A new year's resolution for all of us



S

Simon Brooke

Guest
Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:

* I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is primarily
about motoring
* I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other well-known
safespeed trolls
* I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is cross-
posted to any other group

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; killing [afghan|iraqi] civilians is not 'justice'
 
Simon Brooke wrote:
> Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:


Are you telling us, or asking us?

> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is primarily
> about motoring


What's the point of that one? You're not interested in road safety
issues that may impact cyclists?

> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other well-known
> safespeed trolls


You've already broken that one - remember?
<http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/993f55cc41d29312>

Was it the resultant egg on your face that prompted this post?
<http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/7499657a0bd77b93>
<http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/msg/b462f072e7eb8199>

> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is cross-
> posted to any other group


Maybe some of the narrower-minded of the urc old-guard will follow your
diktat, but I've noticed how refreshingly open-minded some of the newer
contributors here are, so I doubt that they'll toe the line.

--
Matt B
 
Matt B wrote:
> Maybe some of the narrower-minded of the urc old-guard will follow your
> diktat, but I've noticed how refreshingly open-minded some of the newer
> contributors here are, so I doubt that they'll toe the line.


Another way of putting that might be "I've noticed that some of the
newer contributors haven't yet realised I'm a single-issue poster with
no interest in discussing any other aspect of cycling, and while I know
that sooner or later they'll put two and two together I hope the influx
will continue so that they in turn will be replaced by more easy targets
for my tedious hobbyhorsery".

It's a shame that the web-based forums all have such comparatively sucky
user interfaces, because they really are where the actual discussion
happens these days. Usenet is dead, film at any time you want.


-dan
 
Simon Brooke wrote:
> Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:
>
> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
> primarily about motoring
> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other
> well-known safespeed trolls
> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
> cross- posted to any other group


Just #2 for me. I /might/ be interested in a motoring thread one day, and I
don't object to threads x-posted to a couple of relevant groups.

~PB
 
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:
>
> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
> primarily
> about motoring


Actually, I enjoy motoring as well as being on the bike (or trike). Maybe I
don't notice them, but are many threads *primarily* about motoring?

> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other well-known
> safespeed trolls


Some of us have the trolls kill-filed anyhow :)

> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is cross-
> posted to any other group


I try not to cross-post anyhow, but occasionally have to slap my own wrist
:)
 
wafflycat wrote:
>
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:
>>
>> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
>> primarily
>> about motoring

>
> Actually, I enjoy motoring as well as being on the bike (or trike).
> Maybe I don't notice them, but are many threads *primarily* about motoring?
>
>> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other well-known
>> safespeed trolls

>
> Some of us have the trolls kill-filed anyhow :)

I have the mattb one kill filed but keep forgetting the nugent one, I'll
have to try and remember the next time he pops up
 
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other well-known
> safespeed trolls


I do find that sometimes these two make some valid points. Looking through
the archives I have found some interesting debates. It is good to have
people with differing points of view as it would be boring if everyone
agreed with everyone else all the time.

Also, if I want to disagree with someone about an emotive subject is there a
"right" way and a "wrong" way to go about this?

Adam
 
Adam Lea wrote:

>
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other well-known
>> safespeed trolls

>
> I do find that sometimes these two make some valid points. Looking through
> the archives I have found some interesting debates. It is good to have
> people with differing points of view as it would be boring if everyone
> agreed with everyone else all the time.
>
> Also, if I want to disagree with someone about an emotive subject is there
> a "right" way and a "wrong" way to go about this?


The right way is to go over to uk.rec.driving.frothing.at.the.mouth and do
it there.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Morning had broken, and there was nothing we could do but wait
patiently for the RAC to arrive.
 
Amen to that. . .

"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
: Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:
:
: * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
primarily
: about motoring
: * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other
well-known
: safespeed trolls
: * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
cross-
: posted to any other group
:
: --
: [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
:
: ;; killing [afghan|iraqi] civilians is not 'justice'
:

---

a friendly growl from the bear on the Zephyr that roars

__ __ __ _ __
/__/ / /__/ /_ /_\ /_ /
/_ / _ / /__/ /__ / \ / \ ....Kawasaki Zephyr

barry j taylor < [email protected] >
Ulysses #25871: netrider #549
Skype: ursusaustralis



~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*) . . . bjbear on his treadly
 
Simon Brooke wibbled

> Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:
>
> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
> primarily about motoring
> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other
> well-known safespeed trolls
> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
> cross- posted to any other group


Nope.

Just because you don't want to see other viewpoints, doesn't mean
everyones outlook is so blinkered.

--
Paul - ***

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi 'Big and Butch'
'98 Suzuki DR 200 Djebel 'Small but perfectly formed'
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp "When I feel fit enough'
 
In article <[email protected]>, Paul - ***
[email protected] says...
> Simon Brooke wibbled
>
> > Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:
> >
> > * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
> > primarily about motoring
> > * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other
> > well-known safespeed trolls
> > * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
> > cross- posted to any other group

>
> Nope.
>
> Just because you don't want to see other viewpoints, doesn't mean
> everyones outlook is so blinkered.
>
>

He didn't say he wouldn't be reading all the drivel, just that he
wouldn't be stirring the pot.
 
Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:

> Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:
>
> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is primarily
> about motoring


I'm willing to be held to that one.

> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other well-known
> safespeed trolls


I am happy to killfile any thread that is going round in circles.
However, you continue to be unfair to suggest that Matt B is a safespeed
troll and, as far as I can recall, have yet to provide any evidence that
he is.

> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is cross-
> posted to any other group


No, sometimes such discussion is relevant and constructive. When
discussion ceases to be constructive that is when it is better to make
one's excuses and leave the discussion.

Cheers,
Luke


--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>
 
wafflycat wrote:
>
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Could we all make a set of new years resolutions as follows:
>>
>> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
>> primarily
>> about motoring

>
> Actually, I enjoy motoring as well as being on the bike (or trike).
> Maybe I don't notice them, but are many threads *primarily* about motoring?


I don't see many primarily about motoring, but their are a lot that
touch on motoring in a way that directly applies to cycling. e.g. Road
safety.

>> * I shall not follow up to JNugent, Matt B or any of the other well-known
>> safespeed trolls

>
> Some of us have the trolls kill-filed anyhow :)


The problem is that they occasionally jump out of my kill files, and I
usually put Matt B straight back in, but at the moment I am a bit bored.

>> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is cross-
>> posted to any other group

>
> I try not to cross-post anyhow, but occasionally have to slap my own
> wrist :)


Cross posted threads are not by definition bad. Many can be good.
However some crossposted to e.g. uk.wreck.driving will nearly always
descend into a troll/flame war.
 
Martin Dann <[email protected]> wrote:

> wafflycat wrote:
> >
> > "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...


> >> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is cross-
> >> posted to any other group

> >
> > I try not to cross-post anyhow, but occasionally have to slap my own
> > wrist :)

>
> Cross posted threads are not by definition bad. Many can be good.
> However some crossposted to e.g. uk.wreck.driving will nearly always
> descend into a troll/flame war.


Once the idiots have been killfiled (I do this simply by killing the
subthreads in which they appeared), it swiftly becomes possible to find
those who are willing to engage in intelligent debate. It should be
borne in mind by a few more people on this group that 'holder of views
with which I disagree' does not equal 'troll'.

Cheers,
Luke


--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>
 
[email protected] wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>> Maybe some of the narrower-minded of the urc old-guard will follow
>> your diktat, but I've noticed how refreshingly open-minded some of the
>> newer contributors here are, so I doubt that they'll toe the line.

>
> Another way of putting that might be "I've noticed that some of the
> newer contributors haven't yet realised I'm a single-issue poster with
> no interest in discussing any other aspect of cycling, and while I know
> that sooner or later they'll put two and two together I hope the influx
> will continue so that they in turn will be replaced by more easy targets
> for my tedious hobbyhorsery".


My remark covers /all/ the points in the original diktat, you are,
apparently interested in just attacking me. Yet that remark is
obviously not about me - or is there a specific 'single issue' out of
the multitude of issues that I post about that you have difficulties
accepting the views of others on?

> It's a shame that the web-based forums all have such comparatively sucky
> user interfaces, because they really are where the actual discussion
> happens these days.


"web-based forums" such as?

--
Matt B
 
Ekul Namsob wrote:

> Martin Dann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> wafflycat wrote:
>> >
>> > "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]...

>
>> >> * I shall not contribute to any thread on uk.rec.cycling which is
>> >> cross-
>> >> posted to any other group
>> >
>> > I try not to cross-post anyhow, but occasionally have to slap my own
>> > wrist :)

>>
>> Cross posted threads are not by definition bad. Many can be good.
>> However some crossposted to e.g. uk.wreck.driving will nearly always
>> descend into a troll/flame war.

>
> Once the idiots have been killfiled (I do this simply by killing the
> subthreads in which they appeared), it swiftly becomes possible to find
> those who are willing to engage in intelligent debate. It should be
> borne in mind by a few more people on this group that 'holder of views
> with which I disagree' does not equal 'troll'.


Oh, indeed. My own killfile includes people who advance views with which I
agree, but do so repetitiously and in a way intended to provoke argument.

If someone wants to come along and make a cogent, coherent and well-mannered
argument that it is to the greater good of the community as a whole that
motorists should be permitted to kill people with impunity, then I'm
prepared not merely to listen but to engage in debate.

It's people who endlessly repeat the same tired and dishonest arguments
despite repeated rebuttal that end up in my bozo bin.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

IMHO, there aren't enough committed Christians, but that's care
in the community for you. -- Ben Evans
 
Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ekul Namsob wrote:


> > Once the idiots have been killfiled (I do this simply by killing the
> > subthreads in which they appeared), it swiftly becomes possible to find
> > those who are willing to engage in intelligent debate. It should be
> > borne in mind by a few more people on this group that 'holder of views
> > with which I disagree' does not equal 'troll'.

>
> Oh, indeed. My own killfile includes people who advance views with which I
> agree, but do so repetitiously and in a way intended to provoke argument.
>
> If someone wants to come along and make a cogent, coherent and well-mannered
> argument that it is to the greater good of the community as a whole that
> motorists should be permitted to kill people with impunity, then I'm
> prepared not merely to listen but to engage in debate.


I'm not sure anyone on uk.rec.driving has such views...

> It's people who endlessly repeat the same tired and dishonest arguments
> despite repeated rebuttal that end up in my bozo bin.


Which is fair enough.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>