In article ,
Geoff-consulting forester in the US wrote:
An error occurred in my mail program several times stating that the
message was not sent..but sent the messages anyway.
*I reason that this is shared ignorance:*
1. The programmer is ignorant that this error is displayed and yet sends
the messages anyway;
2. I was ignorant that the program sent messages that displayed errors
stating that messages had not been sent;
3. You were ignorant of the cause of the "7" posts.
I count 6 posts, so there could be even more ignorance here - it's
fairly rampant in humans (to err is human).
Feeling less ignorant now? I am.
Now, while you are correct that others have "cross replied" to the
thread (most did actually), you're missing the point:
Keslick is a scam artist, marketing skills and expertise he lacks.
Those of us who do have the expertise and skills realize this quite
clearly nearly every time he posts his rhetoric.
Those of you who do not understand would have no idea how damaging this
is to the industry, because you're not a part of it. Some of us don't
take kindly to this sort of scam artist - the same reason that the
professional dancers on the Nationally syndicated television show "Do
you think you can Dance" get upset and make negative comments about
people who get up there stating that they are a trainer and just can't
friggin' dance.
It's disrespectful to the profession. Unfortunately, we're (the
foresters) in the difficult situation of having a profession that is so
small collectively, we don't have a lobbying firm or PR marketing team
to make it illegal for idiots like John Keslick to market himself as a
"tree bilogist", etc.
We can't have shows with monkeys running up and down trees like they're
"TREE HUNTER", because trees don't move and that's boring.
All we can do is feel sorry for the clients Keslick rips off by charging
a fee to them to taking care of their trees inappropriately through the
obvious lack of knowledge and incompetence, the same way many other
major "landscape care" companies do.
The Forestry program at the University I attended didn't have any Public
Relations (PR) class of any sort (maybe a small angle or two was covered
in a Socioeconomics class). It also didn't have an ethics class - BOTH
of which are arguably needed.
However, Unlike anything that "Symplastless" has experienced, it *DID*
have all kinds of classes related to the study of trees and forests;
Biology,
Inorganic and Organic Chemistry,
They always have these watered down classes for majors that will never
need them. We called them "baby organic chem" and "baby inorganic". They
probably just do it to Foresters to torture them and let them know how
little they know.
Plant Physiology, Pathology,
Drendology, Entomology, Forest Ecology, Biometry, Forest management and
others.
Now, as far as the ****ing freedom of speech goes you little
anti-American church going whore, Don't tread on my bill of rights.
Oh yes, the freedom of speech covers profanity - yes indeed it does my
little ho...
My advice to you is if you don't like to see words like ****ing crotch
rot, or ****, or think about themes such as licking smegma off the
rotten portion between the balls and an asshole just after some dude
gets done running a marathon in a week old undies, stick to a moderated
and highly text censored forum instead.
Get some ****ing skin thickener, biatch!
Now, feel free to blame all this nasty talk on my ignorance of Public
relations. *grin*
By the way, Rachel - I always got a hard-on for chicks named Rachel - .
I mean, seriously are they ALL hot or WHAT? Wanna ****? Don't tell my
wife!
Feel free to blame that last invitation on my lack of an ethics class.
*grin*
What a twisted world we live in!
Have a nice day.
P.S. have to keep this on topic: please don't move firewood. It *bugs* me.
There you have it folk, taxpayer's money at work. So who would you
rather have doctoring your tree Businessman John or psychopath Geoff?
No wonder they don't get no respect.
---------------
D. Staples Jun 25, 6:58 pm
Newsgroups: alt.forestry
From: "D. Staples"
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:58:40 -0500
Local: Mon, Jun 25 2007 6:58 pm
Subject: alt.forestry
"Joe" wrote in message news:3rWfi.6273$oo5.924@trndny09...
POSTED IN ALT.FORESTRY
One thing about this forestry forum- it's the best one on the planet so
far- we have a good variety of points of view- and everyone is willing to
have a real old fashioned red blooded American down and dirty debate-
something not available anywhere else.
In the SAF
(
http://www.securityexpertgroup.com/t...ices_about.htm )?
These forest rangers apparently aspire to be cops. Unbelievable.
discussion groups- I've been thrown out more than once- those
weenies can't bear the thought of anyone thinking out of the box, the SAF
box. The same is true of Guild groups which are even weenier.
Here in Mass.- I often send out "rants" to the entire forestry world- and
over the years I've been told to shut up by virtually everyone from all
sides of the forestry spectrum- and threatened a few times too- the
previous state Chief Forester tried to get my license revoked, claiming in
his official complaint to the license board that my rants were
"essentially forbidden". Can you imagine such arrogance? Also, here in
Mass.- Mike Leonard once wrote a humorous Christmas story about the local
wood industry- they complained to the license board that Mike should lose
his license- imagine, those rough, tough loggers whining over some humor.
So, for what it's worth- this is the best place, the most honest and
profound forestry discussion on the third rock from the sun. Someday these
discussions will be discovered by archivists.
Ah, but Joe, we are merely the dirty underbelly of the profession, the
one's
that actually get mud on our boots, what could we collectively know about
the profession of forestry. We don't get the strokes, the diamond studded
collars, or the "Forester of the Year" awards. All we do is grow trees
and
manage forests. This site represents the real world of forestry. The
archivists will call us a cult, or untermenchen, of the real forestry
world
recorded in the great Halls of Ivory.
--------
rachael simpson wrote:
Geoff-consulting forester in the US wrote:
Treelady, et, Al.
The only reason you find "Symplastless" to have a good understanding of
trees is that you are ignorant.
Note that I stated "ignorant" and not stupid. My statement is not an
insult, but rather a logical reply based on your input.
Then you must also be ignorant to have posted this exact message 7
times! Note: I stated "ignorant" and this is my logical reply based on
everyone's input:
All you self-righteous folk, go back to your "forestry" and leave our
gardens, please!
In defense of John, all he did was reply to a thread that had been
cross-posted. He was *NOT* the original cross-poster. Neither was Billy.
Or Ann. Or myself. With some readers, if not all of them, when you hit
reply to a thread, it sends the reply to all the groups that the OP sent
it to. Whereas, you seem to think that we invaded your territory, STS,
we could think the same here in wreck gardens. So how's bout a
deal....you go back where you belong, and we will stay where we belong.
Oh & glad that Don's vocabulary is so advanced that he has to revert to
name calling with explicits. That was so uncalled for. Is that the type
of language you learned in your PR classes?
Let's hear it one last time for the "Daisy-Chain of the Forest" Joe, Don
Staples, and Geoff.
--
FB - FFF
Billy
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/