More Fascinating Abusive Email from a Typical Mountain Biker

Discussion in 'Mountain Bikes' started by Mike Vandeman, Mar 14, 2004.

  1. I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    hate mail?

    Mike

    X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via
    web80301.mail.yahoo.com; Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:47:15 -0800 Return-
    Path: <[email protected]> Received: from mta1-
    ext.prodigy.net (EHLO mta1-int.prodigy.net) (207.115.63.55)
    by mta825.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    13:47:14 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [64.4.9.21] Received: from
    hotmail.com (law9-f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21]) by mta1-
    int.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
    i2ELlCKM426662 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    16:47:13 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by
    hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    13:47:11 -0800 Received: from 64.91.117.241 by
    lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    21:47:10 GMT X-Originating-IP: [64.91.117.241] X-Originating-
    Email: [[email protected]] X-Sender:
    [email protected] From: "Matt Winchel"
    <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject:
    are you crazy? Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 14:47:10 -0700 Mime-
    Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-ID:
    <[email protected]> X-
    OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2004 21:47:11.0211 (UTC)
    FILETIME=[E7BECBB0:01C40A0D]

    You sir, and your organization are at the very least
    overeducated ignoramuses. If you actually hiked (or God
    forbid biked) in the wilds you would see the world you are
    trying to protect much different light. Nature my dear boy
    is much more durable than you think! To even suggest that
    mountain bikers are destroying the wilds is quite ridiculos.
    Maybe at best (or worst) mountain biikes cause less than 1%
    of true destructive damage(hikers cause more by shear
    numbers) wildlife probably causes comparable damage, and if
    you take consider all the uses of our natural resources
    (recrerational, commerecial, etc.) mountain biking even at
    it most destrucive level is hardly worth noting. Erosion is
    just the movement of soil to one place to another, whether
    it is manmade or natural it is not forever, the topsoil does
    not dissapear it just gets moved, and may very well may move
    back. Anyhow I could go on and we could argue without end,
    one common ground is that we both love the wild and want to
    see it remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at
    time those compromises whether wrong or right must be
    accepted. I am afraid for you that mountain bikes are here
    to stay, and to suggest that we must ban them is silly and
    will only create more of a rift between us all. There are
    much larger and more dire fights to fight, this is not one
    of them. matt
    p.s. you should get out more.

    Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance to
    win $1000!
    ===
    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
     
    Tags:


  2. Michael Paul

    Michael Paul Guest

    about the same thing you hope to accomplish with all of
    your drivel

    "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    > hate mail?
    >
    > Mike
    >
    >
    > X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via
    > web80301.mail.yahoo.com; Sun, 14
    Mar
    > 2004 13:47:15 -0800 Return-Path: <[email protected]>
    > Received: from mta1-ext.prodigy.net (EHLO mta1-
    > int.prodigy.net)
    (207.115.63.55)
    > by mta825.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 13:47:14 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [64.4.9.21] Received:
    > from hotmail.com (law9-f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21])
    > by mta1-int.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
    > i2ELlCKM426662 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Mar
    > 2004 16:47:13 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service
    > by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 13:47:11 -0800 Received: from 64.91.117.241 by
    > lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 21:47:10 GMT X-Originating-IP: [64.91.117.241] X-Originating-
    > Email: [[email protected]] X-Sender:
    > [email protected] From: "Matt Winchel"
    > <[email protected]> To: [email protected]
    > Subject: are you crazy? Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 14:47:10
    > -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-
    > ID: <[email protected]> X-
    > OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2004 21:47:11.0211 (UTC)
    > FILETIME=[E7BECBB0:01C40A0D]
    >
    > You sir, and your organization are at the very least
    > overeducated
    ignoramuses.
    > If you actually hiked (or God forbid biked) in the wilds
    > you would see the
    world
    > you are trying to protect much different light. Nature my
    > dear boy is
    much more
    > durable than you think! To even suggest that mountain
    > bikers are
    destroying the
    > wilds is quite ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst)
    > mountain biikes cause
    less
    > than 1% of true destructive damage(hikers cause more by
    > shear numbers)
    wildlife
    > probably causes comparable damage, and if you take
    > consider all the uses
    of our
    > natural resources (recrerational, commerecial, etc.)
    > mountain biking even
    at it
    > most destrucive level is hardly worth noting. Erosion is
    > just the movement of soil to one place to another,
    whether it
    > is manmade or natural it is not forever, the topsoil does
    > not dissapear it
    just
    > gets moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow I
    > could go on and we
    could
    > argue without end, one common ground is that we both love
    > the wild and
    want to
    > see it remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at
    > time those
    compromises
    > whether wrong or right must be accepted. I am afraid for
    > you that
    mountain
    > bikes are here to stay, and to suggest that we must ban
    > them is silly and
    will
    > only create more of a rift between us all. There are much
    > larger and more
    dire
    > fights to fight, this is not one of them. matt
    > p.s. you should get out more.
    >
    >
    > Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance
    > to win $1000!
    > ===
    > 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
     
  3. Scott

    Scott Guest

    posting this just makes you look bad Mike.

    "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    > hate mail?
    >
    > Mike
    >
    >
    > X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via
    > web80301.mail.yahoo.com; Sun, 14
    Mar
    > 2004 13:47:15 -0800 Return-Path: <[email protected]>
    > Received: from mta1-ext.prodigy.net (EHLO mta1-
    > int.prodigy.net)
    (207.115.63.55)
    > by mta825.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 13:47:14 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [64.4.9.21] Received:
    > from hotmail.com (law9-f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21])
    > by mta1-int.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
    > i2ELlCKM426662 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Mar
    > 2004 16:47:13 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service
    > by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 13:47:11 -0800 Received: from 64.91.117.241 by
    > lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 21:47:10 GMT X-Originating-IP: [64.91.117.241] X-Originating-
    > Email: [[email protected]] X-Sender:
    > [email protected] From: "Matt Winchel"
    > <[email protected]> To: [email protected]
    > Subject: are you crazy? Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 14:47:10
    > -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-
    > ID: <[email protected]> X-
    > OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2004 21:47:11.0211 (UTC)
    > FILETIME=[E7BECBB0:01C40A0D]
    >
    > You sir, and your organization are at the very least
    > overeducated
    ignoramuses.
    > If you actually hiked (or God forbid biked) in the wilds
    > you would see the
    world
    > you are trying to protect much different light. Nature my
    > dear boy is
    much more
    > durable than you think! To even suggest that mountain
    > bikers are
    destroying the
    > wilds is quite ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst)
    > mountain biikes cause
    less
    > than 1% of true destructive damage(hikers cause more by
    > shear numbers)
    wildlife
    > probably causes comparable damage, and if you take
    > consider all the uses
    of our
    > natural resources (recrerational, commerecial, etc.)
    > mountain biking even
    at it
    > most destrucive level is hardly worth noting. Erosion is
    > just the movement of soil to one place to another,
    whether it
    > is manmade or natural it is not forever, the topsoil does
    > not dissapear it
    just
    > gets moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow I
    > could go on and we
    could
    > argue without end, one common ground is that we both love
    > the wild and
    want to
    > see it remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at
    > time those
    compromises
    > whether wrong or right must be accepted. I am afraid for
    > you that
    mountain
    > bikes are here to stay, and to suggest that we must ban
    > them is silly and
    will
    > only create more of a rift between us all. There are much
    > larger and more
    dire
    > fights to fight, this is not one of them. matt
    > p.s. you should get out more.
    >
    >
    > Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance
    > to win $1000!
    > ===
    > 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
     
  4. On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:32:18 GMT, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

    .posting this just makes you look bad Mike.

    The best way to deal with abusive email is to post it for
    the whold world to see. If they have no shame, at least it
    will sucker someone like you. One is born every minute....

    ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    .news:[email protected]... .> I
    wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending hate
    mail? .> .> Mike .> .> .> X-Apparently-To:
    [email protected] via web80301.mail.yahoo.com; Sun, 14
    .Mar .> 2004 13:47:15 -0800 .> Return-Path:
    <[email protected]> .> Received: from mta1-
    ext.prodigy.net (EHLO mta1-int.prodigy.net) .(207.115.63.55)
    .> by mta825.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    13:47:14 -0800 .> X-Originating-IP: [64.4.9.21] .> Received:
    from hotmail.com (law9-f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21]) .>
    by mta1-int.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
    i2ELlCKM426662 .> for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Mar
    2004 16:47:13 -0500 .> Received: from mail pickup service by
    hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; .> Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    13:47:11 -0800 .> Received: from 64.91.117.241 by
    lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; .> Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    21:47:10 GMT .> X-Originating-IP: [64.91.117.241] .> X-Originating-
    Email: [[email protected]] .> X-Sender:
    [email protected] .> From: "Matt Winchel"
    <[email protected]> .> To: [email protected] .>
    Subject: are you crazy? .> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 14:47:10
    -0700 .> Mime-Version: 1.0 .> Content-Type: text/html .> Message-
    ID: <[email protected]> .> X-
    OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2004 21:47:11.0211 (UTC) .>
    FILETIME=[E7BECBB0:01C40A0D] .> .> You sir, and your
    organization are at the very least overeducated
    .ignoramuses. .> If you actually hiked (or God forbid biked)
    in the wilds you would see the .world .> you are trying to
    protect much different light. Nature my dear boy is .much
    more .> durable than you think! To even suggest that
    mountain bikers are .destroying the .> wilds is quite
    ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst) mountain biikes cause
    .less .> than 1% of true destructive damage(hikers cause
    more by shear numbers) .wildlife .> probably causes
    comparable damage, and if you take consider all the uses .of
    our .> natural resources (recrerational, commerecial, etc.)
    mountain biking even .at it .> most destrucive level is
    hardly worth noting. .> Erosion is just the movement of soil
    to one place to another, .whether it .> is manmade or
    natural it is not forever, the topsoil does not dissapear it
    .just .> gets moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow
    I could go on and we .could .> argue without end, one common
    ground is that we both love the wild and .want to .> see it
    remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at time
    those .compromises .> whether wrong or right must be
    accepted. I am afraid for you that .mountain .> bikes are
    here to stay, and to suggest that we must ban them is silly
    and .will .> only create more of a rift between us all.
    There are much larger and more .dire .> fights to fight,
    this is not one of them. .> matt .> p.s. you should get out
    more. .> .> .> Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter
    for a chance to win $1000! .> === .> 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
     
  5. Scott

    Scott Guest

    "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:32:18 GMT, "Scott"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > .posting this just makes you look bad Mike.
    >
    > The best way to deal with abusive email is to post it for
    > the whold world
    to
    > see. If they have no shame, at least it will sucker
    > someone like you. One
    is
    > born every minute....

    Actually I am a newbie and I was on your side. I just
    googled you bro and you don't make any sense and I have
    fought many of the same fight you have. You a nut!

    Killfile for you.
     
  6. "post it for the world to see"... I seem to recall the "Mike
    Vandeman FAQ" which did just that. Posted your nonsense in a
    central location for the world to see. Your name-calling,
    your finger-pointing and hacked up "scientific" data. The
    FAQ was an actual representation of your trolling, baiting
    and ng tactics. It showed your typical posts, reposts and
    shallow arguments from this forum. Then you threatened to
    sue the man for doing exactly what you just did. Posting for
    the world to see. And all he had was actual, unaltered posts
    from a public forum displayed and categorized so people
    would be able to see which arguments have already been
    posted and reposted. So Mr. Doublestandard rises to the
    occasion again... What a surprise!

    Mike Vandeman wrote:

    > On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:32:18 GMT, "Scott"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > .posting this just makes you look bad Mike.
    >
    > The best way to deal with abusive email is to post it for
    > the whold world to see. If they have no shame, at least it
    > will sucker someone like you. One is born every minute....
    >
    > ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > .news:[email protected]... .> I
    > wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    > hate mail? .> .> Mike .> .> .> X-Apparently-To:
    > [email protected] via web80301.mail.yahoo.com; Sun, 14
    > .Mar .> 2004 13:47:15 -0800 .> Return-Path:
    > <[email protected]> .> Received: from mta1-
    > ext.prodigy.net (EHLO mta1-int.prodigy.net)
    > .(207.115.63.55) .> by mta825.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with
    > SMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:47:14 -0800 .> X-Originating-
    > IP: [64.4.9.21] .> Received: from hotmail.com (law9-
    > f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21]) .> by mta1-
    > int.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
    > i2ELlCKM426662 .> for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Mar
    > 2004 16:47:13 -0500 .> Received: from mail pickup service
    > by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; .> Sun, 14 Mar
    > 2004 13:47:11 -0800 .> Received: from 64.91.117.241 by
    > lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; .> Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 21:47:10 GMT .> X-Originating-IP: [64.91.117.241] .> X-Originating-
    > Email: [[email protected]] .> X-Sender:
    > [email protected] .> From: "Matt Winchel"
    > <[email protected]> .> To: [email protected] .>
    > Subject: are you crazy? .> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 14:47:10 -0700 .> Mime-Version: 1.0 .> Content-Type:
    > text/html .> Message-ID:
    > <[email protected]> .> X-
    > OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2004 21:47:11.0211 (UTC) .>
    > FILETIME=[E7BECBB0:01C40A0D] .> .> You sir, and your
    > organization are at the very least overeducated
    > .ignoramuses. .> If you actually hiked (or God forbid
    > biked) in the wilds you would see the .world .> you are
    > trying to protect much different light. Nature my dear
    > boy is .much more .> durable than you think! To even
    > suggest that mountain bikers are .destroying the .> wilds
    > is quite ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst) mountain
    > biikes cause .less .> than 1% of true destructive
    > damage(hikers cause more by shear numbers) .wildlife .>
    > probably causes comparable damage, and if you take
    > consider all the uses .of our .> natural resources
    > (recrerational, commerecial, etc.) mountain biking even
    > .at it .> most destrucive level is hardly worth noting.
    > .> Erosion is just the movement of soil to one place to
    > another, .whether it .> is manmade or natural it is not
    > forever, the topsoil does not dissapear it .just .> gets
    > moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow I could go
    > on and we .could .> argue without end, one common ground
    > is that we both love the wild and .want to .> see it
    > remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at time
    > those .compromises .> whether wrong or right must be
    > accepted. I am afraid for you that .mountain .> bikes are
    > here to stay, and to suggest that we must ban them is
    > silly and .will .> only create more of a rift between us
    > all. There are much larger and more .dire .> fights to
    > fight, this is not one of them. .> matt .> p.s. you
    > should get out more. .> .> .> Create a Job Alert on MSN
    > Careers and enter for a chance to win $1000! .> === .> 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
     
  7. Eric Gisin

    Eric Gisin Guest

    There is nothing hateful in the message, just a dose
    of reality.

    You and Vendicar are obvious mental cases, doesn't you
    psychiatrist tell you this?

    "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    > hate mail?
    >
    > From: "Matt Winchel" <[email protected]> To:
    > [email protected] Subject: are you crazy?
    >
    > You sir, and your organization are at the very least
    > overeducated
    ignoramuses.
    > If you actually hiked (or God forbid biked) in the wilds
    > you would see the
    world
    > you are trying to protect much different light. Nature my
    > dear boy is much
    more
    > durable than you think! To even suggest that mountain
    > bikers are destroying
    the
    > wilds is quite ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst)
    > mountain biikes cause
    less
    > than 1% of true destructive damage(hikers cause more by
    > shear numbers)
    wildlife
    > probably causes comparable damage, and if you take
    > consider all the uses of
    our
    > natural resources (recrerational, commerecial, etc.)
    > mountain biking even at
    it
    > most destrucive level is hardly worth noting. Erosion is
    > just the movement of soil to one place to another, whether
    it
    > is manmade or natural it is not forever, the topsoil does
    > not dissapear it
    just
    > gets moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow I
    > could go on and we
    could
    > argue without end, one common ground is that we both love
    > the wild and want
    to
    > see it remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at
    > time those
    compromises
    > whether wrong or right must be accepted. I am afraid for
    > you that mountain bikes are here to stay, and to suggest
    > that we must ban them is silly and
    will
    > only create more of a rift between us all. There are much
    > larger and more
    dire
    > fights to fight, this is not one of them. matt
    > p.s. you should get out more.
     
  8. Dear Mr. Vandeman, Why in Hell can't you trim the excess
    bullshit from your posts? First of all, your posts are inane
    at best, and second, there are several inches of header data
    that has nothing at all to do with anything.

    Let me suggest that you post in plain text so that you see
    what you hapless audience must endure.

    You know, for a PhD, you are one stupid son of a bitch.
    The problem I have is that my statement makes bitches
    look bad ...

    "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    > hate mail?
    >
    > Mike
    >
    >
    > X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via
    > web80301.mail.yahoo.com; Sun, 14
    Mar
    > 2004 13:47:15 -0800 Return-Path: <[email protected]>
    > Received: from mta1-ext.prodigy.net (EHLO mta1-
    > int.prodigy.net)
    (207.115.63.55)
    > by mta825.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 13:47:14 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [64.4.9.21] Received:
    > from hotmail.com (law9-f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21])
    > by mta1-int.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
    > i2ELlCKM426662 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Mar
    > 2004 16:47:13 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service
    > by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 13:47:11 -0800 Received: from 64.91.117.241 by
    > lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    > 21:47:10 GMT X-Originating-IP: [64.91.117.241] X-Originating-
    > Email: [[email protected]] X-Sender:
    > [email protected] From: "Matt Winchel"
    > <[email protected]> To: [email protected]
    > Subject: are you crazy? Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 14:47:10
    > -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-
    > ID: <[email protected]> X-
    > OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2004 21:47:11.0211 (UTC)
    > FILETIME=[E7BECBB0:01C40A0D]
    >
    > You sir, and your organization are at the very least
    > overeducated
    ignoramuses.
    > If you actually hiked (or God forbid biked) in the wilds
    > you would see the
    world
    > you are trying to protect much different light. Nature my
    > dear boy is
    much more
    > durable than you think! To even suggest that mountain
    > bikers are
    destroying the
    > wilds is quite ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst)
    > mountain biikes cause
    less
    > than 1% of true destructive damage(hikers cause more by
    > shear numbers)
    wildlife
    > probably causes comparable damage, and if you take
    > consider all the uses
    of our
    > natural resources (recrerational, commerecial, etc.)
    > mountain biking even
    at it
    > most destrucive level is hardly worth noting. Erosion is
    > just the movement of soil to one place to another,
    whether it
    > is manmade or natural it is not forever, the topsoil does
    > not dissapear it
    just
    > gets moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow I
    > could go on and we
    could
    > argue without end, one common ground is that we both love
    > the wild and
    want to
    > see it remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at
    > time those
    compromises
    > whether wrong or right must be accepted. I am afraid for
    > you that
    mountain
    > bikes are here to stay, and to suggest that we must ban
    > them is silly and
    will
    > only create more of a rift between us all. There are much
    > larger and more
    dire
    > fights to fight, this is not one of them. matt
    > p.s. you should get out more.
    >
    >
    > Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance
    > to win $1000!
    > ===
    > 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
     
  9. <trimming usless header data>

    > You sir, and your organization are at the very least
    > overeducated
    ignoramuses.

    Well said. What is the complaint here. It is factual, and
    was said with brevity.

    > If you actually hiked (or God forbid biked) in the wilds
    > you would see the
    world
    > you are trying to protect much different light. Nature my
    > dear boy is
    much more
    > durable than you think! To even suggest that mountain
    > bikers are
    destroying the
    > wilds is quite ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst)
    > mountain biikes cause
    less
    > than 1% of true destructive damage(hikers cause more by
    > shear numbers)
    wildlife
    > probably causes comparable damage, and if you take
    > consider all the uses
    of our
    > natural resources (recrerational, commerecial, etc.)
    > mountain biking even
    at it
    > most destrucive level is hardly worth noting.

    If 100% of ALL ROUTES was a complete and utter environmental
    wasteland, the impact to the rest of the environment would
    be in the range of 0.0004% of environment of places where
    there are routes. The destruction is considerably less than
    1%, and quite likely less than the animals themselves would
    cause in any given area.

    > Erosion is just the movement of soil to one place to
    > another,
    whether it
    > is manmade or natural it is not forever, the topsoil does
    > not dissapear it
    just
    > gets moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow I
    > could go on and we
    could
    > argue without end, one common ground is that we both love
    > the wild and
    want to
    > see it remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at
    > time those
    compromises
    > whether wrong or right must be accepted. I am afraid for
    > you that
    mountain
    > bikes are here to stay, and to suggest that we must ban
    > them is silly and
    will
    > only create more of a rift between us all. There are much
    > larger and more
    dire
    > fights to fight, this is not one of them. matt
    > p.s. you should get out more.
    >

    Aint that the truth!

    I don't detect any abuse here at all. I also see no
    particular evidence that the author is a mountain biker. I
    happen to agree with his main point, and I am not a mountain
    biker. This topic could have been posted by my brother, and
    I know for a fact that he has no bikes.

    If you can't stand the heat, perhaps the kitchen is not the
    place for you to be standing.
     
  10. On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 15:01:27 -0800, "Eric Gisin" <[email protected]> wrote:

    .There is nothing hateful in the message, just a dose
    of reality.

    Oh, yeah?: "You sir, and your organization are at the very
    least overeducated ignoramuses."

    .You and Vendicar are obvious mental cases, doesn't you
    psychiatrist tell you .this? . ."Mike Vandeman"
    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    .news:[email protected]... .> I
    wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending hate
    mail? .> .> From: "Matt Winchel" <[email protected]>
    .> To: [email protected] .> Subject: are you crazy? .> .>
    You sir, and your organization are at the very least
    overeducated .ignoramuses. .> If you actually hiked (or God
    forbid biked) in the wilds you would see the .world .> you
    are trying to protect much different light. Nature my dear
    boy is much .more .> durable than you think! To even
    suggest that mountain bikers are destroying .the .> wilds
    is quite ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst) mountain
    biikes cause .less .> than 1% of true destructive
    damage(hikers cause more by shear numbers) .wildlife .>
    probably causes comparable damage, and if you take consider
    all the uses of .our .> natural resources (recrerational,
    commerecial, etc.) mountain biking even at .it .> most
    destrucive level is hardly worth noting. .> Erosion is just
    the movement of soil to one place to another, whether .it
    .> is manmade or natural it is not forever, the topsoil
    does not dissapear it .just .> gets moved, and may very
    well may move back. Anyhow I could go on and we .could .>
    argue without end, one common ground is that we both love
    the wild and want .to .> see it remain heatlthy, but we all
    must compromise and at time those .compromises .> whether
    wrong or right must be accepted. I am afraid for you that
    mountain .> bikes are here to stay, and to suggest that we
    must ban them is silly and .will .> only create more of a
    rift between us all. There are much larger and more .dire
    .> fights to fight, this is not one of them. .> matt .>
    p.s. you should get out more. .>

    ===
    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
     
  11. On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 02:54:31 GMT, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:

    ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    .news:[email protected]... .> On
    Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:32:18 GMT, "Scott" <[email protected]>
    wrote: .> .> .posting this just makes you look bad Mike. .>
    .> The best way to deal with abusive email is to post it for
    the whold world .to .> see. If they have no shame, at least
    it will sucker someone like you. One .is .> born every
    minute.... . .Actually I am a newbie and I was on your side.
    I just googled you bro and .you don't make any sense and I
    have fought many of the same fight you have.

    Really? Google doesn't show that. It shows that you are a
    typical mountain biker.

    ===
    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
     
  12. On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:44:23 -0500, Steve Curtiss <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    ."post it for the world to see"... I seem to recall the
    "Mike Vandeman FAQ" which .did just that. Posted your
    nonsense in a central location for the world to see. .Your
    name-calling, your finger-pointing and hacked up
    "scientific" data. The FAQ .was an actual representation of
    your trolling, baiting and ng tactics. It showed .your
    typical posts, reposts and shallow arguments from this
    forum. .Then you threatened to sue the man for doing exactly
    what you just did. Posting .for the world to see. And all he
    had was actual, unaltered posts from a public .forum
    displayed and categorized so people would be able to see
    which arguments .have already been posted and reposted.

    Quite different. I just posted verbatim. He posted lies.

    .So Mr. Doublestandard rises to the occasion again... What a
    surprise! . . .Mike Vandeman wrote: . .> On Mon, 15 Mar 2004
    23:32:18 GMT, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote: .> .>
    .posting this just makes you look bad Mike. .> .> The best
    way to deal with abusive email is to post it for the whold
    world to .> see. If they have no shame, at least it will
    sucker someone like you. One is .> born every minute.... .>
    .> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    .> .news:[email protected]... .> .>
    I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    hate mail? .> .> .> .> Mike .> .> .> .> .> .> X-Apparently-
    To: [email protected] via web80301.mail.yahoo.com; Sun, 14
    .> .Mar .> .> 2004 13:47:15 -0800 .> .> Return-Path:
    <[email protected]> .> .> Received: from mta1-
    ext.prodigy.net (EHLO mta1-int.prodigy.net) .>
    .(207.115.63.55) .> .> by mta825.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with
    SMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:47:14 -0800 .> .> X-Originating-
    IP: [64.4.9.21] .> .> Received: from hotmail.com (law9-
    f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21]) .> .> by mta1-
    int.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
    i2ELlCKM426662 .> .> for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Mar
    2004 16:47:13 -0500 .> .> Received: from mail pickup service
    by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; .> .> Sun, 14 Mar
    2004 13:47:11 -0800 .> .> Received: from 64.91.117.241 by
    lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; .> .> Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    21:47:10 GMT .> .> X-Originating-IP: [64.91.117.241] .> .>
    X-Originating-Email: [[email protected]] .> .> X-
    Sender: [email protected] .> .> From: "Matt Winchel"
    <[email protected]> .> .> To: [email protected] .> .>
    Subject: are you crazy? .> .> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    14:47:10 -0700 .> .> Mime-Version: 1.0 .> .> Content-Type:
    text/html .> .> Message-ID:
    <[email protected]> .> .> X-
    OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2004 21:47:11.0211 (UTC) .> .>
    FILETIME=[E7BECBB0:01C40A0D] .> .> .> .> You sir, and your
    organization are at the very least overeducated .>
    .ignoramuses. .> .> If you actually hiked (or God forbid
    biked) in the wilds you would see the .> .world .> .> you
    are trying to protect much different light. Nature my dear
    boy is .> .much more .> .> durable than you think! To even
    suggest that mountain bikers are .> .destroying the .> .>
    wilds is quite ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst) mountain
    biikes cause .> .less .> .> than 1% of true destructive
    damage(hikers cause more by shear numbers) .> .wildlife .>
    .> probably causes comparable damage, and if you take
    consider all the uses .> .of our .> .> natural resources
    (recrerational, commerecial, etc.) mountain biking even .>
    .at it .> .> most destrucive level is hardly worth noting.
    .> .> Erosion is just the movement of soil to one place to
    another, .> .whether it .> .> is manmade or natural it is
    not forever, the topsoil does not dissapear it .> .just .>
    .> gets moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow I
    could go on and we .> .could .> .> argue without end, one
    common ground is that we both love the wild and .> .want to
    .> .> see it remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and
    at time those .> .compromises .> .> whether wrong or right
    must be accepted. I am afraid for you that .> .mountain .>
    .> bikes are here to stay, and to suggest that we must ban
    them is silly and .> .will .> .> only create more of a rift
    between us all. There are much larger and more .> .dire .>
    .> fights to fight, this is not one of them. .> .> matt .>
    .> p.s. you should get out more. .> .> .> .> .> .> Create a
    Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance to win
    $1000! .> .> === .> .> 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
     
  13. On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:46:17 -0800, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    .Dear Mr. Vandeman, .Why in Hell can't you trim the excess
    bullshit from your posts? First of .all, your posts are
    inane at best, and second, there are several inches of
    .header data that has nothing at all to do with anything.

    So, naturally, being the hypocrite that you are, you
    REPOSTED all the same stuff you just complained about ME
    posting! :) Idiot.

    .Let me suggest that you post in plain text so that you see
    what you hapless .audience must endure. . .You know, for a
    PhD, you are one stupid son of a bitch. The problem I have
    .is that my statement makes bitches look bad ... . . .
    ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    .news:2rfa50pffahe9sulbr6d2[email protected]... .> I
    wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending hate
    mail? .> .> Mike .> .> .> X-Apparently-To:
    [email protected] via web80301.mail.yahoo.com; Sun, 14
    .Mar .> 2004 13:47:15 -0800 .> Return-Path:
    <[email protected]> .> Received: from mta1-
    ext.prodigy.net (EHLO mta1-int.prodigy.net) .(207.115.63.55)
    .> by mta825.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    13:47:14 -0800 .> X-Originating-IP: [64.4.9.21] .> Received:
    from hotmail.com (law9-f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21]) .>
    by mta1-int.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
    i2ELlCKM426662 .> for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Mar
    2004 16:47:13 -0500 .> Received: from mail pickup service by
    hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; .> Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    13:47:11 -0800 .> Received: from 64.91.117.241 by
    lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; .> Sun, 14 Mar 2004
    21:47:10 GMT .> X-Originating-IP: [64.91.117.241] .> X-Originating-
    Email: [[email protected]] .> X-Sender:
    [email protected] .> From: "Matt Winchel"
    <[email protected]> .> To: [email protected] .>
    Subject: are you crazy? .> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 14:47:10
    -0700 .> Mime-Version: 1.0 .> Content-Type: text/html .> Message-
    ID: <[email protected]> .> X-
    OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2004 21:47:11.0211 (UTC) .>
    FILETIME=[E7BECBB0:01C40A0D] .> .> You sir, and your
    organization are at the very least overeducated
    .ignoramuses. .> If you actually hiked (or God forbid biked)
    in the wilds you would see the .world .> you are trying to
    protect much different light. Nature my dear boy is .much
    more .> durable than you think! To even suggest that
    mountain bikers are .destroying the .> wilds is quite
    ridiculos. Maybe at best (or worst) mountain biikes cause
    .less .> than 1% of true destructive damage(hikers cause
    more by shear numbers) .wildlife .> probably causes
    comparable damage, and if you take consider all the uses .of
    our .> natural resources (recrerational, commerecial, etc.)
    mountain biking even .at it .> most destrucive level is
    hardly worth noting. .> Erosion is just the movement of soil
    to one place to another, .whether it .> is manmade or
    natural it is not forever, the topsoil does not dissapear it
    .just .> gets moved, and may very well may move back. Anyhow
    I could go on and we .could .> argue without end, one common
    ground is that we both love the wild and .want to .> see it
    remain heatlthy, but we all must compromise and at time
    those .compromises .> whether wrong or right must be
    accepted. I am afraid for you that .mountain .> bikes are
    here to stay, and to suggest that we must ban them is silly
    and .will .> only create more of a rift between us all.
    There are much larger and more .dire .> fights to fight,
    this is not one of them. .> matt .> p.s. you should get out
    more. .> .> .> Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter
    for a chance to win $1000! .> === .> 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
     
  14. S Curtiss

    S Curtiss Guest

    MV:"Quite different. I just posted verbatim. He posted lies."

    RE: The now gone MV FAQ

    He posted lies? They were copies of your posts! How can
    showing ng threads of your arguments and "facts" be lies...
    unless, of course, they were lies to begin with?

    "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:p[email protected]...
    > On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:44:23 -0500, Steve Curtiss
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > ."post it for the world to see"... I seem to recall the
    > "Mike Vandeman
    FAQ" which
    > .did just that. Posted your nonsense in a central location
    > for the world
    to see.
    > .Your name-calling, your finger-pointing and hacked up
    > "scientific" data.
    The FAQ
    > .was an actual representation of your trolling, baiting
    > and ng tactics. It
    showed
    > .your typical posts, reposts and shallow arguments from
    > this forum. .Then you threatened to sue the man for doing
    > exactly what you just did.
    Posting
    > .for the world to see. And all he had was actual,
    > unaltered posts from a
    public
    > .forum displayed and categorized so people would be able
    > to see which
    arguments
    > .have already been posted and reposted.
    >
    > Quite different. I just posted verbatim. He posted lies.
    >
    > .So Mr. Doublestandard rises to the occasion again... What
    > a surprise! . . .Mike Vandeman wrote: . .> On Mon, 15 Mar
    > 2004 23:32:18 GMT, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote: .> .>
    > .posting this just makes you look bad Mike. .> .> The best
    > way to deal with abusive email is to post it for the whold
    world to
    > .> see. If they have no shame, at least it will sucker
    > someone like you.
    One is
    > .> born every minute.... .> .> ."Mike Vandeman"
    > <[email protected]> wrote in message .>
    > .news:[email protected]... .> .>
    > I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    > hate mail? .> .>
    (clipped)
     
  15. S Curtiss

    S Curtiss Guest

    <[email protected]> wrote:
    > .> .> .posting this just makes you look bad Mike. .> .>
    > The best way to deal with abusive email is to post it for
    > the whold
    world
    > .to .> see. If they have no shame, at least it will sucker
    > someone like you.
    One
    > .is .> born every minute.... . .Actually I am a newbie and
    > I was on your side. I just googled you bro
    and
    > .you don't make any sense and I have fought many of the
    > same fight you
    have.
    >
    > Really? Google doesn't show that. It shows that you are a
    > typical mountain biker.
    >
    So, disagreeing with you automatically makes someone a Mt
    Biker? What kind of logic is that? This thing is cross-
    posted over several different groups. Does agreeing with you
    automatically make someone an idiot? MV is a hiker. All
    hikers are not MV. Thank God!
     
  16. On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 17:07:42 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote:

    .MV:"Quite different. I just posted verbatim. He posted
    lies." . .RE: The now gone MV FAQ . .He posted lies? They
    were copies of your posts!

    As well as "editorial comments".

    .How can showing ng threads of your arguments and "facts" be
    lies... unless, .of course, they were lies to begin with? .
    . . ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    .news:p[email protected]... .> On
    Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:44:23 -0500, Steve Curtiss
    <[email protected]> .> wrote: .> .> ."post it for the
    world to see"... I seem to recall the "Mike Vandeman .FAQ"
    which .> .did just that. Posted your nonsense in a central
    location for the world .to see. .> .Your name-calling, your
    finger-pointing and hacked up "scientific" data. .The FAQ .>
    .was an actual representation of your trolling, baiting and
    ng tactics. It .showed .> .your typical posts, reposts and
    shallow arguments from this forum. .> .Then you threatened
    to sue the man for doing exactly what you just did. .Posting
    .> .for the world to see. And all he had was actual,
    unaltered posts from a .public .> .forum displayed and
    categorized so people would be able to see which .arguments
    .> .have already been posted and reposted. .> .> Quite
    different. I just posted verbatim. He posted lies. .> .> .So
    Mr. Doublestandard rises to the occasion again... What a
    surprise! .> . .> . .> .Mike Vandeman wrote: .> . .> .> On
    Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:32:18 GMT, "Scott" <[email protected]>
    wrote: .> .> .> .> .posting this just makes you look bad
    Mike. .> .> .> .> The best way to deal with abusive email is
    to post it for the whold .world to .> .> see. If they have
    no shame, at least it will sucker someone like you. .One is
    .> .> born every minute.... .> .> .> .> ."Mike Vandeman"
    <[email protected]> wrote in message .> .>
    .news:[email protected]... .> .> .>
    I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
    hate mail? .> .> .> .(clipped) .

    ===
    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
     
  17. On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 17:30:16 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote:

    . .<[email protected]> wrote: .> .> .> .> .posting this just
    makes you look bad Mike. .> .> .> .> The best way to deal
    with abusive email is to post it for the whold .world .> .to
    .> .> see. If they have no shame, at least it will sucker
    someone like you. .One .> .is .> .> born every minute.... .>
    . .> .Actually I am a newbie and I was on your side. I just
    googled you bro .and .> .you don't make any sense and I have
    fought many of the same fight you .have. .> .> Really?
    Google doesn't show that. It shows that you are a typical
    mountain .> biker. .> .So, disagreeing with you
    automatically makes someone a Mt Biker? What kind .of logic
    is that? This thing is cross-posted over several different
    groups. .Does agreeing with you automatically make someone
    an idiot? .MV is a hiker. All hikers are not MV. Thank God!

    Do you own a mountain bike?
    ===
    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
     
  18. Like your "editorial comments" that all mt bikers are liars.
    That only hikers enjoy the outdoors. That anyone who
    disagrees with your philosophy (make no mistake, it is a
    philosophy) is either stupid or ignorant. Your posts are
    nothing but "editorial comments". How is your posting of an
    opinion in a free speech environment any better than anyone
    else? You have always had a double standard. Your posts are
    gospel, while disagreeing posts are sacrilege. You are
    myopic to any other view and the nly person who is being
    fooled is you.

    Mike Vandeman wrote:

    > On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 17:07:42 -0500, "S Curtiss"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > .MV:"Quite different. I just posted verbatim. He posted
    > lies." . .RE: The now gone MV FAQ . .He posted lies? They
    > were copies of your posts!
    >
    > As well as "editorial comments".
    >
    > .How can showing ng threads of your arguments and "facts"
    > be lies... unless, .of course, they were lies to begin
    > with? . . . ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote
    > in message
    > .news:p[email protected]... .> On
    > Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:44:23 -0500, Steve Curtiss
    > <[email protected]> .> wrote: .> .> ."post it for the
    > world to see"... I seem to recall the "Mike Vandeman .FAQ"
    > which .> .did just that. Posted your nonsense in a central
    > location for the world .to see. .> .Your name-calling,
    > your finger-pointing and hacked up "scientific" data. .The
    > FAQ .> .was an actual representation of your trolling,
    > baiting and ng tactics. It .showed .> .your typical posts,
    > reposts and shallow arguments from this forum. .> .Then
    > you threatened to sue the man for doing exactly what you
    > just did. .Posting .> .for the world to see. And all he
    > had was actual, unaltered posts from a .public .> .forum
    > displayed and categorized so people would be able to see
    > which .arguments .> .have already been posted and
    > reposted. .> .> Quite different. I just posted verbatim.
    > He posted lies. .> .> .So Mr. Doublestandard rises to the
    > occasion again... What a surprise! .> . .> . .> .Mike
    > Vandeman wrote: .> . .> .> On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:32:18
    > GMT, "Scott" <[email protected]> wrote: .> .> .> .> .posting
    > this just makes you look bad Mike. .> .> .> .> The best
    > way to deal with abusive email is to post it for the whold
    > .world to .> .> see. If they have no shame, at least it
    > will sucker someone like you. .One is .> .> born every
    > minute.... .> .> .> .> ."Mike Vandeman"
    > <[email protected]> wrote in message .> .>
    > .news:[email protected]... .> .>
    > .> I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by
    > sending hate mail? .> .> .> .(clipped) .
    >
    > ===
    > 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
     
  19. S Curtiss

    S Curtiss Guest

    "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    > .Dear Mr. Vandeman, .Why in Hell can't you trim the excess
    > bullshit from your posts? First of .all, your posts are
    > inane at best, and second, there are several inches
    of
    > .header data that has nothing at all to do with anything.
    >
    > So, naturally, being the hypocrite that you are, you
    > REPOSTED all the same
    stuff
    > you just complained about ME posting! :) Idiot.
    >
    Wow.. hateful and abusive. That double standard again...
     
  20. S Curtiss

    S Curtiss Guest

    "Eric Gisin" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > .There is nothing hateful in the message, just a dose of
    > reality.
    >
    > Oh, yeah?: "You sir, and your organization are at the
    > very least
    overeducated
    > ignoramuses."
    >
    (clipped)

    Sounds like the same kind of language you (MV) use to
    describe anyone who disagrees with you. That double standard
    hangs around your neck like a disemboweled whipsnake...
    Examples of terms used to describe Mt Bikers by MV:(idiot,
    liar, illiterate, criminal, duh, stupid, crazy) But it's not
    hate-speach when MV does it, is it?
     
Loading...
Loading...