin]

)

>>> Phil

Edit: Gosh! I wish I was a mod so I could change someone's post about spelling too!

[ 06-29-2004, 07:37 PM: Message edited by: Rachel Gilardi ]

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 06-29-2004, 04:00 PM:

Phil: Sounds like a good idea... I should have thought of it [Big Grin]

. What would I do without ya [beer]

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 06-29-2004, 04:42 PM:

quote:
Is everyone just stressed out?

Yes.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 06-29-2004, 05:58 PM:

Well, I was alittle stressed out when I went outside to find my 6 month old bike with a flat tire, but that was about it. I put a plug in it and it is ok now until I can take it to a tire shop to have it patched correctly.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-29-2004, 06:37 PM:

I'm stressed because I just found out my Spider-2 print won't be delivered until 2:00 pm tomorrow. Since I have to work at my day job until 6:00, that means no screening (and not much of an inspection, either).

Stupid Wednesday openings. [Mad]

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-29-2004, 06:53 PM:

This is the time of year that most of us are stressed out either finishing a new build, routine serviceing or upgrading a system in time for film X to open
It is good natured people like Jen that keep reminiding us to have some fun and people like Phil who help it along
and now we return you to your regularly scheduled sponsor sex and drugs and rock and roll

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-29-2004, 07:30 PM:

I'm not stressed. I'm just bored. You people need to do more to entertain me. [av=c]

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 06-29-2004, 07:38 PM:

I'm stressed I don't work in a theater anymore, its just depressing.

I'm also in school A LOT! And working on phones calling YOUS people and asking you to do stupid surveys.

BTW Phil, nice spelling... [Big Grin]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-29-2004, 07:52 PM:

HA! Too funny Rach! I didn't catch your edits at 1st! HAhahaha

>>> Phil

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-29-2004, 09:37 PM:

so all stressed out people beter get some [sex]

to save the world right [Phil Hill]

:jennifer:

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 06-29-2004, 09:41 PM:

Oh yeah! That's what I'm talkin' about!

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-29-2004, 09:41 PM:

So we create the film-tech orgy site huba buba

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 06-29-2004, 10:38 PM:

I've already gotten my film-tech orgy from Don thank-you. I completely blame my moving to Wisconsin on FT, which leads me to blaming it on Brad. One film-tech guy is enough for me, I won't make that mistake again! [Big Grin]

Count me out. [evil]

Phil's plenty of woman to cover me, Jennifer, and Gracia... lucky for you guys!

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 06-29-2004, 11:15 PM:

I think one big F-T group hug is in order.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-29-2004, 11:37 PM:

One thing that might help is a better search criteria for finding a topic/subject. As an example, I typed in a search box "Simplex SH-1000 Lateral Guide roller." The search box would not accept the last 2 letters of what was typed.

When I clicked "Search," I came back with 300 hits.

Now I, along with many members) don't have the time to search through all of them to find a thread directly relating to a specific item I wanted a comment on or one which I was seeking comments.

This confusion is not only frustrating, but it leaves the forum open for duplicate threads which seem to be happening at a more frequent rate.

I disagree with the idea that people are too lazy to perform a search. The search hits may just be overwelming.

A possible solution is to dump (literally) archives that are over 1 year old. That might help.

I have a feeling I might have made a post that may prove unpopular, but it is only a suggestion to try and make things just a little better for all of us. [Smile]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-29-2004, 11:46 PM:

I don't know how you are operating the search engine, but I pasted that into the engine and came up with 2 results, both on target. [Confused]

Regarding deleting the archives, that's a horrible idea. There are many things that have been posted here over the years that are simply not documented in equipment manuals or anywhere else.

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 06-29-2004, 11:53 PM:

I'm pretty danged stressed. I'm not gonna be this weekend though. This is the first weekend off I've had in 9 months!!! I'm gonna relax. Maybe check out Spidey 2 (Couldn't tongiht because I was working through the start of our 12:01 am show) and go to the 4th of July celebration!!

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-30-2004, 12:19 AM:

Brad, the option you used provided two hits, just like your example. Your checked box was "Match all search terms above."

I used "Match any of the terms above."

If I used the keyword "SH-1000" in "Match all search terms above," I came up with 52 hits. The oldest dating back to 11-17-1999. That's 3.5 years ago. Too much stuff to sort through.

I tried to upload the one that had 300 hits but the upload failed. I sent it to you via email instead.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-30-2004, 12:38 AM:

Paul, that is absolutely the wrong way to use a search engine. If you select "match ANY", then every time the word Simplex was used, it will display all of the threads using the word "Simplex". Also, every time SH-1000 was used, it will display all of the threads using the word "SH-1000". The same goes for the word lateral, and the word guide and the word roller. Can you imagine how many results you would've gotten had you added the word film into that line? See the problem? It's operator error.

The only time you would want to use the "match ANY" option would be if you are searching for something that is commonly mispelled. For example, if you search for filmguard, you will get all of the results based upon people who know how it is spelled. However we all know that people like to call it "film-guard", so if you searched for filmguard film-guard using the "match ANY" option, you would see all of the results based upon those two spellings of the name. Unfortunately in this example some people call it "film guard". In that instance you would have to enter that part in quotes since you don't want to turn up with every instance of the word "film". For example:

filmguard film-guard "film guard"

Make sense?

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-30-2004, 12:44 AM:

Well, operator error or not is not the concern. I typed in SH-1000 in Any terms and came up with 5 hits I think it was.

I was only pointing out what others have also experienced as well as myself. Whether it be selected "All" or "Any", there is just too much to search through unless we know the exact topic name.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 06-30-2004, 12:48 AM:

Choosing "ALL" will require ALL of the words in the search to be present in the thread. Choosing "ANY" will require only ONE of the words to be present in the thread.

That's why you should be specific in your keyword choice and start with ALL. If that doesn't give you the results you want, then change your keywords or choose ANY, hence the operator error.

If it were up to us, we'd dump the crappy UBB software entirely in favor of a ranked-results search (damn Google for dumbing down the internet), but none of us has the time right now to write new software, as evidenced by the lack of updates on the front page. I don't even have time to finish typing this ...

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-30-2004, 12:49 AM:

Thanks, Adam. [Smile]

You just said basically what I was trying to say. Some of us don't have time to search through all that stuff.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-30-2004, 12:50 AM:

Sorry you don't get how a search engine works, Paul. Regardless the engine DOES work if used properly. If someone is too lazy to spend at least 5 minutes making an effort to find the answer to a question before they ask it, all they are doing is saying that they are too lazy to make any effort and they want the answer spoon fed to them. As such, if someone asks a simple question and I can find it in 1 minute's time using the search engine, that's pretty pathetic for the poster to be wasting everyone's time.

Regardless, it's operator error...and "ALL" is the default setting, by the way.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-30-2004, 12:53 AM:

Well, I am sorry. I think MSIE has done a marvelous job for me. It has always done what I expected to. [Smile]

I will offer no more suggestions on how to make Film-Tech better, since I am always wrong in the first place.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-30-2004, 01:03 AM:

quote: Paul G. Thompson
I think MSIE has done a marvelous job for me. It has always done what I expected to.

Now you've got me baffled. What does Internet Explorer have to do with the forum's search engine?

[Confused]

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-30-2004, 01:14 AM:

That's what I would like to know....... [Smile]

Actually, if you have 1,500 people what "ALL" meant and what "Any" meant, you would probably have 3,000 different answers. [Big Grin]

In public relations training classes in the US Navy, one experiment we did was to have someone start a story that was read from a script. Each class member told another (in secret) and was relayed down the line with about 12 people. When the story got back to the orginator, there was absolutey no similarity of the story whatsoever.

It was how the story was perceived as it passes from one to another.

It is all how it is preceived at the time.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-30-2004, 02:04 AM:

You guys seem a little stressed out. [Wink]

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 06-30-2004, 03:05 AM:

Honestly, I am getting a little tired of all the rain.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 06-30-2004, 03:53 AM:

I think the search feature on FT is pretty good. I've used some on other forums that absolutely stink at times. Anyone on the Home Theater Forum may know what I'm talking about. There are so many redundant threads there it seems too. It's a great place, don't get me wrong, but things seem more under control here.

As for the thread topic, yeah, I'm definitely stressed. Built three prints tonight, and one last night. Also, had to move eight films, many DTS discs, and break down The Terminal. On top of that, I had to run the projection booth tonight as well. What a day!

AJG

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 06-30-2004, 04:40 AM:

quote: Paul G. Thompson
A possible solution is to dump (literally) archives that are over 1 year old. That might help.

Last time I checked, we don't burn down libraries just because they contain lots of old books that some people don't have time to read.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 06-30-2004, 05:45 AM:

What'r really causing me stress at the moment is the builders who are working on our refurbishment, and new entrance building. They're using one of those abrasive cutting wheel things, and it's been going on for about three hours now. The *?&&!**! racket is driving me round the bend.

Something else which really causes me stress is when I'm working on something which requires a lot of concentration, and the 'phone keeps ringing, usually it's either somebody trying to sell me something that I don't want, or some idiot who gives you something like "Hello, Yeah, well yeah, it's my thing, it's run out of whatsit. Hang on a minute, there's someone at the door... (I hold on for about five minutes while they hold some totally brainless conversation with somebody else) ... yeah, it wants some ink." Eventually, I manage to work out they want a toner cartridge for their laser printer. Another couple of minutes later they manage to tell me what model it is, then they hang up the 'phone without telling me who they are, or what room they're in.

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 06-30-2004, 06:23 AM:

What stresses me out, is threads getting off topic!! Now when I do a search for how to do a search, its going to bring up a thread about stress, causing me even more stress, causing me to post a repeat topic. [Wink]

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 06-30-2004, 06:49 AM:

Search engine bait:

How does this frickin' thing work?

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-30-2004, 01:26 PM:

Daryl, I didn't say burn them. I said dump them. There should be a way to archive the older stuff and make it available under a separate search criteria.

PS....after our logs and records at the radio station are 3 years or so old, we do, in fact, burn them. FCC considers them obsolete and serve no purpose.

As an edit, one thing that might help. Search function has provisions to look items from present to the past 30 days. Beyond 30 days, the search goes to "Day One."

How about including a function that goes back one year, or some other predetermined setting. Seems as though 1 year is where most of the info being looked for will be found.

I have seen some search engines that will allow a search between selected dates as well. Try the Obituary columns, those ask for approximate dates.

From that point, the search starts from "day one."

[ 06-30-2004, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Paul G. Thompson ]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-30-2004, 03:37 PM:

quote: Paul G. Thompson
I have seen some search engines that will allow a search between selected dates as well. Try the Obituary columns...

I agree with you Paul, I *always* read the obits to see if I'm dead yet...

BTW: Radio station logs have nothing in common with "reference" material.

I agree with Daryl, whether it's a "burning" or a "dumping"... LEAVE the archive as is and just learn how to use a search function.

Too much valuable info would be lost if it was segregated, deleted, burned, dumped, (or as Adam would say) ...whatever.

>>> Phil

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-30-2004, 06:21 PM:

Damn...I don't understand you guys. The data base is just too damned big, and I just suggested ways to trim it so one would not have to sort through 52 threads to find out if there is a duplicate. That is insane!

Phil...on the referenced radio stuff. Oh? Are you a CE of a broadcasting company that has to assist in the log keeping/disposition?

Don't you think that a search criteria for an archived thread would be easier to find if you know the approx date it was made? I do. I certainly am not going to waltz through 52 threads dating back to 1999 to see if a certain question has been already asked. I have more important things to do.

Now it has been publically said that I committed an operator's error when I pulled up 300 hits. That's a bunch of crap! I selected that option to widen a search. Then it was said I did not know how to use my browser. That's a bunch of crap, too.

I get the impression some of you think I am a complete idiot! Well, you are entitled to your opinion, and I am intitled to mine.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-30-2004, 06:27 PM:

Feelin' ok today Paul? It's all good. [Cool]

No one said you didn't know how to operate your browser. You brought your browser into the discussion out of thin air. Go back and reread and you'll see.

On widening your search, you never said you used the default settings first and then was displeased with only getting 2 matches. You posted as if it was impossible to find anything because you got hundreds of matches. Go back and reread and you'll see.

Regardless, the only person with enough knowledge in these areas to rewrite the search engine to give more timeframe options is Daryl, and he is swamped right now with other things. The search engine does work and the mods do our best to keep people away from using teaser subject headers and to not duplicate threads, but we can only do so much. This sort of complaint you have (not the search engine part, but the "too much information" part) is inevitable for an online forum of this size. Just imagine how bad it would be if I had not've created the Yak forum. Remember all that anger about the large format forum? Just look back in a year or two's time and suddenly seperating the large format posts will make sense. [Wink]

Still, it WAS an OPERATOR ERROR when you pulled up 300 hits. Face the facts. You can either learn from the posts here trying to teach you, or you can have a tissy fit about it. Now where is Jeremy Fuentes to calm your stress? [Razz]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-30-2004, 06:32 PM:

quote: Paul G. Thompson
Phil...on the referenced radio stuff. Oh? Are you a CE of a broadcasting company that has to assist in the log keeping/disposition?

Well, as a matter of fact, yes Paul... been there done that as a CE for a AM/FM/TV company for many years. I'm not impressed with your (negative) comments.

quote: Paul G. Thompson
Don't you think that a search criteria for an archived thread would be easier to find if you know the approx date it was made?

No!

quote: Paul G. Thompson
Now it has been publically said that I committed an operator's error when I pulled up 300 hits. That's a bunch of crap!

Face the truth, Paul. You don't get how it works and you're unwilling to learn from those that understand it.

And Brad, leave the f*cking search engine alone... It's great and works as it should!

BTW: Just exactly what is a "tissy fit"? [Wink]

>>> Phil

Posted by William T. Parr (Member # 677) on 06-30-2004, 06:58 PM:

quote:
Now where is Jeremy Fuentes to calm your stress? [Razz]

He should be along after the 10:00 showing of Spiderman 2 tonight. [thumbsup]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-30-2004, 07:08 PM:

Todd: Jeremy and his goodie-two-shoes posts piss me off! See my post on page 1.

(Just yanking your chain Jeremy!) [Razz]

>>> Phil

Posted by William T. Parr (Member # 677) on 06-30-2004, 08:03 PM:

quote:
Jeremy and his goodie-two-shoes posts piss me off!

Yeah I noticed that Phil. [Big Grin]

On the subject of getting stressed out. I know I am ready to choke the ever living shit out of my new boss here at the Highland. The Mother Fucker has taken away all priviledges any of us had as well as the added extra bonuses I had. But expects me to still work for $9.50/hr taking care of re racking all the sound equipment for this remodel job, which were 50% of the way done with. Installing his new Splyce system, Fixing the personal computer in the office everytime it fucks up or the SBC DSL line takes a crap. I am about to just walk out of this place. Being on call everytime some breaks in the booth and I am not here when it happens. Bothering me 3 out of the 4 days I was supposed to be on vacation with petty shit like the fact that We were getting our 70mm screen back this past Friday, but yet I had a newbie projectionist scheduled to work. I had planned on being back the day he was scheduled. but low and behold I show up to work to be sure the newbie can handle it and he takes him away from booth and make him work downstairs, Next day the next newest projectionst is scheduled to work Saturday Night, she was just learing booth when the 70mm house went down for remodeling so she needs to be shown how to thread it. What happens, Again my dipshit of a boss under scheduled downstairs and takes away my trainee. Now I have to come in Sunday. My day off to train both of them. Sure enough I loose my trainee because the box office girl did not show up. Get any idea of how close I am coming to making the phrase "going projectionist" famous? [Big Grin]

quote: Phil Hill
Sex is a ***GREAT*** "stress" reliever....

I will take your word for it Phil. One of these years I need to slow down, get a serious girlfriend or wife and vactually try it for a change.... [sex]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-30-2004, 08:22 PM:

quote: William T. Parr
I will take your word for it Phil.

Trust me, Todd. I know! [Big Grin]

As a matter of fact, I think I'll go out clubbin' tonight since I'm sooooo "stressed"! [Wink]

OBTW: I *always* have condoms and "lube" in my car as one NEVER knows when those items will be "necessary"... [Eek!]

>>> Phil

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-30-2004, 09:25 PM:

Geez Phil! You seem prepared for any encounter!

[av=i]

Posted by William T. Parr (Member # 677) on 06-30-2004, 09:38 PM:

quote:
Geez Phil! You seem prepared for any encounter! -

DOH!

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-30-2004, 09:44 PM:

quote: Phil Hill
OBTW: I *always* have condoms and "lube" in my car as one NEVER knows when those items will be "necessary"...

Alrightalrightalright, that is just TOO MUCH information. [puke]

[ 07-01-2004, 01:22 PM: Message edited by: Mike Blakesley ]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-30-2004, 09:46 PM:

Yes boys, ya NEVER know when an opportunity will present itself... Like my priest said... always be prepared!

(Or was that my Boy Scout leader?) [Wink]

>>> Phil

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 06-30-2004, 09:57 PM:

Just...too...much...info. My head hurts. [Eek!]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-30-2004, 10:01 PM:

Phil, it was probably an older man in a suit shooting hoops with you.

click here

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 06-30-2004, 10:07 PM:

ROTFLMFAO!!! I remember having to both run and watch that one in junior high school... [Big Grin]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-30-2004, 10:22 PM:

Brad: hahahah YES! That's too funny! You ass! Don't forget the bow tie! Hahahahhaha

"Boys Beware"... of homosexual geezers praying on those poor young boys! Hahahahah Too fucking funny!

And, while I was the 15 y/o kid playing basketball back then for that film... I did NOT have sex with that prevert! Yes! Did I little know that that night I'd trade my life in for a headline...

I was an actor for Christ's sake! All the stuff in the "out-takes" were all "simulated"! [Wink]

You should post the link for that film! Hahahahaha (Ooops! I see you did!)

(I cannot imagine were you got that from!) [Confused]

>>> Phil

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 07-01-2004, 12:49 AM:

quote: Paul G. Thompson
Daryl, I didn't say burn them. I said dump them. There should be a way to archive the older stuff and make it available under a separate search criteria.

When I think of dumping something I most always think of getting rid of it. In any case, we tried archiving threads a few months ago and I ended up getting 62 emails bitching me out in a matter of hours.

By the way, if you only want results from the last year's worth of threads, stop reading the results after you've read a year's worth of results. The results are in order by date.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 07-01-2004, 02:57 AM:

Well, Daryl...you tried. That's what counts. [Smile]

I have absolutely no problem with that, and you should be commended and not chastised because you took action to try and make it better. [beer]

It is the people who sit on their butts, squawk and moan that take no action for whatever reason to make a given situation better, and it is that type of attitude which makes a situation more problematic.

I have seen that philosophy too many times over in 20 years with the military. Biased, opinionated and others who opposed change for pig-headed non-negotiable reasons were generally weeded out and placed in a position where they had little to no responsibility. Those individuals were usually escorted to the gate after their term of duty was finished.

It seems to be much worse in civilian life.

Posted by David Ingalsbe (Member # 2433) on 07-01-2004, 03:05 AM:

wow even the stress topic is getting stressed. I feel that yes with the summer time and the wounderful holiday weekend everyone is a little stressed. [Frown]

I know that I to have had to do with some of the problems talked about in this thread. I did apologize in the cyan thread. I thinks Phil is right more [beer]

required. And if there is a F-T orgy I get to sit next to Phil. [Eek!]

(I hate not being able to check this from work. By the time i get to post the conversations have usually wandered.)

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 07-01-2004, 06:27 AM:

quote: William T. Parr was the last to post
Now where is Jeremy Fuentes to calm your stress?

I'm here now. Paul relax buddy. [thumbsup]

Happy Brad?? [Big Grin]

quote: Phil Hill
Todd: Jeremy and his goodie-two-shoes posts piss me off! See my post on page 1.

Phil, I started this thread for the sole purpose of pissing you off. It is my new goal in life. [thumbsup]

Posted by William T. Parr (Member # 677) on 07-01-2004, 08:11 AM:

quote: Jeremy Fuentes
Phil, I started this thread for the sole purpose of pissing you off. It is my new goal in life

Wow, I thought that was everybody here's goal in life. [Wink]

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 07-01-2004, 08:20 AM:

Well, it wasnt mine at first, but since Phil seems to get pissed off with everything I do and say now, I have joined the others. [Wink]

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 07-02-2004, 01:05 AM:

quote: Paul G. Thompson
It is the people who sit on their butts, squawk and moan that take no action for whatever reason to make a given situation better, and it is that type of attitude which makes a situation more problematic.

"How many disc jockeys does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Six - one to call the engineer, & five to sit around & bitch."