24 Aug 2006 07:53:08
Groggy the Froggy
Linda Mar Pacifica

Overcast and grey. At 3:00 PM the crowd was non existant and so were any
real rideable waves.

In front of the shit-house medium size close-outs but south closer to Taco
Smell were some 4-5 footers that held up for a few feet.

I got only 45 minutes but I have been so busy lately its much appreciated.





24 Aug 2006 20:34:05
lp
Re: P*cific*

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:53:08 -0700, Groggy the Froggy wrote
(in article <EVcHg.14549$9T3.5852@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net >):

> Overcast and grey. At 3:00 PM the crowd was non existant and so were any
> real rideable waves.
>
> In front of the shit-house medium size close-outs but south closer to Taco
> Smell were some 4-5 footers that held up for a few feet.
>
> I got only 45 minutes but I have been so busy lately its much appreciated.
>
>
>

so, you give taco bell and yourself a psuedonym, but have no problem naming
breaks. imho, bad judgement. even though you are writing about a beginner
spot and there are kooks galore, it's still bad to name a spot on usenet.
especially ones right near my house. thanks.

lp



24 Aug 2006 22:23:10
gpsman
Re: P*cific*

lp wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:53:08 -0700, Groggy the Froggy wrote
> (in article <EVcHg.14549$9T3.5852@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>):
>
> > Overcast and grey. At 3:00 PM the crowd was non existant and so were any
> > real rideable waves.
> >
> > In front of the shit-house medium size close-outs but south closer to Taco
> > Smell were some 4-5 footers that held up for a few feet.
> >
> > I got only 45 minutes but I have been so busy lately its much appreciated.

>
> so, you give taco bell and yourself a psuedonym, but have no problem naming
> breaks. imho, bad judgement. even though you are writing about a beginner
> spot and there are kooks galore, it's still bad to name a spot on usenet.
> especially ones right near my house. thanks.

Relax Duke Kahanamoku. I can't tell if he's in TX, RI or FL.

Where are you? Are there still secret spots there?
-----

- gpsman



26 Aug 2006 01:05:33
Cyber Kahuna
Re: P*cific*

Yeah.. Like P*cific* is some kind of secret.

The kiddie pool of the Bay Area.

" >> so, you give taco bell and yourself a psuedonym, but have no problem
naming
>> breaks. imho, bad judgement. even though you are writing about a
>> beginner
>> spot and there are kooks galore, it's still bad to name a spot on usenet.
>> especially ones right near my house. thanks.
>
> Relax Duke Kahanamoku. I can't tell if he's in TX, RI or FL.
>
> Where are you? Are there still secret spots there?
> -----
>
> - gpsman
>




26 Aug 2006 02:55:57
lp
Re: P*cific*

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:05:33 -0700, Cyber Kahuna wrote
(in article <x7NHg.17090$YC3.2075@tornado.socal.rr.com >):

> Yeah.. Like P*cific* is some kind of secret.
>
> The kiddie pool of the Bay Area.
>
> " >> so, you give taco bell and yourself a psuedonym, but have no problem
> naming
>>> breaks. imho, bad judgement. even though you are writing about a
>>> beginner
>>> spot and there are kooks galore, it's still bad to name a spot on usenet.
>>> especially ones right near my house. thanks.
>>
>> Relax Duke Kahanamoku. I can't tell if he's in TX, RI or FL.
>>
>> Where are you? Are there still secret spots there?
>> -----
>>


a little late on this. i've tried to write a reply previously, but my
newsreader sucks and crashes half the time when i start to send messages
(intel mac).

anyhow, the short answer to my point is that usenet and the web are archived
for all time. any names for breaks and info are then available to any
visiting kook for instant local knowledge and even more so advertising where
to go.

the reason i mention it even for a spot that's hardly a secret, is so people
understand the ramifications, so that they don't blurt out less known spots.
its simple to keep ggogle and other search engines away. just change a few
letters or use a psuedonym when naming the spot. that way others that know
the spot won't have too much difficulty figuring it out, yet a keyword search
doesn't turn up ever increasing praise for your local gems.

btw - i know this is a losing cause, but a little restraint might help keep
some of the breaks from zooism for a little longer.

lp




26 Aug 2006 10:55:56
SKIPPER
Re: P*cific*


Hey - I got a GREAT idea for you cyberkook deits. Why don't we
put up daliy pictures of every surfbreak and try to create a
surfing portal!!

We can call it surfcheck.com if we can get the domain back
from Suzanne Somers.

-PA

Cyber Kahuna wrote:
> Yeah.. Like P*cific* is some kind of secret.
>
> The kiddie pool of the Bay Area.
>
> " >> so, you give taco bell and yourself a psuedonym, but have no problem
> naming
> >> breaks. imho, bad judgement. even though you are writing about a
> >> beginner
> >> spot and there are kooks galore, it's still bad to name a spot on usenet.
> >> especially ones right near my house. thanks.
> >
> > Relax Duke Kahanamoku. I can't tell if he's in TX, RI or FL.
> >
> > Where are you? Are there still secret spots there?
> > -----
> >
> > - gpsman
> >



26 Aug 2006 15:56:43
=?iso-8859-1?B?c2hhZnSu?=
Re: P*cific*

SKIPPER wrote:
> Hey - I got a GREAT idea for you cyberkook deits. Why don't we
> put up daliy pictures of every surfbreak and try to create a
> surfing portal!!
>
> We can call it surfcheck.com if we can get the domain back
> from Suzanne Somers.

What's the easiest way to make a million in the surf biz?

Start with 5mil !



26 Aug 2006 17:04:20
SurfSarge
Re: P*cific*

Work for Alvin..

shaft=AE wrote:
> SKIPPER wrote:
> > Hey - I got a GREAT idea for you cyberkook deits. Why don't we
> > put up daliy pictures of every surfbreak and try to create a
> > surfing portal!!
> >
> > We can call it surfcheck.com if we can get the domain back
> > from Suzanne Somers.
>
> What's the easiest way to make a million in the surf biz?
>=20
> Start with 5mil !



27 Aug 2006 07:06:22
Re: P*cific*


lp wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:05:33 -0700, Cyber Kahuna wrote
> (in article <x7NHg.17090$YC3.2075@tornado.socal.rr.com>):
>
> > Yeah.. Like P*cific* is some kind of secret.
> >
> > The kiddie pool of the Bay Area.
> >
> > " >> so, you give taco bell and yourself a psuedonym, but have no problem
> > naming
> >>> breaks. imho, bad judgement. even though you are writing about a
> >>> beginner
> >>> spot and there are kooks galore, it's still bad to name a spot on usenet.
> >>> especially ones right near my house. thanks.
> >>
> >> Relax Duke Kahanamoku. I can't tell if he's in TX, RI or FL.
> >>
> >> Where are you? Are there still secret spots there?
> >> -----
> >>
>
>
> a little late on this. i've tried to write a reply previously, but my
> newsreader sucks and crashes half the time when i start to send messages
> (intel mac).
>
> anyhow, the short answer to my point is that usenet and the web are archived
> for all time. any names for breaks and info are then available to any
> visiting kook for instant local knowledge and even more so advertising where
> to go.
>
> the reason i mention it even for a spot that's hardly a secret, is so people
> understand the ramifications, so that they don't blurt out less known spots.
> its simple to keep ggogle and other search engines away. just change a few
> letters or use a psuedonym when naming the spot. that way others that know
> the spot won't have too much difficulty figuring it out, yet a keyword search
> doesn't turn up ever increasing praise for your local gems.
>
> btw - i know this is a losing cause, but a little restraint might help keep
> some of the breaks from zooism for a little longer.
>
> lp


Is there anything wrong with going somewhere else to surf other than
your closest few beaches? Some don't travel enough but it seems many
do
http://www.srosurf.com/gennews/exp.html



28 Aug 2006 01:56:00
Cyber Kahuna
Re: P*cific*


"DICKWEED" <blakestah@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1156614956.562155.266920@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Hey - I got a GREAT idea for you cyberkook deits. Why don't we
> put up daliy pictures of every surfbreak and try to create a
> surfing portal!!
>
> We can call it surfcheck.com if we can get the domain back
> from Suzanne Somers.
>
> -PA
>
So, that was supposed to be "funny"? A little weak on the wit. Nice try
though.

Next time I see you, I'll flip a quarter in your direction. That should
triple your income from the 'net.




28 Aug 2006 09:51:26
SKIPPER
Re: P*cific*


Cyber Kook wrote:
> "Skipper" <blakestah@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hey - I got a GREAT idea for you cyberkook deits. Why don't we
> > put up daliy pictures of every surfbreak and try to create a
> > surfing portal!!
> >
> > We can call it surfcheck.com if we can get the domain back
> > from Suzanne Somers.

> So, that was supposed to be "funny"? A little weak on the wit. Nice try
> though.

> Next time I see you, I'll flip a quarter in your direction. That should
> triple your income from the 'net.

for those who cannot remember, the Cyberkook setup surfcheck in the
mid 1990s, and had daily pics of every surfbreak he could online.

That made him REALLY popular with the locals.

This is more in tune with my net presence.
http://www.sfbg.com/2006bob/outdoors.php#way

better watch out, kdalle might come "threaten" one of your
people again!!

ROTFL.

-PA



28 Aug 2006 19:36:43
Cyber Kahuna
Re: P*cific*


> for those who cannot remember, the Cyberkook setup surfcheck in the
> mid 1990s, and had daily pics of every surfbreak he could online.

So who are you talking to?? You do realize the entire
population of this NG is about 6, 7 if you count Shafts alter ego's. This NG
is almost dead.




28 Aug 2006 13:57:38
OBsurfr
Re: P*cific*


"Cyber Kahuna" <private@h82bdry.com > wrote in message
news:fBHIg.18639$YC3.16055@tornado.socal.rr.com...
>
> > for those who cannot remember, the Cyberkook setup surfcheck in the
>> mid 1990s, and had daily pics of every surfbreak he could online.
>
> So who are you talking to?? You do realize the entire
> population of this NG is about 6, 7 if you count Shafts alter ego's. This
> NG is almost dead.
>
It ain't dead!
Far from it.
It has evolved into a food discussion group.
Floyd




28 Aug 2006 22:33:39
Tom Tweed
Re: P*cific*

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:57:38 -0700, "OBsurfr" <g.barnes1@cox.net >
wrote:

>It has evolved into a food discussion group.

Nah, it's a music discussion group now.

TT
---------------------------------
Tom Tweed mailto:tweedt@ucsd.edu
La Jolla, CA, USA
"Art changes, but it doesn't get better."
-- Sister Wendy
---------------------------------


28 Aug 2006 17:00:51
SKIPPER
Re: P*cific*


Cyber Kahuna wrote:
> > for those who cannot remember, the Cyberkook setup surfcheck in the
> > mid 1990s, and had daily pics of every surfbreak he could online.
>
> So who are you talking to?? You do realize the entire
> population of this NG is about 6, 7 if you count Shafts alter ego's. This NG
> is almost dead.

So far its only lasted 8 years longer than Surfcheck.com...

-PA



29 Aug 2006 01:20:00
Cyber Kahuna
Re: P*cific*


"DICKER" <BLAHBLAH@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1156809651.471420.319020@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Cyber Kahuna wrote:
>> > for those who cannot remember, the Cyberkook setup surfcheck in the
>> > mid 1990s, and had daily pics of every surfbreak he could online.
>>
>> So who are you talking to?? You do realize the entire
>> population of this NG is about 6, 7 if you count Shafts alter ego's. This
>> NG
>> is almost dead.
>
> So far its only lasted 8 years longer than Surfcheck.com...

It is on it's last legs. Sort of like your surf forecasts, only you couldn't
even give 'em away.

Wait...Do you hear that? That is the sound of Skips asshole puckering, or
maybe it's just low tide at P*cific@.




30 Aug 2006 08:21:29
elf
Re: P*cific*

In article <fBHIg.18639$YC3.16055@tornado.socal.rr.com >,
"Cyber Kahuna" <private@h82bdry.com > wrote:

> > for those who cannot remember, the Cyberkook setup surfcheck in the
> > mid 1990s, and had daily pics of every surfbreak he could online.
>
> So who are you talking to?? You do realize the entire
> population of this NG is about 6, 7 if you count Shafts alter ego's. This NG
> is almost dead.

Yeah but I thought you could multiply the number of regular posters by
ten, as a general Usenet rule. So that means we have a whopping...60 or
70 people reading worldwide (with 40 of them in Calif.)! Not quite
moribund, but...

Anyway, this newsgroup would continue even if it were only Surff, Foon
and Shaft arguing about whether stand up surfing is the only way to surf
and the benefits of real salt, and the occasional ravings of Alvin
"Thurston Howell" Donovan III.

(btw, waves coming...)

-elf


30 Aug 2006 10:28:34
Surfer Bob
Re: P*cific*

Cyber Kahuna wrote:
> So who are you talking to?? ...This NG is almost dead.

Google indicates 50 recent authors. Der Elektionfuehrer notes that
ASKOTY voter participation was actually *up* sharply from 2004 to 2005.


You are missing the point: Usenet is almost dead. But don't let that
worry you none. Whining about how "AS just isn't what it used to be" is
an old and proud tradition around here.

I may surpass Gleshna in total posts to AS before I die, but I don't
think anyone will ever surpass M@rk's record for number of posts in a
single day.

Whine on!
Surfer Bob



30 Aug 2006 11:32:34
Surff
Re: P*cific*


Cyber Kahuna wrote:
> >> So who are you talking to?? You do realize the entire
> >> population of this NG is about 6, 7 if you count Shafts alter ego's. This
> >> NG
> >> is almost dead.
> >
> > So far its only lasted 8 years longer than Surfcheck.com...

Touche Mr. Blake.

> It is on it's last legs. Sort of like your surf forecasts, only you couldn't
> even give 'em away.

At least Mr. Blake didn't hype his reports with "ooooooo, there might
be a
hurricane headed for So. Cal" everytime a
low pressure area formed off the western coast of Mexico, Mr. Diets.

Cmon Cyber Kahuna, you could find a home here in alt.s if you wanted
too. Don't be so bitter.

Surff