Vikes066 - who are you?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>Vikes066: <br /><br />I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but I just want to know who I am supporting? <br /><br />We know Robert Plancich and his attorney, Adam Warshaw...<br /><br />and we know Dave Bushing and Bill Mastro and Doug Allen...<br /><br />so I just want to know who you are and what your interests are in this.<br /><br />Have you been "burned" by one of these COA's...<br /><br />or are you just a curious guy who wants to see justice prevail?<br /><br />Would you mind giving your name?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Hal, Lee asked this question before and he never answered. I jsut asked again and am awaiting a response. It would seem that a lot people would be interested in who this anonymous poster is. And unitl you clearly identify yourself, you really have no credibility here. The very thing you question about Bushing.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>I don't think Vikes should reveal his identity, as it seems according to Jay that Mastro will shut off the accounts of those who criticize their policies. <br /><br />In the meantime, I think his posts are well-written and well-reasoned (he's certainly less temperamental than me) and not at all sensationalistic. <br /><br />Jay and Lee find his posts necessary to attack because they feel their reputations are on the line and they must defend Bushing, SCDA and Mastro or otherwise admit they were manipulated like yokels. <br /><br />Otherwise, I think they bring good information and topics for discussion.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p>I thought i knew Jay and Lee pretty well,so im a little confused as to why you think their reputations have anything to do with mastro or anyone else just mentioned?<br /><br />I didnt read any posts by vikes066 so i have no idea what thats about but it doesnt seem like theyre asking much(and it sounds like Hal wants to know too) by knowing who it is.If someone came on tv and said something that affected me id like to know who they were or if they had any merit in what theyre saying before i started believing them,thats not asking much at all,its common sense.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Lee Behrens</b><p>Aaron, <br /><br />How do you know that it is not me or Jay asking the questions? Oh I see you are willing to follow the man behind the door that won't ID himself.<br /><br />I have absolutely no problem with the questions that vikes066 has asks. I have exchange pleasent emails with him and asked his ID but he has not revealed it. This to me puts up red flags. If you are afraid to ID yourself what are you afraid of and what are you hiding from. Robert Plantich was not afraid to stand behind what he believed.<br /><br />The theory that you will be banned from the person/individual you are critisizing is a poor one because I would think you do not want ot be involved with them anyways, so what are you out?<br /><br />The slight bit of creditablility I give Aaron and Joe is that at least they id themselves. <br /><br />Another question I pose to all that have responded to SCDA and Large auction threads, critzing them. DO you buy the type of memobilia they authenticate and do you bid in auction houses you question?<br /><br />There have been alot of good points made about the made on this subject, too many questions in my book to jump into the memorbilia market. I personally am not registered on any auction house because I did not want to be tempted to spend any more money than I already do.<br /><br />I sure would like to know Vikes066 ID and motives and the answer to my other questions I posed. <br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>"I thought i knew Jay and Lee pretty well,so im a little confused as to why you think their reputations have anything to do with mastro or anyone else just mentioned?" <br /><br />I didn't say that I thought their reputations were at stake. I said I thought that they thought their reputations were at stake, thus their dogged defending of Bushing, Mastro, SCDA, etc. <br /><br />I don't believe their reputations are at stake anymore.<br /><br />"I didnt read any posts by vikes066 so i have no idea what thats about..." <br /><br />Then you would need to read them to understand the context of my reasoning.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p>Im not going to read them but the point of my response was that its not asking too much to know who someone is before you believe something they say.Especially if what they say affects you somehow.I wouldnt ask for someones life story but i would want to know why i should believe them over someone who is trusted or known.<br /><br />If someone told me my car runs better and cheaper on peanut oil than it does on gas and i asked them how they knew and they wouldnt tell me,i wouldnt put peanut oil in my car unless someone credible backed up that story

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>Peanut Oil? What a maroon.<br /><br />Everyone knows that sawdust is what you need to put in your gas tank! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Right, Barney?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>"Im not going to read them but the point of my response was that its not asking too much to know who someone is before you believe something they say." <br /><br />Well, then I would probably advise you to not believe him. Everybody should make up their own mind anyway.<br /><br />For what it's worth, he's not throwing around accusations. He's really just repeating things that have already been admitted to by Troy, including an admission that Dave Bushing does not have a Master's degree as stated on his bio.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am not sure why Vikes doesn't want to be known either. If he is afraid of being banned there are probably many of his friends that could bid in the auctions for him. I think when we make accusations and state derrogatory facts we should be known. I believe in the court system the accused has a right to know their accusor (but I am 99% sure a lawyer will correct me on that one). At any rate I do agree that we all need to come out in the open with our identities in these kinds of threads. For the record I bid in most of the auctions, Mastro, Lipset, Hunt, Sotheby's, Robert Edwards, 19th Century etc....and will continue to do so. I have never been given anything but great service from all of them. I am a little glad that I don't collect autographs or memorabelia though.... regards all<br /><br />edited to note that I am really on the fence about remaining anonymous as seen by this post earlier today.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Well said, Vikes. And yes, you have been incredibly even-tempered in your responses to other posters--oddly robotic even! (Where as I'm more of the "fire away" type of poster.) If people are trying to attack the facts you've presented by attacking your irrelevant credibility it's simply a confirmation that they have nothing else to attack you with. <br /><br />BTW, gotta love that Lee is trying to go around your back to find out who you are. His "friends" must be really leaning on him to take you down. <br /><br />Good job!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>rob</b><p>Hey Vikes, what does FACTS stand for? You always have it in capital letters so i assume it is an acronym.<br /><br />just wondering

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>vikes066</b><p>FACTS is not an acronym. The CAPITAL letters are used for emphasis purposes only the same way you might use some inflection or emphasis in a spoken word form.<br /><br />Hope that clears up the confusion.<br /><br />Vikes066

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am not sure why I am even posting in this thread but it does peak my curiosity. I understand your points and they are well taken. At the same time if I came on here and only stated some damning facts about you wouldn't you want to know who I am? Again, you are absolutely correct about yourself being civil and so forth and that's always appreciated. But I still ask the question "wouldn't you want to know who's saying stuff about you?" best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>vikes066</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />Take a look at the discussions. I myself am not just "saying" this stuff. They are true FACTS. Anyone who can google or dogpile search can find the same stuff. I did not fabricate these things. They are truths. These are not accusations.<br /><br />There will be people who want to try and bash me now since they don't want to believe the facts. That's fine. I have been encouraging to have people believe what they want to believe.<br /><br />But once again that will not change the FACTS of this discussion. <br /><br />Respectfully yours,<br /><br />Vikes066

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>Vikes,<br /><br />You keep saying that other members are "bashing" you. Can you point out examples of this? I think everyone is just curious as to who is revealing this good information. Most of us identify ourselves when we post and you should as well to take credit for outlining these facts for us.<br /><br />Wesley

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>mcavoy</b><p>Just posting from my a$$:<br /><br />vikes066:<br />- vikings 1066: invasion of England?<br />- someone from Dakotas-Minnesota-Wisconsin region, ethnic northern european, huge Vikings fan?<br />- someone who is apparently stating facts so far, not accusations; intent appears to better the hobby-industry, not worsen it.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Oh boy, contacted by the famous columist Mr O'Keefe. This tells me everything I need to know about his journalistic integrity. I've heard Planich's side of the story and I've heard SCDA/Bushing's side. Does he bother to contact me or anyone else that made this trip? Of course not, he contacts some anonymous person on this board that will back up O'Keefe's point of view on this subject. There's some good objective journalism for ya.<br /><br />Vikes, you love the facts so much, yet the FACT is that no one knows who you are or how credible you are. This is the FACTS about you. Yes you are civil, etc, but this does not excuse you hiding behind an anonymous handle. The FAACT is, you post all the FACTS you want, but unitl you identify yourself, you no credibility, the very thing you question Bushing and SCDA on.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>vikes066</b><p>Would the FACTS change if my name was:<br /><br />Paddy O'Donaghue or<br />Giana Marconi or<br />Enrique Rodriquez or<br />Heidi Von Essens or<br />Schlomo Rabinowitz or perhaps<br />Sam Smith or<br />Byung Kim Lee<br /><br />Ponder that for a moment. Personally I am irrelevant to the issue. Male, female, young, old, as the Rock used to say in WWE Wrestling: It's doesn't matter!!!<br /><br />You could substitute me for any of the people I listed above (obviously made up names) and the FACTS surrounding the discussion still remain the same.<br /><br />I don't understand how simpler it can get.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Vikes, you are awesome. I am starting to wish I was you! <br /><br />(BTW, perhaps Jay would be more satisfied with the journalist's objectivity were the reporter that student from Marquette who didn't ask any questions. LOL.)

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Lee Behrens</b><p>Would this board have the creditablity it does if we all posted anonomously, whether factual or not? This board has became the power it has because of the people stepping forward not hiding. I do not understand how anyone can be taken seriously when in hiding whether it involves FACTS or not. <br /><br />I admire Vikes for the way he has brought his FACTS up but absolutely disagree with posting anonomously. I personally feel that if you are not willing to ID yourself that your posts should be deleted whether factual or not.<br /><br />Vikes, I also have not seen any "bashing" towards you. You want to present the FACTS, we want to know the ID of this person. Both are reasonable but you seem to want to do it your way. There have been some that have had 10 times the controvesy and ID themselves and there has been no harm done by either party.<br /><br />A reasonable request from a reasonable board,<br /><br />Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Vikes,<br />You never answered my only question to you. (and I honestly have nothing against you). <br /><br />Would you want to know who is publicly stating damning FACTS about you ?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>vikes066</b><p>What part of <u>I am not a relevant part of this discussion </u> do you not understand? You and Jay both confuse me.<br /><br />I don't know you. I never met you. I don't know what you do for a living. We never shared a meal or a beverage together. All of that doesn't matter, though. I will say that I do have respect for your passion for the hobby though.<br /><br />Just because I now know your name does that makes you more credible than me or anyone else? We are not in a court of law. I, nor you are being deposed or giving sworn testimony.<br /><br />We are all just discussing simple and documented FACTS. Just like people who make small talk about the sports scores or the weather waiting in line to use the bathroom or to pay for items at a store. Nothing more and nothing less.<br /><br />Every FACT that I have brought up is verifiable doing a simple search on the internet. Nothing has been fabricated and therefore nothing will change if you knew my name, we met or we had a meal together.<br /><br />So what difference does it make if besides the need to fulfill your own curiosity? I'd like you to explain that more in detail for me.<br /><br />Respectfully,<br /><br />Vikes066

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>Vikes - obvious Minn. Vikings fan. <br /><br />Jay - Dont you live in Minn?<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Cap</b><p>I have been reading this with some interest and I have come to the conclusion that Pat Buchanon was actually 'Deep Throat' and I'm still working on who the second gun man was in Texas that ended the life of a young President.<br /><br />I would feel much more comfortable knowing who Vikes is, but can understand why he's hiding. This Board displays the true darkside of all the sports items discussed and I'm wondering if other Collectible-Based Boards are discussing cutting and pasting the upside down airplane or sand blasting a leg on a Buffalo nickel.<br /><br />This week is almost over cardboard people! Let me get back to bidding. I have to esnipe this 'PSA Graders' Joe Jackson and see if I can bid $400 for a George (or was it Harry, either way, ICK!) Wright signature from another auction house!<br /><br />Cap<br /><br><br>I can see that your head has been twisted and fed by worthless foam from the mouth-Bob Dylan

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>vikes066</b><p>Honestly what difference would it make if we were speaking about facts? Nothing would change no matter who reported it. <br /><br />If we were speaking about opinion that is a whole different scenario.<br /><br />In some areas of the country if you get pulled over and arrested for a DUI, they publish you name in the paper. It would then be a FACT that you drove drunk. <br /><br />If someone spread a untrue rumour that you drove drunk that would be an opinion. Not based upon factual evidence.<br /><br />Two totally seperate issues.<br /><br />Facts are the truth. Let the truth set you free.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Lee Behrens</b><p>For one thing Leon's question needs to be answered. and my initial statement about the about the board being creditable be cause we post who we are. If all posted as Bozo the Clown, Superman, Shrek and the such would the board have any creditablity, NO!!!!<br /><br />That is why we ask

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I was finally contacted by the famous Michael O'Keefe. It's really sad that it took a post from an anonymous person bragging about his being emailed by O'Keefe and me mentioning that he had not contacted any of the people that went to Chicago to finally contact me or anyone else. He was obviously aware of the whole situation, yet didn't bother to contact any of us until now. <br /><br />I'll keep you all posted.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Lee Behrens</b><p>So Vikes will be the tell us the facts and only the facts, I think that was a line in a TV show.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>"I personally feel that if you are not willing to ID yourself that your posts should be deleted whether factual or not." <br /><br />So suppress the truth, if you don't know the source? <br /><br />When does the book burning begin?<br /><br />Jay, again, you astound me with the levels you are willing to go to to deny the truth. <br /><br />Once again, I must ask, what's your feeling on Troy violating his own policy that he stated here a month ago? Does it change your opinion on the credibility of their claims to have affected change for the better? <br /><br />BTW, if Vikes posts get deleted than everyone here who does not post under their full first and last name (verified by the moderator) should have their posts deleted as well. Fair is fair. <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>let's try to make this as simple as possible so that vikes, Aarona nd everyone else can understand this:<br /><br />vikes comes on the board and says that an e104-3 Cobb has been discovered.<br /><br />Pete Calderon comes on the board announces that an e104-3 Cobb has been discoved a few hours later.<br /><br />Even though vikes purports to post only the facts, how many peole on this board would believe him, even if he was correct?<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br /> Hi guys and Julie,<br /> I thought we agreed after the Dr Koos fiasco, that everyone who posted on the board would identify themselves, or there post would be deleted. Has that changed? I personally don't care about the entire issue, but I do feel that anyone posting accusations as "FACTS" should either identify themselves or have there post deleted. I've never met anyone on this board in person, but consider almost everyone a friend who I haven't shaken hands with yet. Hopefully I will have that chance in Chicago at the National, but If not I will still trust the good Names of my fellow board 54 members(Julie, Leon, Bill's, Brian's, Scott's, Jay's, Lee's,Johns's,Andy's, Art,Keith,Trae etc.... Board 54 is a community of Vintage card collectors, not a posting board for people to make accusations that they won't sign there name too. Be well Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Aaron, I'm staying out that. And why do you value my opinion so much? I'm obviously wrong, so it shouldn't matter to you.<br /><br />I went to Chicago about the DiMaggio bat. Even though I used to collect game used equipment, I don't collect it any more and never plan to. So at this point, I don't really care what Troy, Bushing SCDA or anyone else in the game used memorabilia field does. It doesn't impact me or my collecting. You can deal with it with them and your fellow collector that have the same interest as you.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Since I am in the fray and bored. If I were the moderator I would NOT delete anyone's posts that wanted to remain anonymous UNLESS they were spouting hypothesis or unknowns or worse yet, lies. Vikes has not done any of that. He has also not made any personal attacks and has been civil. Do I think he should be made known? Yes? Would I require it? No.....regards all

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Leon, this begs the question, has anyone double checked vikes facts to make sure that they are indeed facts?<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I should also point out that I hate the "slippery slope" argument about anything, but all you have to do is look how this board changed. This is not a dig at Bill, this is still great board, but it lost some of it focus becuase things were allowed and we hit that slippery slope. We let vikes slide even though he is civil, where do we draw the line? We have a very firm line that is already in place. If he doesn't want to play by those rules, that is his choice, but he should not be allowed to post either. I'm not for censorship, but we are all known here and there is no reason for him to hide if all he is doing is reporting the facts.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I also think Vikes should "out" himself. Otherwise he can continue to report the FACTS without repercussion if he is wrong. Robert Plancich stated some things here as fact that he was wrong on, but at least we know who he is, and we also know his willingness to go straight to the source to try and get his information. Vikes on the otherhand is unwilling to discuss his FACTS with the men he has accused of wrongdoing even though I gave him the information he needs in an email.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>"Aaron, I'm staying out that." <br /><br />Why? Because it contradicts with your opinion? Cop-out. <br /><br />"And why do you value my opinion so much? I'm obviously wrong, so it shouldn't matter to you." <br /><br />I'm just trying to get an understanding of how you see this whole thing and why you are so vehemently attacking anyone or anything that criticizes SCDA, Bushing or Mastro. I'm not accusing you of being on the payroll or anything, but jeez you are going to the mat for these guys. <br /><br />I mean, Vikes conclusively shows that Bushing doesn't have a Masters. Your response is that it doesn't effect Bushing's ability to authenticate. Vikes conclusively shows that Troy violated his own "reform" policy of not using SCDA LOA's when a conflict of interest exists. You're staying out of that. There's no argument that SCDA does practice undisclosed conflict of interest. Everybody does it. Whether you approve of it or not, none of this stuff is even in dispute, yet when Vikes brings up these issues, all you care about is who he is and how to discredit him. Now you're even going after the newspaper reporter who published Planich's story. <br /><br />Honestly, I just don't get it. <br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>"let's try to make this as simple as possible so that vikes, Aarona nd everyone else can understand this:" <br /><br />Thanks, Jay. How about this? <br /><br />vikes comes on the board and shows that's its been independtly proven that an e104-3 Cobb has been discovered.<br /><br />Pete Calderon comes on the board announces that its been independtly proven an e104-3 Cobb has been discoved a few hours later.<br /><br />What's the difference?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>If Vikes said it, I would ask to see a scan of the front and back. On the other hand, if Pete said it, I would just accept that the card exists.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>al davis</b><p>in some ways might it not be better to remain anonymous and be judged solely by our logic and reason? just because someone has a certain name, profession, or group of associates doesn't necessarily influence my judgement of his ability to explain reality. maybe if i knew that vikes was some nose-picking creep from the backwoods i might foolishly ignore his credible arguments. being anonymous certainly removes the built-in prejudice that many people seem to have. why do we have to treat everything on this board as though we are delivering closing arguments in front of the Supreme Court? we should be grateful that we have the latitude to express ourselves, whoever we may be.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Bu Wesley you didn't answer the question. <br /><br />Vikes has already shown that it's been independly proven. He's not asking for any sort of leap of faith. He's offered images, links, quotes from the owner, etc. <br /><br />He's not asking you to believe anything. He's simply showing you the evidence. <br /><br />If Pete offered you the same proof, what's the difference?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I hate it when I feel the need to come back to a thread and respond when I have told myself I wouldn't. So far, from what I have read, all Vikes has done is stated public knowledge. To my knowledge, based on what I have read and heard, they are FACTS. If I didn't think so then yes I would have an issue with him. Can someone show me anything he has stated on this board that is not a FACT? regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>"I hate it when I feel the need to come back to a thread and respond when I have told myself I wouldn't. So far, from what I have read, all Vikes has done is stated public knowledge. To my knowledge, based on what I have read and heard, they are FACTS." <br /><br />EXACTA-FRICKIN-LUTELY.<br /><br />I feel like Hurley when Danielle finally confirmed the numbers were cursed.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>Aaron, I misread your fact situation. Yes if vikes has images and provenance, of course, I would take it as true. If he merely came here and stated that he has seen this uncataloged card without the images, I would ask him for the images. On the other hand, if Pete or someone else that is knowlegeable about caramel cards has seen the card, I would take his word about the existence of the Cobb card even without the images.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>I don't care who Vikes is (any more than I care that Dave Bushing didn't finish his dissertation <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>). If he wants to say so fine, if he doesn't, I am content to read the substance of what he says and respond accordingly. If Bill wants to implement a rule that everyone here has to post by first and last name, that is his judgment, but until he does, I don't have a problem with it. On the other hand if anyone doesn't already know who I am and cares -- pretty unlikely I would guess as to the "cares" -- I am not hiding behind my initials, just liked the screen name.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>J Levine</b><p>I understand...the whole board is just voices in my head...everyone is me, I am everyone...<br /><br />-Everyone (currently Joshua)

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Aaron, if you don't get the example about the credibility of vikes being anonymous, then you truly are clueless. Just becuase vikes claims to state nothing but facts doesn't make him a credible source. I doubt anyone here would take his word that he found an e104-3 Cobb even if he onwed the card. He would need to prove it. Pete C on the other hand has the respect and crediblity to make this same claim without showing the card or other eveidence.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Okay, Jay. Whatever you say. I think this topic is exhausted and leon rather concisely delivered the knockout punch.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>tbob</b><p>the man who came to Minnesota in 1966 and took over the reins of the Vikings. Bud Grant. Bud, I wondered what you had been doing all these years without football...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>'ARRRR...Time to move on! Everyone is right, no one is wrong!"<br /><br />Cap<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1109986460.JPG"> <br><br>I can see that your head has been twisted and fed by worthless foam from the mouth-Bob Dylan

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Elliot</b><p>This whole thread makes me sick. To me it's clear that if you want to post about controversial subjects, you can't do so anonymously. Certainly it is acceptable if only the moderator knew who you were.<br /><br />Also,Vikes, Bill was not even trying to limit your ability to post, he was asking you to limit it to the three threads that had already been started about SCDA, which IMO was two threads too many.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>It's Driving Me Sane</b><p>Which BEGS the question.<br /><br />Are the Bozo Brothers related to the KALLIKAK Family? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ryan Christoff</b><p>Joe,<br /><br />That is a classic Joe post. Since this thread is all about identity, it begs the question: Are you, in FACT, the offspring of Julie Vognar and Dennis Miller? <br /><br />I can see it now, Julie yelling at Dolf Luque while tiny Joe falls through the air into the feisty Cuban's arms. <br /><br />Classic!<br /><br />-Ryan<br /><br /><br /><br />P.S. I'm hoping Julie and Joe can see that this post is all in good fun.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ryan, That Was</b><p>Has a God Damn sense of humor.<br /><br />Bravo! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Julie</b><p>idea what you're talking about (and I refuse to re-read this long, long thread of idiocy to find out!)

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ryan, BTW</b><p>My mother almost had a fit over that Luque episode.<br />As I understand it, my father heard about it for a very long time.<br /><br />Julie, don't even bother to look.<br />What Ryan is referring too really happened.<br />I'm surprised that he remembers my telling him.<br /><br />Till this day I feel sorry for my departed father, and it was all Dolf Luque's fault.<br /><br />Hasta luego y'all. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ryan, If you're Still On</b><p>Jose Enrique Montalvo card?<br /><br />Send me an "E" if you do.<br />Thank you.<br />Joe (the tranquil one) <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>