From: patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: A question for Airplane Boy
Organization: You wouldn't believe it, either.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 08:35:49 GMT

I got this mail from Chris Lyman earlier tonight, while I was at work -- and
per his request, I'm posting it, with my comments marked by a leading #.
(Enjoy, Steve.)

----------start enclosed mail------------------
From chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov Thu Jan  7 23:00:44 1993
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 10:54:42 CST
From: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
To: patrick@is.rice.edu
Subject: Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?
Content-Type: X-sun-attachment

Patrick,

Could I ask a big favor?  Since I don't have posting access, and AB is making
a public issue of our email exchanges, could you post the enclosed article
for me?  Thanks.

Btw, I've gotten two messages from him this morning.  Neither has any original
content, and one includes the infamous klansman barfic.  I'll be sending him
warning not to do that anymore.  D'ya think he'll:

1. have an aneurism? (sp?)

# Nah.  Aneurysms aren't much fun, as Dale will testify.

2. blow up real good?

# That's a distinct possibility -- he seems to take anything I say as an
# excuse to do that.

3. send a core dump to stpaul.gov with a cc: to rice.edu?

# I'd hope he's not *that* dumb -- some other people at CSUS would be
# getting mail soon after...

4. generate 60+ articles in the space of three hours?

# I'm sort of hoping for that -- he's really funny when he spazzes out...

5. die of fright?

# I hope not -- this kid's been scared most of his life, judging by his
# responses.  You'd think he'd get tired of running scared, sooner or
# later...

Actually, I think he'll stop but pretend to ignore me.

# Yeah, just like he pretends to put me in his killfile, but still manages
# to find a way to rave at me, no matter what I say...:-)

Keep smiling,
Chris
----------
> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:

> Gee, it seems both Chris Lyman AND PatricKKK Humphrey are spending
> time talking about me. And then they send me their little love notes
> afterwards.

Nice try, Steve.  To echo Patrick's question who sent you the mail first?
In that mail, whose address was in the "cc:" field?

(To bring everybody including Steve up to date, I responded via email to
Chaney's interesting article "What can we expect from President Hillary
Clinton?"  Almost as an afterthought, I cc'd Patrick, figuring he'd be
interested in our exchange.  Patrick inadvertently cc'd Chaney when he
answered, and since then Steve's responses have been causing much 
merriment in Houston and St. Paul.)

Btw, Steve, there has been some attempt on my part to talk _to_ you, not
about you.  You're not scared of me, are you?

> This, folks, is only a continuation starting from PatricKKK's
> re-initiation of email between the 2 of us.

Not true, Propellor Boy.  See above.  Btw, I noticed that your first reply
to Patrick was time-stamped at almost 2am PST.  You need your rest if you
want to grow up to be big and strong.

> Remember, as he said, I only IMAGINE that pro-choicers are emailing me
> first. (Which proves how much of a liar he really is.) 

Since I can't post, why shouldn't I respond via email?  Your fantasy about
Anita Hill being appointed to the Supreme Court was fascinating.  Don't
you like getting feedback on your articles?

If you just want to be left alone, you can always try posting rational
arguments! :-)

One more thing: please desist from emailing copies of your klansman barfic.
If I get any more of them, I will forward them to your sysadmin.

Have a smurfy day.

-----------end included mail---------------


# Thanks, Chris -- I think he'll like this...:-)

--PLH, still trying to figure out how my admins can be responsible for a
private Fidonet BBS...

--

Newsgroups: talk.abortion,can.politics