Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling

[hippy]

>Originally posted by L'Acrobat Of course it won't evolve, the net
>itself isn't changing at all is it you pillock...

So, yeah, how about that aussie drug scandal, eh?

;-)

hippy
- very bored with this, can we just organise a punch up and be done
with it?



--

 

[Graeme]

hippy <[email protected]> wrote in news:hE1Ec.35937$zS.33610
@fe17.usenetserver.com:

> very bored with this, can we just organise a punch up and be done
> with it?
>

And if that doesn't work, how about we form a lynch mob?

Graeme

 

[flyingdutch]

Graeme wrote:
> h And if that doesn't work, how about we form a lynch mob?
> Graeme



How about a new thread voting who agrees/disagrees so these 2 can ge
tthe message loud and clear and stop being conveniently ignorant...



--

 

[Richard Sherratt]

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:28:42 GMT, "L'acrobat"
<husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com> wrote:

>Your sig is a classic example of whining, and the funny part is that it is
>actually counterproductive.
>
>Oh yes, your crusade is going swimmingly, you have actually convinced
>someone to take up top posting.
>
>So, Top Posting - 1 v DRS - 0
>
>What a sad loser you are.

Oh dear. We've attracted a fool.

This is a nice, friendly newsgroup where occasional lapses in Usenet
protocols are not jumped on and where learners are gently advised of
the correct way to do things. Of course, if they continue to ignore
the advice and get all precious about their rights to annoy other
people, they will be plonked.


--
Regards.
Richard.

 

[Richard Sherratt]

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 16:42:26 GMT, "L'acrobat"
<husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com> wrote:

>Yes, we've been through this before - if you have to tell people it's
>clever, it isn't.
>
>It's whiny, which is why it suits you to a tee.
>
>You are simply pathetic.

Ooo er. You are so butch.

^k

Bye.

--
Regards.
Richard.

 

[DaveB]

>
> How about a new thread voting who agrees/disagrees so these 2 can ge
> tthe message loud and clear and stop being conveniently ignorant...
>

Ok here's the plan. I've created a hotmail account [email protected]
(who gives a rat's ****). If you think it's important to bottom post
send an email to that address with bottom post in the subject. If you
couldn't give a rats whether top or bottom is used send an email with
the topic cgara.

Anyone who wants to check on the polling can logon with the password
toppost . I'm sure none of this will have any impact on DRS's OCD but at
least there will be some data to backup any arguments, <heavy scarcasm>
and we all know how important it is not to post opinions without data
</heavy scarcasm>.

DaveB

 

[DaveB]

DaveB wrote:
>
>>
>> How about a new thread voting who agrees/disagrees so these 2 can ge
>> tthe message loud and clear and stop being conveniently ignorant...
>>
>
> Ok here's the plan. I've created a hotmail account [email protected]
> (who gives a rat's ****). If you think it's important to bottom post
> send an email to that address with bottom post in the subject. If you
> couldn't give a rats whether top or bottom is used send an email with
> the topic cgara.
>
> Anyone who wants to check on the polling can logon with the password
> toppost . I'm sure none of this will have any impact on DRS's OCD but at
> least there will be some data to backup any arguments, <heavy scarcasm>
> and we all know how important it is not to post opinions without data
> </heavy scarcasm>.
>
> DaveB
>

Doh! stupid hotmail !@#$%^. Send the emails to [email protected] .

 

[DRS]

"flyingdutch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Graeme wrote:
> > h And if that doesn't work, how about we form a lynch mob?
>
> How about a new thread voting who agrees/disagrees so these 2 can ge
> tthe message loud and clear and stop being conveniently ignorant...

I'm not in the least ignorant about Usenet standards and etiquette, unlike
that drop-kick.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

 

[Graeme]

"DRS" <[email protected]> wrote in news:cbrnft$1bg$1
@lust.ihug.co.nz:

> I'm not in the least ignorant about Usenet standards

No, but you are ignorant of when to just drop it. You're flogging a dead
horse.

Graeme

 

[DRS]

"Graeme" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "DRS" <[email protected]> wrote in news:cbrnft$1bg$1
> @lust.ihug.co.nz:
>
>> I'm not in the least ignorant about Usenet standards
>
> No, but you are ignorant of when to just drop it. You're flogging a
> dead horse.

I'll believe that when I start seeing people telling off the troublemakers
instead of me.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

 

[Graeme]

"DRS" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> "Graeme" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> No, but you are ignorant of when to just drop it. You're flogging a
>> dead horse.
>
> I'll believe that when I start seeing people telling off the
> troublemakers instead of me.

troublemaker - n : someone who deliberately stirs up trouble

Yes, it takes two sides to have an argument, but your posting of replies
qualifies you as a troublemaker too, unless you're posting accidentaly of
course

Graeme

 

[DRS]

"Graeme" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "DRS" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>> "Graeme" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> No, but you are ignorant of when to just drop it. You're flogging a
>>> dead horse.
>>
>> I'll believe that when I start seeing people telling off the
>> troublemakers instead of me.
>
> troublemaker - n : someone who deliberately stirs up trouble
>
> Yes, it takes two sides to have an argument, but your posting of
> replies qualifies you as a troublemaker too,

No, it doesn't. I'm not deliberately stirring up trouble. I'm responding
to the troublemakers. It's not at all the same thing. In fact it's not
even close. So spare me this tedious waste of energy. Expend it on the
ones who need it. When they stop imposing their selfishness and laziness on
the rest of us there will be nothing to respond to.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

 

[mfhor]

>>> No, but you are ignorant of when to just drop it. You're flogging a
>>> dead horse.
>>
>> I'll believe that when I start seeing people telling off the
>> troublemakers instead of me.
>
> troublemaker - n : someone who deliberately stirs up trouble
>
> Yes, it takes two sides to have an argument, but your posting of
> replies qualifies you as a troublemaker too,

No, it doesn't. I'm not deliberately stirring up trouble. I'm responding
to the troublemakers. It's not at all the same thing. In fact it's not
even close. So spare me this tedious waste of energy. Expend it on the
ones who need it. When they stop imposing their selfishness and laziness
on the rest of us there will be nothing to respond to.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?


NYaa nyaa nyaa nyaa nyaa I am so better than you you beeen baad. Have
not have too have not have too Have not have too have not have tooHave
not have too have not have tooHave not have too have not have tooHave
not have too have not have tooHave not have too have not have tooHave
not have too have not have tooHave not have too have not have tooHave
not have too have not have too

What is the most annoying thing on Usenet? Pedantic people who use a
public forum to gring their tiny little axes about etiquette.

As I tell the grade 1's that I teach: Turn away from and ignore people
who are trying to annoy you. Find something else INTERESTING to do that
will take your mind off it.

Oh, that and hedgehogs.

BTW - did you know eGH is totally useless in promoting muscle growth in
humans? Is it all just a plant and an attempted stitch up?

MH



--

 

[Lotte]

How about you all give up on this thread and ride your flaming bikes!



--

 

[Graeme]

mfhor <[email protected]> wrote in news:iQnEc.24040$S33.2514
@fe44.usenetserver.com:

> Oh, that and hedgehogs.
>

What? Turn away and ignore hedgehogs too? You've no heart.



Graeme

 

[flyingdutch]

Graeme wrote:
> mfhor <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:iQnEc.24040$S33.2514news:iQnEc.24040$S33.2514
> @fe44.usenetserver.com:
> > Oh, that and hedgehogs.
> >
> What? Turn away and ignore hedgehogs too? You've no heart.
>
> Graeme



We have hedgehogs in Oz???

or are you talkin biscuits



--

 

[mfhor]

Graeme wrote:
> mfhor <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:iQnEc.24040$S33.2514news:iQnEc.24040$S33.2514
> @fe44.usenetserver.com:
> > Oh, that and hedgehogs.
> >
> What? Turn away and ignore hedgehogs too? You've no heart.
>
> Graeme



NOOOOO! Don't ignore the hedgehogs! I was just saying how they were the
most annoying thing on Usenet, snuffling around the edges of the screen,
eating stray URLs, messing up your Javascript and spreading it all over
the . . . hang on, that's just my animated screensaver, isn't it?



MH



--

 

[Graeme]

flyingdutch <[email protected]> wrote in news:ePpEc.51019
[email protected]:

> We have hedgehogs in Oz???
>

All the more reason not to turn away and ignore it if you see one. The poor
wee soul is obviously lost.



Graeme

 

[Graeme]

mfhor <[email protected]> wrote in news:11qEc.9846$Jz6.3981
@fe33.usenetserver.com:

> hang on, that's just my animated screensaver, isn't it?
>

Cool, a hedgehog screensaver! Where did you get that?

 

[L'acrobat]

How sad do you have to be to think that anybody care about your sad
obsession with usenet ettiquete.

"DRS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "flyingdutch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Graeme wrote:
> > > h And if that doesn't work, how about we form a lynch mob?
> >
> > How about a new thread voting who agrees/disagrees so these 2 can ge
> > tthe message loud and clear and stop being conveniently ignorant...
>
> I'm not in the least ignorant about Usenet standards and etiquette, unlike
> that drop-kick.
>
> --
>
> A: Top-posters.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
>
>