Are you tired of reading advice from dead advice columnists and their
humorless PC daughters?  Come to www.dearbuster.com for advice on all
topics.  Advice for the 21st century from a man's point of view.  A little
bit of humor, a little bit of entertainment, and a lot of attitude.  Never
again will the questions be more interesting than the answers.  Never again
will you see a politically-correct "sensitive" answer.  Common sense is the
rule here.  Come visit!  Letters change each week.

Thanks for listening,

Buster Van Buren
buster@dearbuster.com

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 08:06:16 GMT, "Buster Van Buren"
<buster@dearbuster.com> wrote:

>Are you tired of reading advice from dead advice columnists and their
>humorless PC daughters?  Come to www.dearbuster.com for advice on all
>topics.  Advice for the 21st century from a man's point of view.  A little
>bit of humor, a little bit of entertainment, and a lot of attitude.  Never
>again will the questions be more interesting than the answers.  Never again
>will you see a politically-correct "sensitive" answer.  Common sense is the
>rule here.  Come visit!  Letters change each week.
>
>Thanks for listening,
>
>Buster Van Buren
>buster@dearbuster.com

LOL.. 'cause we're all about sensitivity here.

'Kate

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

"'Kate" <nothere@home.com> wrote in message
news:ascej0dpf7g7cq4rhdvkijsifhg1f4rfgg@4ax.com..
> On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 08:06:16 GMT, "Buster Van Buren"
> <buster@dearbuster.com> wrote:
> 
little[vbcol=seagreen] 
Never[vbcol=seagreen] 
again[vbcol=seagreen] 
the[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
> LOL.. 'cause we're all about sensitivity here.
>
> 'Kate
>

Yeah he obviously didn't lurk long, if at all. lol

Christine

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

That's where both of you are wrong.  I'm not lurking.  I'm actively watching
this newsgroup, and imparting advice to everyone.

And, if you read my little "ad-post" more carefully, you'd understand that I
was talking about typical advice columnists like Dear Abby, Ann Landers,
Miss Manners, and the assortment of 70 year old to dead women giving advice
to people.  I wasn't talking about the group.  I happen to like this group,
as it gives me lots of topics to think about and explore.

And Kate?  Thanks for liking that other post.  It's always nice to see that
people "sometimes" read and understand what I say.

Have a great night.

Buster
www.dearbuster.com



"CME" <cmedwards9@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mFPZc.87384$X12.46627@edtnps84..
>
> "'Kate" <nothere@home.com> wrote in message
> news:ascej0dpf7g7cq4rhdvkijsifhg1f4rfgg@4ax.com.. 
> little 
> Never 
> again 
> the 
>
> Yeah he obviously didn't lurk long, if at all. lol
>
> Christine
>
>

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 03:11:37 GMT, "Buster Van Buren"
<buster@dearbuster.com> wrote:

>That's where both of you are wrong.  I'm not lurking.  I'm actively watchin
g
>this newsgroup, and imparting advice to everyone.
>
>And, if you read my little "ad-post" more carefully, you'd understand that 
I
>was talking about typical advice columnists like Dear Abby, Ann Landers,
>Miss Manners, and the assortment of 70 year old to dead women giving advice
>to people.  I wasn't talking about the group.  I happen to like this group,
>as it gives me lots of topics to think about and explore.
>
>And Kate?  Thanks for liking that other post.  It's always nice to see that
>people "sometimes" read and understand what I say.
>
>Have a great night.
>
>Buster
>www.dearbuster.com

OK, since you're an actual human person responding to actual comments.
I looked at your site. Even though there are dozens of advice sites
like yours (you might want to lose the "only" from your intro) I
looked anyway. I didn't get far because the red-on-black was hard to
read and your html doesn't fit in a window. It's not worth having to
scroll left-right for every line of text. I dunno how to fix that but
it's worth fixing.

lm

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 03:11:37 GMT, "Buster Van Buren"
<buster@dearbuster.com> wrote:

>That's where both of you are wrong.  I'm not lurking.

Show me where I said "lurking" and I'll let you tell me I'm wrong.

>  I'm actively watching this newsgroup,

Ok, that's for sure not lurking.  That's more like stalking..

>and imparting advice to everyone.


But not reprinting from this newsgroup to your site, right?  You
wouldn't do that.

>And, if you read my little "ad-post" more carefully, you'd understand that 
I
>was talking about typical advice columnists like Dear Abby, Ann Landers,
>Miss Manners, and the assortment of 70 year old to dead women giving advice
>to people.  I wasn't talking about the group.

Yeah, yeah. got it.

> I happen to like this group,
>as it gives me lots of topics to think about and explore.

um hum.


>And Kate?  Thanks for liking that other post.  It's always nice to see that
>people "sometimes" read and understand what I say.

Darlin'... that wasn't me.  Again.


>Have a great night.
>
>Buster
>www.dearbuster.com


You too. I sure hope you learn how to read threaded posts soon.

'Kate

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

You are correct..It was Christine who liked my post.  I take back anything
nice I said to you, and redirect it towards Christine.

Could it be perhaps your confrontational attitude that resulted in you being
a single parent, by the way?

Just a thought to ponder

Buster
"'Kate" <nothere@home.com> wrote in message
news:o8pfj099oij3dcda6fdm8jlhn2sqv06n9n@4ax.com..
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 03:11:37 GMT, "Buster Van Buren"
> <buster@dearbuster.com> wrote:
> 
>
>  Show me where I said "lurking" and I'll let you tell me I'm wrong.
> 
>
> Ok, that's for sure not lurking.  That's more like stalking..
> 
>
>
> But not reprinting from this newsgroup to your site, right?  You
> wouldn't do that.
> 
that I[vbcol=seagreen] 
advice[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
> Yeah, yeah. got it.
> 
>
> um hum.
>
> 
that[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
> Darlin'... that wasn't me.  Again.
>
> 
>
>
> You too. I sure hope you learn how to read threaded posts soon.
>
> 'Kate
>

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 04:20:45 GMT, "Buster Van Buren"
<buster@dearbuster.com> wrote:

>I'm glad you checked out the site.  Sorry you didn't like the colors, but
>after 5000 some hits, you are the first to complain.  The site is set up in
>a standard size for computer screens to capture without having to "scroll"
>left or right. (It is not set to be a "wide capture") In fact, I've got
>server statistics that show that 97.8% of all my readers are set up to read
>the site without the problem you stated.  You must have a smaller monitor,
>or have set your screen settings larger to make the type larger.
>
>If you go to the letters section, you will find the questions in white, and
>my answers in bold red on a black background.  I'm sorry that you have
>difficulty reading that, but once again, I haven't had that complaint
>before.

You may not have, but it's a legitimate one, IMO. For good visibility,
yellow on black is the most universally visible colour. Red on black
is a challenge to some people and particularly to people with vision
impairment. To reach the widest audience, you might like to run your
site through an accessibility checker, like Bobby:
http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp

You'd be amazed how many people would really appreciate it.

Cele

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 04:14:54 GMT, "Buster Van Buren"
<buster@dearbuster.com> wrote:

>You are correct..It was Christine who liked my post.  I take back anything
>nice I said to you, and redirect it towards Christine.
>
>Could it be perhaps your confrontational attitude that resulted in you bein
g
>a single parent, by the way?
>
>Just a thought to ponder

Don't go there. You really, really don't want to go there. You don't
know Kate, or her overall posting style, and I guarantee you, tossing
off hurtful remarks about why people are own around here can be a
*lot* more destructive than any cracks sent your way are likely to
have been. And they gain nothing.

For the record, Kate's attitude has *nothing* to do with her status as
a single parent.

Cele

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Thanks Cele:

Actually, I'm not too concerned about the visibility of the site to older
adults who may have vision problems. The site is already almost entirely
made from Flash, which typically is not a program most older people have.
The demo for my audience is typically more for young adults, or so it seems
from the letters I've received.

I'm all for constructive criticism, and I'll check out that site you
recommended, however my site was previously set up as you described, and I
got tons of complaints about how it wasn't "edgy" enough for the audience it
was attracting.

By the way, I'm not going to get into a pissing match with Kate.  She
unjustly came at me with attitude, and I'm not one to take that.  And, as
"well" as you may know her from her postings, you cannot say with 100%
certainty that her confrontational style was not a mitigating factor (no
matter how small or large) in the reason she CURRENTLY is "spouseless".  I
just made an observation from a man's point of view, based on what I saw.
If I observed it, certainly any other guy entering her life will notice it
as well.  Kindness is returned by kindness.  Snippiness is returned by the
type of response I gave.

Buster




"Cele" <cltemple@shaw.spam-me-at-your-peril.ca> wrote in message
news:qi0gj0poks1hqa44kqcai38494djbnofc4@4ax.com..
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 04:20:45 GMT, "Buster Van Buren"
> <buster@dearbuster.com> wrote:
> 
in[vbcol=seagreen] 
"scroll"[vbcol=seagreen] 
read[vbcol=seagreen] 
monitor,[vbcol=seagreen] 
and[vbcol=seagreen] 
>
> You may not have, but it's a legitimate one, IMO. For good visibility,
> yellow on black is the most universally visible colour. Red on black
> is a challenge to some people and particularly to people with vision
> impairment. To reach the widest audience, you might like to run your
> site through an accessibility checker, like Bobby:
> http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp
>
> You'd be amazed how many people would really appreciate it.
>
> Cele

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]