Another Motorist-Hating Freak, But At Least He Admits It

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:01:50 -0800 (PST), Nuxx Bar
<[email protected]> said in
<[email protected]>:

>If he hasn't answered by then, I'll email them to you. I'm not
>posting them on here and jumping through their hoops until they play
>ball with me.

You are a ridiculous idiot. You said you could list them, and now
you say you're not going to unless we ask nicely. You are behaving
like a two-year-old, only with less hope of eventually reaching a
state of reason.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:00:11 -0800 (PST), Nuxx Bar
<[email protected]> said in
<3fde7348-1aff-4bef-826e-8a4990606fb2@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>:

>Same to you. He *did* lie in a very calculating way and I explained
>how. What am I supposed to do when someone is quite clearly using
>trolling tactics to deliberately snarl up the debate and make me jump
>through hoops?

Asking you to post the list you've repeatedly said exists and
repeatedly demanded that we address is scarcely making you jump
through hoops. YOU raised the issue, YOU refuse to tell us what the
list is, YOU insist that we admit these measures exist, and YOU now
apparently insist that until we do then you won't post the list.
That makes YOU a troll.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:44:42 -0800 (PST), Nuxx Bar
<[email protected]> said in
<[email protected]>:

>> Your respond to a previous question in this thread asking for a source where
>> you say "the Conservative Party" shows that you've already done that Google
>> (as it's from the BBC story).
>
>What do you want? A medal?

Interesting that earlier you DEMAND an APOLOGY for LIES when someone
fails to be able top read your mind about your supposed list of
anti-motorist measures, but you respond like this when caught out
repeating a falsehood which was *clearly identified as a falsehood
in the source from which you apparently lifted it*.

And yet somehow it's everyone else that's a troll.

That's pretty funny.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[spindrift]

On 26 Feb, 17:23, Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Feb 26, 3:04 pm, spindrift <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why, by the way, have you ignored the responses to your questions on
> > the two other threads you started??
>
> Another question for you, which you MUST ANSWER:
>
> - You are notorious for your forum and usenet posts regarding injury
> collisions between cyclists and motor vehicles which have made the
> news.  Have you *ever* apportioned blame to the cyclist, and not the
> driver, in such a post?

You asked me this before and I linked to a thread where I did just
that. I blamed the cyclist. I've told you this already, why are you
asking questions I've already answered?

 

[Budstaff]

"Nuxx Bar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Feb 26, 9:41 pm, "Just Visiting" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Nuxx Bar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:24966046-3d0b-40b0-a355-9e77891c161d@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > "I hate cars. If I ever get any power again, I'll ban the lot."
>> > Ken Livingstone, 1988
>>
>> > And the trolls say that London, indeed the whole of the UK, has no
>> > anti-motorist measures whatsoever. ROTFL. The ******** that they
>> > have to come out with to maintain the lie. Is it really worth it?
>>
>> A quick Google of that quote shows a whole nine hits. One of which is
>> this
>> thread, and one is Ken denying ever saying it in a BBC interview.
>>
>> Your respond to a previous question in this thread asking for a source
>> where
>> you say "the Conservative Party" shows that you've already done that
>> Google
>> (as it's from the BBC story).
>
> What do you want? A medal?
>
>> So nuxxy baby, which is more likely: that he actually said it, or that
>> you're a complete ****? What do you think the odds are?
>
> Which is more likely: that you and your troll mates just happen to be
> exactly like anti-motorist wankers in every way, or that you actually
> are anti-motorist wankers? What do you think the odds are?
>
> And since you asked so charmingly, I think he did say it. As with you
> lot, when you look at the overwhelming evidence, the idea that he
> doesn't hate cars is just too ridiculous for words. And when you look
> at his track record with alcohol (e.g. drinking whisky instead of the
> usual water at press conferences), together with the fact that people
> tend to lose their inhibitions when they get rat-arsed, I think he
> probably did let it slip when he was ****** one night. If you're
> going to tell habitual lies and make a habit of covering up what you
> really think, drinking to excess isn't a good idea. It's like the
> racist **** who manages to keep his (justifiably unpopular) opinions
> in check in the workplace, only to spill the beans at the office
> party. Livingstone spilt the beans about his foul attitude towards
> motorists, and no amout of lying after the event (or trolls leaping to
> his defence) will change that.
>
> (Thanks for the completely unprovoked ad hominem BTW. Do you go round
> high streets walking up to people who've never met or spoken to you
> and calling them cocks? Or would you be too scared of getting a
> kicking? Is it easier when you've got the Internet to cower behind?
> What does that say about you?)


Looking at your activity on here, have you ever considered that you've got
far too much spare time? Why aren't you out driving? Run out of petrol
money?

 

[Dave Larrington]

In news:1icxj4w.ny3enw12rb1cqN%[email protected],
Ekul Namsob <[email protected]> tweaked the
Babbage-Engine to tell us:

> At least one person in this thread finds you extremely funny.

Make that two...

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger
Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger
Badger Badger

 

[Dave Larrington]

In news:1icxtdb.m239qe1e01ieoN%[email protected],
Ekul Namsob <[email protected]> tweaked the
Babbage-Engine to tell us:

> Oh, do grow up. For a moment there I thought you were willing to
> engage in intelligent debate.

Hope 1 x 0 Experience

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger
Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger
Badger Badger

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Dave Larrington wrote:
>In news:1icxj4w.ny3enw12rb1cqN%[email protected],
>Ekul Namsob <[email protected]> tweaked the
>Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>
>> At least one person in this thread finds you extremely funny.
>
>Make that two...

He's not funny enough to take out of the kill file, but it is quite
amusing seeing him frothing at the mouth in some of the quoted replies.
But I think it's obvious enough that he can't post his vaunted list
that there's no need to keep on poking him.

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Feb 26, 9:38 pm, [email protected] (Ekul
> Namsob) wrote:
> > Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Feb 26, 5:59 pm, [email protected] (Ekul
> > > Namsob) wrote:
> > > > Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > Anyway, I know exactly what you'll do when I list them. You'll deny
> > > > > that they're anti-motorist measures at all.
> >
> > > > I promise you that I won't.
> >
> > > Tell you what then. To show that you're serious, please name at least
> > > three measures that exist in the UK which you consider to be anti-
> > > motorist. I will list my (and many other people's) anti-motorist
> > > measures within 72 hours of you doing so.
> >
> > OK. This will be a struggle since I don't believe there are any wholly
> > anti-motorist measures in force in this country but I shall try.
> >
> > 1) The London congestion charge.
> >
> > 2) The existence of mandatory cycle lanes.
> >
> > 3) The existence of pedestrian zones.
> >
> > Two thirds of the above apply exclusively to motorists.
>
> Thank you. If only all your posts to me were as informative, although
> admittedly they are improving.

I wonder whether that has any connection with how you might finally be
deciding to make positive contributions yourself.

> I don't think you'll get much agreement from Spindrift and co though,
> do you? But it does appear that you for one are not a motorist-
> hater. Let's hope you don't get ostracized as a result.

As has been pointed out to you with tedious regularity, there are almost
no anti-motorists on this group. Indeed, you have yet to name more than
one.

> > Various of us were happily contributing to intelligent debate until one
> > individual insisted on one particular point while refusing to expound
> > upon that very point. I am, however, more than willing to let bygones be
> > bygones. Please do me a favour, give up on using provocative language.
> > It simply has the effect of turning intelligent discussion into
> > confrontation.
>
> I would gladly do it, but others don't seem to want to play ball. I
> was perfectly polite and neutral when I started this thread, and look
> at the replies I got straight away, including from you.

It is not polite to claim that you will do something and then refuse to
do it. It is not polite to refuse to explain a point when asked and it
is not polite to accuse people of lying without good, solid evidence.

> Sadly, I don't think it's possible round these parts. I could speculate
> about why but I won't.

It's entirely possible. We've had many vigorous, yet civil, debates on
this group.

> Still I'll happily debate politely if others do.

Would you care to apologise then for insisting that I am a liar?

> I can assure everyone that I am perfectly capable of doing it when others
> are prepared to.

Often, in my experience, it is important to be polite even when others
are not prepared so to be.

Cheers,
Luke


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

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Feb 26, 10:53 pm, [email protected] (Ekul
> Namsob) wrote:
> > Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Firstly, until you answer the two "yes or no" questions that I asked
> > > you in my previous post, I'm not going to do my list of anti-motorist
> > > measures.
> >
> > Excuse me. You said within 72 hours of my listing of three anti-motorist
> > measures.
>
> If he hasn't answered by then, I'll email them to you. I'm not
> posting them on here and jumping through their hoops until they play
> ball with me. As I've already said, they know what the anti-motorist
> measures are anyway, so I would only be doing it to humour them, and
> why should I if they won't humour me?

You'll need my email address which I am not about to post to Usenet. You
have made a promise, you are now expected to stick to it. If you are any
kind of polite, respectable person, that is exactly what you will do.

Frankly, you still have no evidence that we know what these
anti-motorist measures really are and this isn't about you humouring
anyone, jumping through hoops or even being fired from a cannonball.

I repeat, for one final time, we /cannot/ have a sensible, polite
discussion on a topic when you continue to accuse people (including me
and others, some of whom I respect) of lying and refuse to elaborate on
what you are actually trying to say.

Does that help you to understand why you do not get the respect you
claim to desire?

Cheers,
Luke


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

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:

> You can bet your life that as soon as I leave, there'll be a flurry of
> "He only left because he couldn't answer our questions".

The truth is often predictable. You can bet your life that 2 + 2
continues to equal 4. Go on, prove us wrong: remembering the need for
polite, honest debate, please answer questions.

Cheers,
Luke

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

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:

> If someone lies, I'll say so, every time. I would be quite happy for
> anyone else to do the same. If you can't deal with that, tough.

Fine. You lied when you claimed you would post your list, as I recall,
"later today" several days ago, if you got the time. You have had plenty
of time and have used that time to do anything but posting your list.

What happened, by the way, to your polite tone? I continue to be polite
to you. You are not returning the favour.

Cheers,
Luke

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

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Feb 26, 11:02 pm, [email protected] wrote:

> > I think you probably
> > need to establish more of a track record of sounding less "out there"
> > than spindrift at his most didactic before many will consider it worth
> > spending much time trying to second guess what is going on in your
> > head. Anyway, don't rush on my account. I am in no special hurry to
> > see your list.
>
> I'll bear that in mind. You patronising burk.

Once again, you respond to criticism with insult.

Luke


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

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:

> (Thanks for the completely unprovoked ad hominem BTW. Do you go round
> high streets walking up to people who've never met or spoken to you
> and calling them cocks? Or would you be too scared of getting a
> kicking? Is it easier when you've got the Internet to cower behind?
> What does that say about you?)

Much the same as it says about you and your unprovoked foul-mouthed
attack on me.

Cheers,
Luke

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

 

[burtthebike]

"Nuxx Bar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Feb 26, 9:41 pm, "Just Visiting" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Nuxx Bar" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>
> (Thanks for the completely unprovoked ad hominem BTW. Do you go round
> high streets walking up to people who've never met or spoken to you
> and calling them cocks? Or would you be too scared of getting a
> kicking? Is it easier when you've got the Internet to cower behind?
> What does that say about you?)

Gentlemen, may I suggest that, whilst it may have been mildly entertaining
to keep pulling nuxx's chain, the index of amusement has now fallen to zero?

Just kill file the troll.

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Nuxx Bar <[email protected]> wrote:

> Still I'll happily debate politely if others do.

This is just a friendly reminder that you have two hours to post your
list.

Cheers,
Luke


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