Buddhist Bicycle Jerseys



"frkrygow" <"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> writes:

> Tim McNamara wrote:
> > [email protected] (Bill Z.) writes:
> >
> >>And it is obviously you three who have a real problem.
> > I'll hand it to you, Bill. In the years I've been on Usenet, you are
> > one of the best at avoiding getting a clue. A masterful performance
> > that is now smelling like overripe troll.
>
> Zaumen's been this way as long as I can remember. And that's many,
> many years.

Frank Krygowski (the guy posting this) is an anti-helmet nut whose
been on my case for 10 years for not agreeing with his idiotic
views on that subject and has a long term grudge and axe to grind.
Much of what Krygowski posted consisted of pure propaganda.

The rest of you are IMHO out to lunch on the present discussion.
Trivial software can handle the quoting convention and if it can, you
can. BTW, I've had access to this stuff since the 70s, starting with
an ARPAnet account. Tim (a relative newbie) notwithstanding, the
trolls are Sorni, and a few other nuts, all of whom were making a big
ado about nothing.

Sorni's complaint basically hinges on me snipping a four-word,
content-free wisecrack of his after finishing my post due to his
wisecrack not fitting into what I ended up writing. And that sort of
complaint on his part really is idiotic.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
> I think both of your mothers
> wear combat boots.

I doubt they owned shoes.
 
Zippy the Pinhead wrote:
> I've read the entire thread thus far, and I think both of your mothers
> wear combat boots.

At least we had mothers.


jim
 
Claire Petersky wrote:
> Bill Z, Sorni, JimLane, take a deep breath in. Then, let a deep
> breath out.
>
> Next inhalation, breathe in, and relax.
>
> Exhale, and smile.
>
> Breathe in, and relax; breathe out and smile.
>
> This simple practice, taught by Thich Nhat Hanh in his book, Peace is
> Every Step (http://tinyurl.com/3fmnz), will help you find the path to
> your true self.

And I'll bet he appreciates your correct attribution of his teachings :)

Thanks, Claire -- hope the road rash is healing well and completely.

Bill "Oowwwwmmmmmmm" S.
 
Bill Z. wrote:
> "frkrygow" <"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> writes:
>
>> Tim McNamara wrote:
>>> [email protected] (Bill Z.) writes:
>>>
>>>> And it is obviously you three who have a real problem.
>>> I'll hand it to you, Bill. In the years I've been on Usenet, you
>>> are one of the best at avoiding getting a clue. A masterful
>>> performance that is now smelling like overripe troll.
>>
>> Zaumen's been this way as long as I can remember. And that's many,
>> many years.
>
> Frank Krygowski (the guy posting this) is an anti-helmet nut whose
> been on my case for 10 years for not agreeing with his idiotic
> views on that subject and has a long term grudge and axe to grind.
> Much of what Krygowski posted consisted of pure propaganda.
>
> The rest of you are IMHO out to lunch on the present discussion.
> Trivial software can handle the quoting convention and if it can, you
> can. BTW, I've had access to this stuff since the 70s, starting with
> an ARPAnet account. Tim (a relative newbie) notwithstanding, the
> trolls are Sorni, and a few other nuts, all of whom were making a big
> ado about nothing.
>
> Sorni's complaint basically hinges on me snipping a four-word,
> content-free wisecrack of his after finishing my post due to his
> wisecrack not fitting into what I ended up writing. And that sort of
> complaint on his part really is idiotic.

Anyone else would have just said, "Whoops, you're right -- I forgot to snip
your name so it looked like you said something you didn't", or "Ooops, I
replied to the wrong post" and that would have been the end of it (seen it
many, many times). I didn't know I was dealing with a total perfectionist
whacko who won't admit to the most trivial of mistakes. I was never at all
vexed about it, until you went all defensive/jerklick over it; then it
became rather fun to watch you twist 'n turn and do ANYTHING to avoid being
in error despite others trying to tell you so, too.

You'd think someone with your vast ARP* (old, eh?) knowledge base would have
learned how to post/quote/attribute by now.

Bill "color coding or not" S.

*on purpose, so don't bother correcting it (if you can possibly resist)
 
"S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:


> Anyone else would have just said, "Whoops, you're right -- I forgot to snip
> your name so it looked like you said something you didn't", or "Ooops, I
> replied to the wrong post" and that would have been the end of it (seen it
> many, many times).
<idiotic comments snipped>.

Sorni, if you are such a complete and utter idiot as to think that
anyone couldn't tell who said what, you are hopeless. I quoted you as
quoting someone else, with that someone else mentioned by name. It
basically said, "Sorni said that Dave said that ...." If I had
eliminated the "Dave said," you'd have a legitimate complaint, but I
didn't do that. If you are such an idiot that you can't tell the
difference, that's your loss.

Bill

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Bill Z. wrote:
> "S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
>> Anyone else would have just said, "Whoops, you're right -- I forgot
>> to snip your name so it looked like you said something you didn't",
>> or "Ooops, I replied to the wrong post" and that would have been the
>> end of it (seen it many, many times).
> <idiotic comments snipped>.
>
> Sorni, if you are such a complete and utter idiot as to think that
> anyone couldn't tell who said what, you are hopeless. I quoted you as
> quoting someone else, with that someone else mentioned by name. It
> basically said, "Sorni said that Dave said that ...." If I had
> eliminated the "Dave said," you'd have a legitimate complaint, but I
> didn't do that. If you are such an idiot that you can't tell the
> difference, that's your loss.

So "Sorni writes:" is the same as saying "Sorni says that so & so said:"?
Sorry, it's not.

You replied to the wrong post and didn't catch it and/or clean it up before
hitting "Send", and you just won't admit it.

God help you if there's ever an /important/ issue in your life where you
need to admit and error or -- horrors! -- apologize.

Bill "learned long ago I'd rather be happy than *right* (at all costs)" S.

PS: Resorting to name-calling doesn't make you seem any more rational,
Bill. (And you called ME petulant!)
 
Jay Hill <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Z. wrote:
>
>> The rest of you are IMHO out to lunch on the present discussion.
>
> You're wrong, asshole. You incorrectly attributed something to
> Sorni.

He is wrong. He also suffers from that peculiar middle-aged male
malady that prevents him from being able to see it or admit it.
Nothing you can do about it. Just be glad you're not married to him.
 
Bill Z. wrote:

> The rest of you are IMHO out to lunch on the present discussion.

You're wrong, asshole. You incorrectly attributed something to Sorni.
 
S o r n i wrote:
> Bill Z. wrote:
>
>>"S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Anyone else would have just said, "Whoops, you're right -- I forgot
>>>to snip your name so it looked like you said something you didn't",
>>>or "Ooops, I replied to the wrong post" and that would have been the
>>>end of it (seen it many, many times).
>>
>><idiotic comments snipped>.
>>
>>Sorni, if you are such a complete and utter idiot as to think that
>>anyone couldn't tell who said what, you are hopeless. I quoted you as
>>quoting someone else, with that someone else mentioned by name. It
>>basically said, "Sorni said that Dave said that ...." If I had
>>eliminated the "Dave said," you'd have a legitimate complaint, but I
>>didn't do that. If you are such an idiot that you can't tell the
>>difference, that's your loss.
>
>
> So "Sorni writes:" is the same as saying "Sorni says that so & so said:"?
> Sorry, it's not.
>
> You replied to the wrong post and didn't catch it and/or clean it up before
> hitting "Send", and you just won't admit it.
>
> God help you if there's ever an /important/ issue in your life where you
> need to admit and error or -- horrors! -- apologize.
>
> Bill "learned long ago I'd rather be happy than *right* (at all costs)" S.
>
> PS: Resorting to name-calling doesn't make you seem any more rational,
> Bill. (And you called ME petulant!)
>
>

Nah, I called Z petulant, didn't I? If he did, he was cribbin off me.


jim
 
On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 21:38:21 -0700, JimLane <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Zippy the Pinhead wrote:
>> I've read the entire thread thus far, and I think both of your mothers
>> wear combat boots.
>
>At least we had mothers.

Yes, I made the acquaintance of yours here: http://www.hoslap.net/
 
Zippy the Pinhead wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 21:38:21 -0700, JimLane <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Zippy the Pinhead wrote:
>>
>>>I've read the entire thread thus far, and I think both of your mothers
>>>wear combat boots.
>>
>>At least we had mothers.
>
>
> Yes, I made the acquaintance of yours here: http://www.hoslap.net/
>
>


Hmmm, so that's who you are trying to associate with, eh? You probably
were too low on the totem to get anywhere. After all, they do have
standards and you can't even make that cut.


jim



jim
 
"S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Z. wrote:
> > "S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >

> So "Sorni writes:" is the same as saying "Sorni says that so & so said:"?
> Sorry, it's not.

Sigh. The text
+
+ Sorni writes:
+ > Durbin writes:
+ > > ....
+
is expressed in English as "Sorni writes that Durbin write that ...."
The quoting convention is 100% clear. It is *not* the same as
+
+ Sorni writes:
+ > > ....
+
which most readers would figure out, but might be read as "Sorni write
that ....". Do you see the difference or are you really that dense?

>
> You replied to the wrong post and didn't catch it and/or clean it up before
> hitting "Send", and you just won't admit it.

Not "cleaning up" by making the text ever so slightly more succinct is
not a misquote, which was what you complaining about.

If your complaint is about style, not accuracy, you should have said
that, but you didn't.
>
> God help you if there's ever an /important/ issue in your life where you
> need to admit and error or -- horrors! -- apologize.

Anyone who expects an apology when nothing happened, as you seem to,
really does have a few serious problems to deal with.

Bill

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
JimLane <[email protected]> writes:

> Nah, I called Z petulant, didn't I? If he did, he was cribbin off me.

I don't remember if I used the word, but I take it you now claim to
have a copyright on the use of a single word? You really are out to
lunch.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Bill Z. wrote:
> "S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:

>> God help you if there's ever an /important/ issue in your life where
>> you need to admit an error or -- horrors! -- apologize.
>
> Anyone who expects an apology when nothing happened, as you seem to,
> really does have a few serious problems to deal with.

Learn to read. I said if there's ever a truly significant issue for you to
deal with, not this inane blather.

Now go ahead and take the last word; I'm done.

Bill "just wish I'd never noticed the misattribution in the first place" S.
 
PLEASE ALL DON'T REPLY TO ANY MORE MESSAGES ON THIS THREAD
"S o r n i" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bill Z. wrote:
> > "S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> >> God help you if there's ever an /important/ issue in your life where
> >> you need to admit an error or -- horrors! -- apologize.
> >
> > Anyone who expects an apology when nothing happened, as you seem to,
> > really does have a few serious problems to deal with.
>
> Learn to read. I said if there's ever a truly significant issue for you
to
> deal with, not this inane blather.
>
> Now go ahead and take the last word; I'm done.
>
> Bill "just wish I'd never noticed the misattribution in the first place"
S.
>
>
 
"S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Z. wrote:
> > "S o r n i" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> >> God help you if there's ever an /important/ issue in your life where
> >> you need to admit an error or -- horrors! -- apologize.
> >
> > Anyone who expects an apology when nothing happened, as you seem to,
> > really does have a few serious problems to deal with.
>
> Learn to read. I said if there's ever a truly significant issue for you to
> deal with, not this inane blather.

This *is* a truly significant issue to you given how you've been ranting
about it, but I will agree that your complaints are in fact "inane
blather."

> Now go ahead and take the last word; I'm done.

You said you were "done" quite a few times, of course ...

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 19:49:24 -0700, [email protected] (Tom Keats)
wrote:
>In article <lQJcc.86562$JO3.44558@attbi_s04>,
> "Claire Petersky" <[email protected]> writes:
>> Bill Z, Sorni, JimLane, take a deep breath in. Then, let a deep breath out.
>> Next inhalation, breathe in, and relax.
>> Exhale, and smile.
>> Breathe in, and relax; breathe out and smile.
>>
>> This simple practice, taught by Thich Nhat Hanh in his book, Peace is Every
>> Step (http://tinyurl.com/3fmnz), will help you find the path to your true
>> self.
>
>That's the basic pot smoking technique, too.

Same technique, same results, eh?
--
Rick Onanian
 
>> Bill Z. wrote:
>>> The rest of you are IMHO out to lunch on the present discussion.
>Jay Hill <[email protected]> writes:
>> You're wrong, asshole. You incorrectly attributed something to
>> Sorni.
On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 08:13:45 -0500, Tim McNamara
<[email protected]> wrote:
>He is wrong. He also suffers from that peculiar middle-aged male
>malady that prevents him from being able to see it or admit it.
>Nothing you can do about it. Just be glad you're not married to him.

I hope that as I approach middle age, I don't suffer from that
malady. I find it's quite satisfying sometimes to admit being wrong
and get on with stuff. Google groups for
onanian "i stand corrected"
for the most common way I admit I'm wrong...
--
Rick Onanian
 
>"frkrygow" <"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> writes:
>> Tim McNamara wrote:
>> Zaumen's been this way as long as I can remember. And that's many,
>> many years.

I've snipped properly according to your rules. Can you spot what's
wrong?

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 02:59:14 GMT, [email protected] (Bill
Z.) wrote:
>Frank Krygowski (the guy posting this) is an anti-helmet nut whose
>been on my case for 10 years for not agreeing with his idiotic
>views on that subject and has a long term grudge and axe to grind.

You're both nuts for continuing to argue the same point for so long.

Frank is effectively anti-helmet, and I spent a lot of time in a
helmet war sparring with him. I did learn to respect him, even if I
don't agree. His views may (or may not) be mistaken and/or
inaccurate, but they are well-reasoned, not idiotic.

>Much of what Krygowski posted consisted of pure propaganda.

I'd rather see propaganda than another helmet war incited out of an
unrelated courtesy issue.

>Sorni's complaint basically hinges on me snipping a four-word,
>content-free wisecrack of his after finishing my post due to his

No, his complaint is about what you failed to snip.

Sheldon Brown uses a tagline that says something like "The nice
thing about standards is that there's so many to choose from".
Consider that clarity, even if it requires flouting a standard (it
didn't in this case), beats a standard whose clarity may be
questionable, even if you think it looks obvious.
--
Rick Onanian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back