Are the Gods with Lance?

BrianW said:

http://www.letour.fr/2005/TDF/LIVE/us/400/index.html

Brian

please precede any posts as to TdF stage results with Spoiler in the
title and no clues as to the outcome thanks ;-)

Quoted message said:

please precede any posts as to TdF stage results with Spoiler in the
title and no clues as to the outcome thanks ;-)

oh come on. any cycling fan is gonna be watching the TdF. and know what
happened already...

Quoted message said:

oh come on. any cycling fan is gonna be watching the TdF. and know what
happened already...

And it's just as easy to not read any TdF related posts until they are 24
hours
old and no longer a spoiler if one has updated one's knowledge by other
means.

crofter said:

Quoted message said:

please precede any posts as to TdF stage results with Spoiler in the
title and no clues as to the outcome thanks ;-)

oh come on. any cycling fan is gonna be watching the TdF. and know what
happened already...

not at all, many of us will be watching the itv2 highlights in the
evening (or watching them recorded at some ungodly hour or even the
next day if working nights)
the urc convention is not to put any hints as to stage results in the
title of posts, please respect this.

vernon said:

Quoted message said:

oh come on. any cycling fan is gonna be watching the TdF. and know
what happened already...

And it's just as easy to not read any TdF related posts until they
are 24 hours
old and no longer a spoiler if one has updated one's knowledge by
other means.

Except in a newsgroup the subject is there for all to see. The subject in
this case is a bit of a giveaway.

Quoted message said:

Except in a newsgroup the subject is there for all to see. The subject in
this case is a bit of a giveaway.

Not necessarily. The pessimists amongst us could interpret it as: are the
gods deserting Lance?

vernon said:

Quoted message said:

Except in a newsgroup the subject is there for all to see. The
subject in this case is a bit of a giveaway.

Not necessarily. The pessimists amongst us could interpret it as:
are the gods deserting Lance?

Yes Vernon. Good point.

<rollseyes>

Can we please keep to the 'Spoiler:' convention all the same, eh?

Simonb said:

vernon said:

Quoted message said:

Except in a newsgroup the subject is there for all to see. The
subject in this case is a bit of a giveaway.

Not necessarily. The pessimists amongst us could interpret it as:
are the gods deserting Lance?

Yes Vernon. Good point.

<rollseyes>

BTW does <rollseyes> /;rimshot etc. appear as some sort of icon in
another dimension of Usenet? all I ever see is the text.

"crofter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

please precede any posts as to TdF stage results with Spoiler in the
title and no clues as to the outcome thanks ;-)

oh come on. any cycling fan is gonna be watching the TdF. and know what
happened already...

Actually, no, it isn't so obvious. Many of us record the programs for later
viewing, and yet still want to come on here to see the latest posts.

in message <[email hidden]>,

MartinM (') said:

Simonb said:

vernon said:

> Except in a newsgroup the subject is there for all to see. The
> subject in this case is a bit of a giveaway.
>
Not necessarily. The pessimists amongst us could interpret it as:
are the gods deserting Lance?

Yes Vernon. Good point.

<rollseyes>

BTW does <rollseyes> /;rimshot etc. appear as some sort of icon in
another dimension of Usenet? all I ever see is the text.

Hint for the clueless: it's a TEXT MEDIUM.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Due to financial constraints, the light at the end of the tunnel
has been switched off.

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,
MartinM ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

BTW does <rollseyes> /;rimshot etc. appear as some sort of icon
in another dimension of Usenet? all I ever see is the text.

Hint for the clueless: it's a TEXT MEDIUM.

Cyclingforums (for example) has a number of graphical emoticons you can
sprinkle throughout your postings. The version that goes out to Usenet
has a text "equivalent" for each of these such as <rolleyes>. I find
these often give the wrong impression. When contradicting someone
else's point the graphical rolling eyes looks reasonable sweet and
innocent, but the text <rolleyes> seems somehow deliberately insulting.

--
Dave...

dkahn400 said:

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,
MartinM ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

BTW does <rollseyes> /;rimshot etc. appear as some sort of icon
in another dimension of Usenet? all I ever see is the text.

Hint for the clueless: it's a TEXT MEDIUM.

Cyclingforums (for example) has a number of graphical emoticons you can
sprinkle throughout your postings. The version that goes out to Usenet
has a text "equivalent" for each of these such as <rolleyes>. I find
these often give the wrong impression. When contradicting someone
else's point the graphical rolling eyes looks reasonable sweet and
innocent, but the text <rolleyes> seems somehow deliberately insulting.

thanks Dave, thought it might be something like that; I prefer to use
plain text smileys etc as they don't get altered

MartinM said:

BTW does <rollseyes> /;rimshot etc. appear as some sort of icon in
another dimension of Usenet? all I ever see is the text.

Certain emoticons get translated into Pretty Pikchas if one is using
OE-Quotefix which, for my sins, I am.

Most of the nonse like :rollseyes:, however, is from numpties who believe
Usenet to be in some way related to the World Wide Wait.

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
The thing about Tony Parsons, though, the defining aspect of his
personality, is that he is a complete [censored].

MartinM said:

not at all, many of us will be watching the itv2 highlights in the
evening (or watching them recorded at some ungodly hour or even the
next day if working nights)
the urc convention is not to put any hints as to stage results in the
title of posts, please respect this.

Wot Martin said. Though I didn't get to see the highlights yesterday as my
Freeview box decided to go to sleep when it was supposed to be squirting
electrons down the string into the video. Bah! It did this while I was out
shopping for a combined Freeview-box-cum-hard-disk-video. That $DEITY, eh?
What an ironist...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
The thing about Tony Parsons, though, the defining aspect of his
personality, is that he is a complete [censored].

dkahn400 said:

but the text <rolleyes> seems somehow
deliberately insulting.

Not deliberate. Bit sensitive, are we?

Simonb said:

dkahn400 said:

but the text <rolleyes> seems somehow
deliberately insulting.

Not deliberate. Bit sensitive, are we?

I sometimes am. Can't really speak for you though <rolleyes>.

--
Dave...

dkahn400 said:

Simonb said:

dkahn400 said:

but the text <rolleyes> seems somehow
deliberately insulting.

Not deliberate. Bit sensitive, are we?

I sometimes am. Can't really speak for you though <rolleyes>.

<tuts>

Simonb said:

dkahn400 said:

Simonb said:

dkahn400 wrote:

> but the text <rolleyes> seems somehow
> deliberately insulting.

Not deliberate. Bit sensitive, are we?

I sometimes am. Can't really speak for you though <rolleyes>.

<tuts>

<chuckle>

--
Dave...

Dave Larrington said:

MartinM said:

not at all, many of us will be watching the itv2 highlights in the
evening (or watching them recorded at some ungodly hour or even the
next day if working nights)
the urc convention is not to put any hints as to stage results in the
title of posts, please respect this.

Wot Martin said. Though I didn't get to see the highlights yesterday as my
Freeview box decided to go to sleep when it was supposed to be squirting
electrons down the string into the video.

yes it helps if you use wire ;-)

BTW I assume we have now lost the Tour in London for the next million
years?