Try looking for a Shawn Wagner in (a God-forsaken place called) Baker, Montana. Bigfoot Whitepages says this is who owns this email. Same person has a second email address of manson316@bigfoot.com. My research could determine nothing else. Nothing...is in Bakers Montana and nothing...is near it.

-- idiot (umh@thinking.com), May 24, 1999

Answers

idiot..hi!..Do a search using Switchboard with the initial S with the last name Wagner, Baker, MT and you will come up with a Stanley Wagner east of Baker, MT. His parent's 'phone, perhaps?

-- willis (seek@ndyeshall.find), May 24, 1999.

Could be related, like the husband, of an Anne Wagner in that town.

-- 1 (2@3.4), May 24, 1999.

So what. What are you going to do, publish his home address? Everyone here knows I'm not a big fan of Norm, but it just ain't right to post any private information about him. Someone did just that to Chuck a few weeks back, and the whole forum was ready to hang the idiot that did it! Let's keep it clean here folks... <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 24, 1999.

Norm posts positive press on y2k. Good. Nothing wrong with that. I need to look at it and decide, based on my knowledge, whether I agree or disagree. If I agree, and I do, then I hope for more of the same. If I disagree, fine, I will have logical reasons. I think we are in deep trouble, but if I cannot keep an open mind, I am basing decisions on emotion and not reason. Perhaps Norm should be left alone.

-- Mike Lang (webflier@erols.com), May 24, 1999.

Enough already! Enough. What has Norm done to deserve having personal info published? What about anonymity? I'm starting to get the feeling that there are a bunch of big brother types on this forum.

-- cw (cwiowa@uiowa.edu), May 24, 1999.

Nobody - and I mean NOBODY - likes a snitch. I don't agree with much of what Norm posts, but by God he has a right to say what he wants without having his privacy invaded.

-- klm (klm@nowhre.not), May 24, 1999.

Norm, I've flamed you on occasion--and I'll probably do it again! But I would NEVER stoop so low as to dig up and publish your personal information.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), May 24, 1999.

Sysman, Mike Lang, cw, klm, Old Git,

You've shown your true colors on this post, and I must say, your flags wave prowdly. Amid the flames and pettiness, this is the kind of fair play I find most admirable at this forum.

Thanks for the bright light,

-- Spindoc' (spindoc_99_2000@yahoo.com), May 24, 1999.

BTW, Norm,

This should not be interpreted as encouragement for your silly P.R. posts; I don't enjoy having my time wasted by pap. Nevertheless, no one is forcing me to click on your threads, and I believe censorship is the first path to tyrrany. Enjoy your 1st Ammendment rights. I shall enjoy mine by not paying much attention to you.

-- Spindoc' (spindoc_99_2000@yahoo.com), May 25, 1999.

Keep on keeping on Norm.

-- RoarShack (test@for.the.imbeciles), May 25, 1999.

Should someone be SO STUPID as to post someone's info when the person in question has selected anonymity, the point of the HYPER FLAMING POLLY's will have been made, completed, and proven. Which is that we can't handle contrary information and views. At which time I would be forced to find another forum, and SHOUT FROM THE ROOFTOPS that posting on and or reading from this forum could be hazardous to one's mental health.

Now, I KNOW this is, at this time, untrue. PLEASE don't make it true.

I was quite understanding (in public) when it happened to me. I would be forced to join with whoever was "outed" in this way to seek whatever legal or other retribution would obtain.

I still have a sense of humor, but it does NOT stretch this far. i will very strongly defend the right to anonymity, and to the opinion being expressed. I may disagree on the issues, but I WILL NOT sit by and see someone trashed that way.

***### ANY QUESTIONS???????? ###***

Chuck

who is STILL keeping the Compact. my close friend would recognize this whisper for what it is........

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), May 25, 1999.