More Abusive Email from a Typical Mountain Biker

[manmoose]

In article <[email protected]>, Mike Vandeman
<[email protected]> wrote:

> X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via 206.190.37.176; Fri, 29 Apr 2005
> 20:43:34 -0700
> Authentication-Results: mta824.mail.sc5.yahoo.com
> from=sbcglobal.net; domainkeys=neutral (no sig)
> X-Originating-IP: [206.190.37.122]
> Return-Path: <[email protected]>
> Received: from 207.115.57.49 (EHLO ylpvm18.prodigy.net) (207.115.57.49)
> by mta824.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:43:33 -0700
> X-Originating-IP: [206.190.37.122]
> Received: from web81605.mail.yahoo.com (web81605.mail.yahoo.com
> [206.190.37.122])
> by ylpvm18.prodigy.net (8.12.10 083104/8.12.10) with SMTP id
> j3U3h37B015153
> for <[email protected]>; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:43:03 -0400
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Received: from [67.121.239.122] by web81605.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 29
> Apr
> 2005 20:43:32 PDT
> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
> From: ROBERT GRISAK <[email protected]>
> Subject: Headbanging
> To: [email protected]
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1732291881-1114832612=:71467"
>
> Hey Doc, as a psychologist you are probably familiar with persons who
> continuously bang their heads against hard objects and seek to take on
> windmills
> ala Mr. Quixote. Kind of hard on the head and it really gets one nowhere. You
> seem to be overly stressed out about some kids riding their bikes through a
> park. Mountain bikes have been around for a long time and I suspect they will
> be
> around for quite a while longer. Take horses for example. Horsemen's uses of
> trails all over the country is quite acceptable and far more erosion causing
> than a rubbered tired bike. So what's up with horses.... are they OK in your
> world? If not, now it seem you have two problems to deal with. At Lake
> Oroville,
> near where I live there are both horse trails and bike trails. They are called
> multiple use trails. There are frequent downhill bike races as well as
> organized
> horse-back events. Sometimes they even ride together! This has been going on
> here for over twenty years. So what is the problem. The trails are beautifully
> maintained and groomed. Hikers, bicyclists, and horsemen all participate in
> helping manage this resource. I recall a date last spring when there was four
> separate trail events on one day, simultaneously, at Lake Oroville. Everyone
> had
> a good time. No problems. So, Doc, what is your problem? You need to take some
> time off and check in with a trusted colleague in your profession and get to
> the
> root of your angst. Is this really about protecting nature? I think you need
> to
> relax and take a look at the big scheme of things. Mountain Bikers, horsemen,
> cattle, and rubber tired machines are not going to go away. I think it best
> you
> tried to meet your problems in a more balanced and rational way. Hike into the
> wilderness and stay a long, long time.
>
> Bob Grisak
> Park Ranger (retired)
>
> ===
> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande


Reads like sound advice, Mr. (Dr.?) Vanderbilt - nothing abusive I can
see. Do you think you may be suffering from a bit of paranoia, perhaps?

--
---
manmoose of maine

 

[Jeff Strickland]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> .<quote>
> .Hike into the wilderness and stay a long, long time.
> .</quote>
> .
> .Two words with more than one syllable. Hardly a difficult sentence to
> .understand. And, hardly an abuse. Idiot.
>
> Proving that you didn't understand it.


Idiot.

 

[GaryG]

"manmoose" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:030520051134113679%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Mike Vandeman
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via 206.190.37.176; Fri, 29 Apr
2005
> > 20:43:34 -0700
> > Authentication-Results: mta824.mail.sc5.yahoo.com
> > from=sbcglobal.net; domainkeys=neutral (no sig)
> > X-Originating-IP: [206.190.37.122]
> > Return-Path: <[email protected]>
> > Received: from 207.115.57.49 (EHLO ylpvm18.prodigy.net) (207.115.57.49)
> > by mta824.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Fri, 29 Apr 2005
20:43:33 -0700
> > X-Originating-IP: [206.190.37.122]
> > Received: from web81605.mail.yahoo.com (web81605.mail.yahoo.com
> > [206.190.37.122])
> > by ylpvm18.prodigy.net (8.12.10 083104/8.12.10) with SMTP id
> > j3U3h37B015153
> > for <[email protected]>; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:43:03 -0400
> > Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> > Received: from [67.121.239.122] by web81605.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP;
Fri, 29
> > Apr
> > 2005 20:43:32 PDT
> > Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: ROBERT GRISAK <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Headbanging
> > To: [email protected]
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="0-1732291881-1114832612=:71467"
> >
> > Hey Doc, as a psychologist you are probably familiar with persons who
> > continuously bang their heads against hard objects and seek to take on
> > windmills
> > ala Mr. Quixote. Kind of hard on the head and it really gets one
nowhere. You
> > seem to be overly stressed out about some kids riding their bikes
through a
> > park. Mountain bikes have been around for a long time and I suspect they
will
> > be
> > around for quite a while longer. Take horses for example. Horsemen's
uses of
> > trails all over the country is quite acceptable and far more erosion
causing
> > than a rubbered tired bike. So what's up with horses.... are they OK in
your
> > world? If not, now it seem you have two problems to deal with. At Lake
> > Oroville,
> > near where I live there are both horse trails and bike trails. They are
called
> > multiple use trails. There are frequent downhill bike races as well as
> > organized
> > horse-back events. Sometimes they even ride together! This has been
going on
> > here for over twenty years. So what is the problem. The trails are
beautifully
> > maintained and groomed. Hikers, bicyclists, and horsemen all participate
in
> > helping manage this resource. I recall a date last spring when there was
four
> > separate trail events on one day, simultaneously, at Lake Oroville.
Everyone
> > had
> > a good time. No problems. So, Doc, what is your problem? You need to
take some
> > time off and check in with a trusted colleague in your profession and
get to
> > the
> > root of your angst. Is this really about protecting nature? I think you
need
> > to
> > relax and take a look at the big scheme of things. Mountain Bikers,
horsemen,
> > cattle, and rubber tired machines are not going to go away. I think it
best
> > you
> > tried to meet your problems in a more balanced and rational way. Hike
into the
> > wilderness and stay a long, long time.
> >
> > Bob Grisak
> > Park Ranger (retired)
> >
> > ===
> > I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> > humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> > years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
> >
> > http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
>
>
> Reads like sound advice, Mr. (Dr.?) Vanderbilt - nothing abusive I can
> see. Do you think you may be suffering from a bit of paranoia, perhaps?

Nobody but Mike can see the "abuse" in that letter. Normal people reading
it see a rational, calm, well-written letter with only a hint of
tongue-in-cheek at the end. But, Mike sees "abuse" aimed at him...he's
definitely paranoid.

Based on his posting history, I think he also has a deep-seated need for
"abuse" in his life (thus, his incessant trolling). It gives his life
meaning, and confirms his view of himself as a "prophet".

GG

> --
> ---
> manmoose of maine

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Tue, 03 May 2005 14:49:59 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>People afraid to use their real names don't count. DUH!

Really? I'll bear that in mind if I meet any.

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, 03 May 2005 14:49:07 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>.>Most people understand that "read" includes "understand".

>.Really? Most people, eh? What's your authority for that? Citations
>.required. And while you're about it, since several of us have read
>.the post in question and fail to discern what is supposed to be
>.abusive.

>Proving that you aren't honest enough to report abuse when it comes from your
>fellow mountain bikers.

You say that, but as far as I can tell I am not actually a mountain
biker. Nor have you established relevant difference - i.e. in what
way abusing trolls might be more the preserve of mountain bikers than
any other (news)group. I did suggest a methodology to test your
hypothesis, but you don't seem interested in taking it up.

>BTW, look at his last sentence.

The one where he advises you that taking a nice long hike in the
wilderness, an activity you profess to love, might restore your
equilibrium? Seems entirely fair to me. I had similar advice from my
doctor some years back when I was suffering from depression. Worked,
too. You should try it - don't worry, we'll still be here when you
get back.

>.>.Unless and until you can submit authoritative evidence that abuse is
>.>.correlated with mountain biking and not with other activities, your
>.>.hypothesis must be dismissed as simply another example of bigotry.

>.>I never said it isn't associated with other activities. You FABRICATED that.

>.Not at all. You have posted multiple threads over the years whose
>.titles are designed to imply that abuse is a behaviour typical of
>.mountain bikers.

>Yes, it IS. That says NOTHING about other groups.

But unless you can prove that mountain bikers are more likely to
respond to persistent trolling with abuse than other groups, you have
failed to establish a relevant difference - which is a key factor
which distinguishes campaigning from bigotry. So: where is your
evidence that mountain bikers are more likely than any other group to
respond abusively to constant trolling?

>.But if the abusive behaviour is shared with other groups, i.e. is
>.typical of Usenet readers when responding to trolls, then there is no
>.relevant difference, and your statement is pure bigotry. I think that
>.any impartial observer will find *far* more abuse in this thread from
>.you than from me; that either means you are a typical mountain biker,
>.or that abuse is not after all a behaviour distinctive of mountain
>.bikers and you are a bigot.

>That is a lie, and abuse.

No, it's the truth (see, I can do it too!). In this thread you have
been consistently abusive, even when asked a straightforward and civil
question.

Here for example:
<url:http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?selm=6il771tnu2057et5vomf7rgid0pn3beub0%404ax.com>.
Civil question, abusive answer.

You have failed to establish a relevant difference. So it looks like
you are as much of a bigot as the Klansman who is "only telling the
truth [fsvo] about blacks".

>.But as I said, you failed to demonstrate relevant difference. Where
>.is your evidence that this is any more true of mountain bikers than of
>.other groups?

>Irrelevant.

No, it's very important. Either there is a relevant difference or you
are engaging in bigotry. Or you are just trolling. Or maybe both.
Either way you are about as likely to make converts as Ron Grossi.

I note that the parks people have reacted to your lunatic fringe
activities by softening their stance on mountain biking. Keep up the
good work!

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, 03 May 2005 14:53:58 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>.in order to justify years of trolling *exclusively* in mountain
>.bike newsgroups, you *must* establish relevant difference. Otherwise
>.it is simple bigotry.

>Nope, just the TRUTH. Books about mathematics don't talk about chemistry, and
>NOT from "bigotry". DUH!

But you are not claming to be a specialist on mountain biking, you
claim to be an environmentalist. When invited to contrast mountain
bikers taking a chainsaw to a downed tree,with commercial logging for
profit, the best you could come up with was that logging is legal.
Looks like good old fashioned bigotry to me.

>.What it means, Mike, is that if that email was to you it indicates
>.that, despite your denials, you *are* taking common cause with horse
>.riders.

>Nope, it just means that I received an email. DUH!

[..]

>.But I notice that you have not answered an important question: who is
>.the Mike of the original email?

>No idea.

None? No idea at all? You posted an email (unusually for you
/without/ the headers) addressed to someone who just /happened/ to
have the same name, which arrived nicely parcelled up without the
quote marks it might be expected to get if forwarded? Subject:
Griffith Park Master Plan meeting and no "re" or "fw"? And you never
even checked who it was /to/?

Pull the other one.

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, 03 May 2005 15:01:24 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>.>Didn't you read the last sentence?

>.The one where he suggested you might regain your perspective by doing
>.the thing you claim to love best? I thought that was a very caring
>.suggestion.

>Liar.

So now you can read my thoughts as well? You need that long walk,
Mike.

>.Should I sue my doctor because he suggested some long quiet walks in
>.the country when I was suffering from depression?

>Quite different. DUH!

True: I was curable.

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, 3 May 2005 10:43:07 -0700, "GaryG" <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>Based on his posting history, I think he also has a deep-seated need for
>"abuse" in his life (thus, his incessant trolling). It gives his life
>meaning, and confirms his view of himself as a "prophet".

It is a singular thing: both Vandeman and Bill Zaumen post with
pacbell addresses, display the same obsessive trolling for abuse, both
insult others freely and complain equally vociferously when this
brings the aggressive response they so evidently crave, both refuse to
admit they are wrong even when it's proved with chapter and verse and
posting references, both excise the parts of an argument they can't
rebut, both prefer ad-hominem to any consideration of evidence - has
anyone ever seen them in the same room, I wonder?

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

 

[stevemtbsteve]

Proving that you aren't honest enough to report abuse when it comes from your
fellow mountain bikers. BTW, look at his last sentence.
BS. I just tell the truth.
Yes, it IS. That says NOTHING about other groups.
That is a lie, and abuse.
Irrelevant.
People afraid to use their real names don't count. DUH!
Easy. I do a lot LESS damage than you do. DUH!
Nope, just the TRUTH. Books about mathematics don't talk about chemistry, and
NOT from "bigotry". DUH!
Nope, it just means that I received an email. DUH!
No idea.
Someone afraid to use his (or her) real name is obviously LYING, and doesn't
want to be exposed.
I said "look at the last sentence". You can't even succeed in doing THAT simple
task!
You are lying, because you are afraid to admit your fellow mountain bikers are
abusive. You are all dishonest.
It's true. You can't see abuse even when it's staring you in the face.
Hmmmm. Sounds like what YOU are doing.
I have a Ph.D. in Psychology, so YOU must be the ignorant one.
Liar.
Quite different. DUH!
Proving that you didn't understand it.

That was the sole content of the last 8 MV threads, the funniest of which has to be:
I have a Ph.D. in Psychology,

and this is all he can manage; he should really be ashamed of himself. The rest of the psychology community must be quaking at the weight of his intellect. But everyone's gotta have a hobby Hang on in there Mike, we are all there with you


Cheers
Steve

PS could you just clear up one thing for me, you pro or anti mtb?

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 03 May 2005 16:08:29 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

..On Tue, 03 May 2005 14:49:59 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..
..>On Mon, 02 May 2005 18:24:49 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
..>wrote:
..>
..>.On Mon, 02 May 2005 05:33:45 -0400, pmhilton <[email protected]> wrote
..>.in message <[email protected]>:
..>.
..>.>You are attempting rational discourse with an irrational being.
..>.
..>.Up to a point. Read the Vandeman FAQ and you'll find that it is
..>.possible to fight him and win. He's been argued into the ground a
..>.couple of times recently - either he's losing his touch or we're
..>.getting better
..>.
..>.Guy
..>
..>People afraid to use their real names don't count. DUH!
..>===
..Like every single one of your alleged supporters.
..
..You cannot use every nasty tactic you accuse others of, and then claim
..to be better than everyone who disagress with you. It is completely
..understandable that many people would not want a person like you to
..have access to their personal information, as you have a documented
..history of trying to get people fired from their jobs for the crime of
..disagreeing with you.
..
..That IS the reason that the Sierra Club National Board of Directors
..permanently removed you from all SC leadership positions, elected or
..appointed, for "Breach of Leadership Trust". They also considered, but
..chose not to, revoking your SC membership.

Too bad they violated their own rules, and were required to withdraw the
complaint.

..Happy trails,
..Gary (net.yogi.bear)

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 03 May 2005 21:36:01 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..On Tue, 03 May 2005 14:49:59 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote in message <[email protected]>:
..
..>People afraid to use their real names don't count. DUH!
..
..Really? I'll bear that in mind if I meet any.
..
..Guy

Have you considered lookng in the mirror?

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 03 May 2005 16:13:18 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

..On Tue, 03 May 2005 14:53:58 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..
..>On Mon, 02 May 2005 09:24:54 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
..>wrote:
..>
..>.No, in order to justify years of trolling *exclusively* in mountain
..>.bike newsgroups, you *must* establish relevant difference. Otherwise
..>.it is simple bigotry.
..>
..>Nope, just the TRUTH. Books about mathematics don't talk about chemistry, and
..>NOT from "bigotry". DUH!
..>
..Books about chemistry DO talk about physics, because the two subjects
..are interrelated. To talk about chemistry without involving physics is
..foolish.

Right, but horseback riding and mountain biking aren't related.

..With your Omni PhD (tm), of course you know everything there is to
..know about both of these topics. I eagerly await the announcement of
..the Vandeman Unified Field Theory, and the Vandeman Process for
..converting radioactive waste into gold.
..
..Happy trails,
..Gary (net.yogi.bear)

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 03 May 2005 22:06:13 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..On Tue, 03 May 2005 14:53:58 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote in message <[email protected]>:
..
..>.in order to justify years of trolling *exclusively* in mountain
..>.bike newsgroups, you *must* establish relevant difference. Otherwise
..>.it is simple bigotry.
..
..>Nope, just the TRUTH. Books about mathematics don't talk about chemistry, and
..>NOT from "bigotry". DUH!
..
..But you are not claming to be a specialist on mountain biking,

Yes, I am.

you
..claim to be an environmentalist.

Yes, I am BOTH.

When invited to contrast mountain
..bikers taking a chainsaw to a downed tree,with commercial logging for
..profit, the best you could come up with was that logging is legal.
..Looks like good old fashioned bigotry to me.

No, just FACT. You are afraid to admit that the mountain bikers BROKE THE LAW!
But we know that mountain bikers are dishonest. Nothing new there!

..>.What it means, Mike, is that if that email was to you it indicates
..>.that, despite your denials, you *are* taking common cause with horse
..>.riders.
..
..>Nope, it just means that I received an email. DUH!
..
..[..]
..
..>.But I notice that you have not answered an important question: who is
..>.the Mike of the original email?
..
..>No idea.
..
..None? No idea at all? You posted an email (unusually for you
../without/ the headers) addressed to someone who just /happened/ to
..have the same name, which arrived nicely parcelled up without the
..quote marks it might be expected to get if forwarded? Subject:
..Griffith Park Master Plan meeting and no "re" or "fw"? And you never
..even checked who it was /to/?

Define "to".

..Pull the other one.
..
..Guy

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 3 May 2005 08:35:58 -0700, "GaryG" <[email protected]> wrote:

.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]...
..> On Mon, 02 May 2005 23:51:52 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]> wrote:
..>
..> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
..> .> On Sun, 01 May 2005 17:33:01 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..> .>
..> .> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
..> .> .> On Sun, 01 May 2005 02:16:06 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..> .> .>
..> .> .> .di wrote:
..> .> .> .> "BarryNL" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..> .> .> .> news:[email protected]...
..> .> .> .>
..> .> .> .>
..> .> .> .>>Wierd, considering mountain bikes are probably responsible for
..less than a
..> .> .> .>>millionth of the damage to wildlife caused by fossil fuels or
..urban
..> .> .> .>>development, I wonder what his real reason for hating mountain
..bikers is.
..> .> .> .>
..> .> .> .>
..> .> .> .> He tried one and couldn't ride it, based on some the past stuff
..that's been
..> .> .> .> on this list. It's just a cause he can get involved in, most
..of the real
..> .> .> .> environmental groups have shunned him. But in reality he hates
..everything
..> .> .> .> involving humans.
..> .> .> .>
..> .> .> .
..> .> .> .Mmm, I guess so, because if he really thought it through he'd see
..that
..> .> .> .humans are as much part of nature as anything else and the idea of
..> .> .> .creating an environment free of humans is as much an artificial
..> .> .> .suppression of nature as everything he claims to be fighting
..against.
..> .> .>
..> .> .> Are zebra mussels a part of SF Bay? Is kudzu a part of Florida's
..ecosystem? Are
..> .> .> humans part of North America's ecosystems? Think a little.
..> .> .
..> .> .Why is a species propogated by humans any more unnatural than a flower
..> .> .using insects to carry its pollen? Try and see the bigger picture.
..> .>
..> .> Take Biology 101. You must have missed it.
..> .
..> .Thanks, but I already have a qualification in biology. I'd suggest a
..> .better idea is for you to study something like social science or
..> .psychology which will teach you critical thinking.
..>
..> I have a Ph.D. in Psychology, so YOU must be the ignorant one.
..
..Gee...that sounds somewhat "abusive", don't you think?

Nope, FACT.

..GG
..
..>
..> .> ===
..> .> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
..> .> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
..> .> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
..> .>
..> .> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
..>
..> ===
..> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
..> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
..> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
..>
..> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
..

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 03 May 2005 21:52:57 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..On Tue, 03 May 2005 14:49:07 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote in message <[email protected]>:
..
..>.>Most people understand that "read" includes "understand".
..
..>.Really? Most people, eh? What's your authority for that? Citations
..>.required. And while you're about it, since several of us have read
..>.the post in question and fail to discern what is supposed to be
..>.abusive.
..
..>Proving that you aren't honest enough to report abuse when it comes from your
..>fellow mountain bikers.
..
..You say that, but as far as I can tell I am not actually a mountain
..biker.

But you defend them, making them your "fellows".

Nor have you established relevant difference - i.e. in what
..way abusing trolls might be more the preserve of mountain bikers than
..any other (news)group.

I never said that. YOU did.

I did suggest a methodology to test your
..hypothesis, but you don't seem interested in taking it up.
..
..>BTW, look at his last sentence.
..
..The one where he advises you that taking a nice long hike in the
..wilderness,

That's not what he said, liar.

an activity you profess to love, might restore your
..equilibrium? Seems entirely fair to me. I had similar advice from my
..doctor some years back when I was suffering from depression. Worked,
..too. You should try it - don't worry, we'll still be here when you
..get back.
..
..>.>.Unless and until you can submit authoritative evidence that abuse is
..>.>.correlated with mountain biking and not with other activities, your
..>.>.hypothesis must be dismissed as simply another example of bigotry.
..
..>.>I never said it isn't associated with other activities. You FABRICATED that.
..
..>.Not at all. You have posted multiple threads over the years whose
..>.titles are designed to imply that abuse is a behaviour typical of
..>.mountain bikers.
..
..>Yes, it IS. That says NOTHING about other groups.
..
..But unless you can prove that mountain bikers are more likely to
..respond to persistent trolling with abuse than other groups, you have
..failed to establish a relevant difference - which is a key factor
..which distinguishes campaigning from bigotry. So: where is your
..evidence that mountain bikers are more likely than any other group to
..respond abusively to constant trolling?

Irrelevant.

..>.But if the abusive behaviour is shared with other groups, i.e. is
..>.typical of Usenet readers when responding to trolls, then there is no
..>.relevant difference, and your statement is pure bigotry. I think that
..>.any impartial observer will find *far* more abuse in this thread from
..>.you than from me; that either means you are a typical mountain biker,
..>.or that abuse is not after all a behaviour distinctive of mountain
..>.bikers and you are a bigot.
..
..>That is a lie, and abuse.
..
..No, it's the truth (see, I can do it too!). In this thread you have
..been consistently abusive, even when asked a straightforward and civil
..question.
..
..Here for example:
..<url:http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?selm=6il771tnu2057et5vomf7rgid0pn3beub0%404ax.com>.
..Civil question, abusive answer.
..
..You have failed to establish a relevant difference. So it looks like
..you are as much of a bigot as the Klansman who is "only telling the
..truth [fsvo] about blacks".
..
..>.But as I said, you failed to demonstrate relevant difference. Where
..>.is your evidence that this is any more true of mountain bikers than of
..>.other groups?
..
..>Irrelevant.
..
..No, it's very important. Either there is a relevant difference or you
..are engaging in bigotry.

Nope, just telling the truth.

Or you are just trolling. Or maybe both.
..Either way you are about as likely to make converts as Ron Grossi.
..
..I note that the parks people have reacted to your lunatic fringe
..activities by softening their stance on mountain biking. Keep up the
..good work!
..
..Guy

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

[GaryG]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 3 May 2005 08:35:58 -0700, "GaryG" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .news:[email protected]...
> .> On Mon, 02 May 2005 23:51:52 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]>
wrote:
> .>
> .> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
> .> .> On Sun, 01 May 2005 17:33:01 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]>
> .wrote:
> .> .>
> .> .> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
> .> .> .> On Sun, 01 May 2005 02:16:06 +0200, BarryNL
<[email protected]>
> .wrote:
> .> .> .>
> .> .> .> .di wrote:
> .> .> .> .> "BarryNL" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .> .> .> .> news:[email protected]...
> .> .> .> .>
> .> .> .> .>
> .> .> .> .>>Wierd, considering mountain bikes are probably responsible for
> .less than a
> .> .> .> .>>millionth of the damage to wildlife caused by fossil fuels or
> .urban
> .> .> .> .>>development, I wonder what his real reason for hating mountain
> .bikers is.
> .> .> .> .>
> .> .> .> .>
> .> .> .> .> He tried one and couldn't ride it, based on some the past
stuff
> .that's been
> .> .> .> .> on this list. It's just a cause he can get involved in,
most
> .of the real
> .> .> .> .> environmental groups have shunned him. But in reality he
hates
> .everything
> .> .> .> .> involving humans.
> .> .> .> .>
> .> .> .> .
> .> .> .> .Mmm, I guess so, because if he really thought it through he'd
see
> .that
> .> .> .> .humans are as much part of nature as anything else and the idea
of
> .> .> .> .creating an environment free of humans is as much an artificial
> .> .> .> .suppression of nature as everything he claims to be fighting
> .against.
> .> .> .>
> .> .> .> Are zebra mussels a part of SF Bay? Is kudzu a part of Florida's
> .ecosystem? Are
> .> .> .> humans part of North America's ecosystems? Think a little.
> .> .> .
> .> .> .Why is a species propogated by humans any more unnatural than a
flower
> .> .> .using insects to carry its pollen? Try and see the bigger picture.
> .> .>
> .> .> Take Biology 101. You must have missed it.
> .> .
> .> .Thanks, but I already have a qualification in biology. I'd suggest a
> .> .better idea is for you to study something like social science or
> .> .psychology which will teach you critical thinking.
> .>
> .> I have a Ph.D. in Psychology, so YOU must be the ignorant one.
> .
> .Gee...that sounds somewhat "abusive", don't you think?
>
> Nope, FACT.

OK...just so we're clear on the rules in your head:

When you state that someone is "ignorant" because you disagree with their
position, that's a "fact".

But, when someone disagrees with you, and suggests you take a long walk in
the woods, that's "abuse".

Interesting juxtaposition. It sounds pretty much like the textbook
description of a bigot, to me. Or, someone suffering from paranoia.

GG

>
> .GG
> .
> .>
> .> .> ===
> .> .> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> .> .> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> .> .> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
> .> .>
> .> .> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
> .>
> .> ===
> .> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> .> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> .> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
> .>
> .> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
> .
>
> ===
> I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
> humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
> years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

 

[GaryG]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 03 May 2005 22:06:13 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>

BTW - Mike, did you ever show Grizak's supposedly "abusive" email to your
friends and/or family, as I suggested?

If so, what was their take on the "abuse" that you (and you alone) seem to
see in his letter?

Did they support your thinking that Grizak was abusing you when he wrote
what he did?

Or, did they suggest that you were being overly emotional and paranoid in
your thinking?

Discussing your feelings of abuse with friends and family may reveal that
your "truth" is not serving you well.

GG

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Wed, 04 May 2005 04:16:00 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>.>.in order to justify years of trolling *exclusively* in mountain
>.>.bike newsgroups, you *must* establish relevant difference. Otherwise
>.>.it is simple bigotry.

>.>Nope, just the TRUTH. Books about mathematics don't talk about chemistry, and
>.>NOT from "bigotry". DUH!

>.But you are not claming to be a specialist on mountain biking,

>Yes, I am.

To be a specialist in knocking one particular group without
demonstrating relevant difference between them and other groups who
display similar or identical behaviour is not "specialising", it's
bigotry. You are not a specialist on mountain biking any more than
your average Klansman is a specialist on black issues.

> you
>.claim to be an environmentalist.

>Yes, I am BOTH.

So you say, but you seem to be picking on one of the most benign
activities out there while quietly ignoring much worse things. Most
environmentalists see the Noble Bicycle as part of the solution, not
part of the problem. All you seem to be able to come up with to date
is that mountain bikers disturb wildlife - something you acknowledge
all human activity does, including hiking, which you admit you do.

> When invited to contrast mountain
>.bikers taking a chainsaw to a downed tree,with commercial logging for
>.profit, the best you could come up with was that logging is legal.
>.Looks like good old fashioned bigotry to me.

>No, just FACT. You are afraid to admit that the mountain bikers BROKE THE LAW!
>But we know that mountain bikers are dishonest. Nothing new there!

No, Mike, I have never been "afraid" to mention that. As I pointed
out at the time, if you take a random sample of the adult population
of any Western democracy you will find that the majority of them -
close to 100% if they are motorists - break the law; this is not
specific to mountain bikers. You have failed to provide any evidence
to show that mountain bikers are any more likely to break the law than
the generality of the population, so your claim amounts to bigotry.

So it seems you are the one being dishonest. And abusive. Clearly
you are a "typical mountain biker".

You, the Great Environmentalist, were invited to contrast cutting up a
fallen tree with commercial logging. The best you could come up with
was that logging is legal. Yet more evidence that your concern is not
for the environment which you freely admit that you, as a hiker,
disturb, but for bashing your pet hate group. You are a bigot.

>.>.But I notice that you have not answered an important question: who is
>.>.the Mike of the original email?

>.>No idea.

>.None? No idea at all? You posted an email (unusually for you
>./without/ the headers) addressed to someone who just /happened/ to
>.have the same name, which arrived nicely parcelled up without the
>.quote marks it might be expected to get if forwarded? Subject:
>.Griffith Park Master Plan meeting and no "re" or "fw"? And you never
>.even checked who it was /to/?

>Define "to".

In the context of your earlier abuse along the lines of "learn to
read" that is amusing, in an ironic way.

The email begins:

Subject: Griffth Park Master Plan meeting
Hi Mike,
The meeting was last night, so there hasn't been time to talk about
it much
[...]

So, "to" in this context would mean who was the Mike to whom this
obviously friendly message, clearly part of a supportive exchange of
emails, was sent? I can think of a couple of possibilities: one is
that it was sent to you, another is that it was sent to some other
mike, who forwarded it to you (in which case your claim to have "no
idea" who it was from is problematic). If the message was forwarded
to you rather than sent directly you have obviously done some work
cleaning up things like "Fw:" in the subject line, and quoting
characters, as well as excising the names of the people it went to
along the way. So if it wasn't directly to you, you seem to have gone
to some lengths to make it appear as if it was. But Occam's Razor
strongly supports the idea that you are the Mike of the email.

It would be easier if you hadn't defied your normal practice and
posted it without headers.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Wed, 04 May 2005 04:09:47 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>.>People afraid to use their real names don't count. DUH!
>.Really? I'll bear that in mind if I meet any.
>Have you considered lookng in the mirror?

Yes, I did so as I was shaving this morning, thanks. Some bloke
called Guy looked back out at me. This was as expected.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Wed, 04 May 2005 04:23:49 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>.>.>Most people understand that "read" includes "understand".

>.>.Really? Most people, eh? What's your authority for that? Citations
>.>.required. And while you're about it, since several of us have read
>.>.the post in question and fail to discern what is supposed to be
>.>.abusive.

>.>Proving that you aren't honest enough to report abuse when it comes from your
>.>fellow mountain bikers.

>.You say that, but as far as I can tell I am not actually a mountain
>.biker.

>But you defend them, making them your "fellows".

There are two problems with that statement:

First, I am not defending mountain bikers per se, I am defending a
minority group subject to attack from a bigot.

Second, it begs the question. I still can't see what's supposed to be
abusive in the email, so my "failure to report" the abuse is moot.

> Nor have you established relevant difference - i.e. in what
>.way abusing trolls might be more the preserve of mountain bikers than
>.any other (news)group.

>I never said that. YOU did.

You have been posting for years along the lines of "X from a typical
mountain biker"; you then follow this up in posts with assertions like
"we know that mountain bikers are dishonest", but you have not, as far
as I can tell, ever demonstrated that the behaviour you ascribe to
mountain bikers is correlated with mountain biking, rather than being
a general human behaviour.

You could take a court report of a black man stealing from a store and
say "black men are thieves". It would be just as "true", and just as
bigoted.

You can't knock mountain bikers for sending abusive emails to trolls
if you can't prove that other groups do not react the same way to
sustained trolling. The thing that separates a righteous campaign
from bigotry is relevant difference, and you have completely failed to
demonstrate it.

>.>BTW, look at his last sentence.

>.The one where he advises you that taking a nice long hike in the
>.wilderness,

>That's not what he said, liar.

He said: "I think it best you tried to meet your problems in a more
balanced and rational way. Hike into the wilderness and stay a long,
long time."

Seems a perfectly reasonable suggestion to me. You claim to love the
wilderness, and Ranger Grisak does too; he knows the restorative
powers of nature. You should try taking Ranger Grisak's suggestion to
heart. It worked for me when I had depression.

>.But unless you can prove that mountain bikers are more likely to
>.respond to persistent trolling with abuse than other groups, you have
>.failed to establish a relevant difference - which is a key factor
>.which distinguishes campaigning from bigotry. So: where is your
>.evidence that mountain bikers are more likely than any other group to
>.respond abusively to constant trolling?

>Irrelevant.

Not at all. You characterise supposed abuse (and in this case on a
rather tenuous definition, but I digress) as being typical of mountain
bikers. I suggest that it is typical of minority groups subjected to
bigotry, and of Usenet groups subjected to relentless trolling. If
you want to prove that mountain bikers are unusually prone to abuse
you can demonstrate it easily by trolling a recreational offroad
driving, motorcycling or horse-riding group in the same way you have
trolled the mountain bike groups. Keep it up with the same level of
dedication as you show here for a period of, say, three months, and if
the level of abuse [fsvo] from the other groups is lower then you will
have proved our point. Otherwise it is a baseless assertion amounting
to plain bigotry.

>.Either there is a relevant difference or you
>.are engaging in bigotry.

>Nope, just telling the truth.

But a carefully selected subset of the truth, and ignoring similar
truths about different groups, many of whom are arguably far worse.
So you are "telling the truth" about mountain bikers in the same way
the Klansman is "telling the truth" about black people. Bigotry, in
both cases.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound