Has anyone tried the Bigha?

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> > "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]... [...]
> >
> >> Read what is written, Dolan, especially what is
> >> written by me - and Love, too. His claim was that
> >> BiGHA sponsors me. That's silly. As to their
> >> advertising with the magazine, I have never disputed
> >> that. Again, read.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > That is what we are both saying - you dolt! That you are
> > being paid by
the
> > magazine and therefore you cannot be too critical of the
> > bikes you
review or
> > you would be let go. Where the hell do you suppose Mr.
> > Ball gets his
money
> > to pay you if not from his advertisers.
> >
> > I am not making any blanket charge that you do not do
> > good reviews. I am merely making the very simple
> > observation that you cannot ******** your advertisers
> > with a bad review. Elementary, my dear Watson!
> >
>
> Nope, that wasn't what he said - you dolt! He said I
> was sponsored by BiGHA. I'm not. You dolt! "And
> therefore" is followed by a conclusion supported by,
> what? Evidence? Nope, just supposition. You dolt! If
> a review pisses off the sponsors because it was
> erroneous, biased, or just plain wrong, that's one
> thing. But if you criticize them for something that
> needs to be changed, the good sponsors will
> appreciate it
> - they'd rather hear it from you, instead of a bunch of
> irate customers. The thing you and your friend don't
> seem to understand is, that the magazine stands a much
> better chance of having problems if the readership
> starts thinking that nothing 'bad' is going to be said
> about a product, if they buy an ad or sponsor the
> magazine in any way. And if that happens, guess what?
> Readership drops, and the ads go away. You dolt! And the
> result is elementary, as you say. Either write reviews
> that are credible, or the readers will go elsewhere, and
> the advertisers will leave along with them. You dolt!
>
> And I'll have to admit, when I first saw that phrase, I
> thought you had left out a space, and were saying "you do
> it". And I thought - wha? I need a better monitor!
>
> --
> Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
> http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> > "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]... [...]
> >
> >> Read what is written, Dolan, especially what is
> >> written by me - and Love, too. His claim was that
> >> BiGHA sponsors me. That's silly. As to their
> >> advertising with the magazine, I have never disputed
> >> that. Again, read.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > That is what we are both saying - you dolt! That you are
> > being paid by
the
> > magazine and therefore you cannot be too critical of the
> > bikes you
review or
> > you would be let go. Where the hell do you suppose Mr.
> > Ball gets his
money
> > to pay you if not from his advertisers.
> >
> > I am not making any blanket charge that you do not do
> > good reviews. I am merely making the very simple
> > observation that you cannot ******** your advertisers
> > with a bad review. Elementary, my dear Watson!
> >
>
> Nope, that wasn't what he said - you dolt! He said I
> was sponsored by BiGHA. I'm not. You dolt! "And
> therefore" is followed by a conclusion supported by,
> what? Evidence? Nope, just supposition. You dolt!

He meant by sponsor that you were being paid by the magazine
for your review. But it is ever the way of small minds to
attach to details and make a big issue out of nothing. I
occasionally like to set up straw men too, but I try not to
make a habit of it.

> If a review pisses off the sponsors because it was
> erroneous, biased, or just plain wrong, that's one thing.
> But if you criticize them for something that needs to be
> changed, the good sponsors will appreciate it
> - they'd rather hear it from you, instead of a bunch of
> irate customers.

Don't make me laugh! Now you are just plain being
ridiculous.

> The thing you and your friend don't seem to understand is,
> that the magazine stands a much better chance of having
> problems if the readership starts thinking that nothing
> 'bad' is going to be said about a product, if they buy an
> ad or sponsor the magazine in any way. And if that
> happens, guess what? Readership drops, and the ads go
> away. You dolt!

No, all the readers know what the magazine does and why it
does it. The ads never go away no matter what. The only
thing that makes the ads go away is if the manufacturer
goes out of business (or gets a bad review). Most magazines
are nothing but shills for their advertisers. Everyone
knows that. That is why magazines like Consumer's Reports
are so valuable.

> And the result is elementary, as you say. Either write
> reviews that are credible, or the readers will go
> elsewhere, and the advertisers will leave along with them.
> You dolt!

Most reviews will tell you quite a bit about a product and
still mange to avoid any criticism of the product. Everyone
knows that.

> And I'll have to admit, when I first saw that phrase, I
> thought you had left out a space, and were saying "you do
> it". And I thought - wha? I need a better monitor!

?

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

PS. I believe I have just added a new word to Varney's
vocabulary, namely "dolt". He is using it over and
over and that is the way you become acquainted with
new words. But like all simple minded people, he
pushes it too far and never knows when to stop making
a fool of himself.

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> > He meant by sponsor that you were being paid by the
> > magazine for your review. But it is ever the way of
> > small minds to attach to details and
make
> > a big issue out of nothing. I occasionally like to set
> > up straw men too,
but
> > I try not to make a habit of it.
> >
> >
>
> I'll know who to go to from now on, when I have
> questions about what Lorenzo says, especially if what
> he said seems pretty stupid. But that is the way of
> details, I suppose. Anyway, I have not been making a
> "big issue" out of any of this - who has been
> constantly ranting and raving about this BiGHA, and now
> my being "sponsored" by them? Certainly not me. But I
> do agree with you - his behavior does indicate a small
> mind.

I now learn from another one of Lorenzo's posts that you are
an EDITOR of your magazine. True or false? You do not merely
just submit articles as a writer. Now my estimate of you is
in the cellar. You do not even take responsibility for your
magazine even though you are an editor of it. I will let the
readers of ARBR draw their own conclusions about you and
your magazine, but I will stay as far away as I can get from
it. Your credibility with me is now zip!

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> [Nothing]
>
> Hey Ed, type something before hitting send, you dolt!

I do this occasionally to keep you are your toes and to give
you something to post about.

But I am waiting for your response to Freewheeling (Scott)
on another current thread. Nothing to say? I thought so. It
is getting harder and harder to defend liberalism these days
isn't it, let alone Marxism and Communism. I note that only
nut cases like Michael Moore (who is a big fat treasonous
pig without a brain) want to even be associated with the
term liberalism anymore. But his type (Al Gore too) are so
out of it, that I simply refer to them as Bush Haters and
let it go at that. I like to be accurate above all else.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>He meant by sponsor that you were being paid by the
>>>magazine for your review. But it is ever the way of small
>>>minds to attach to details and
>
> make
>
>>>a big issue out of nothing. I occasionally like to set up
>>>straw men too,
>
> but
>
>>>I try not to make a habit of it.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'll know who to go to from now on, when I have
>> questions about what Lorenzo says, especially if what
>> he said seems pretty stupid. But that is the way of
>> details, I suppose. Anyway, I have not been making a
>> "big issue" out of any of this - who has been
>> constantly ranting and raving about this BiGHA, and now
>> my being "sponsored" by them? Certainly not me. But I
>> do agree with you - his behavior does indicate a small
>> mind.
>
>
> I now learn from another one of Lorenzo's posts that you
> are an EDITOR of your magazine. True or false? You do not
> merely just submit articles as a writer. Now my estimate
> of you is in the cellar. You do not even take
> responsibility for your magazine even though you are an
> editor of it. I will let the readers of ARBR draw their
> own conclusions about you and your magazine, but I will
> stay as far away as I can get from it. Your credibility
> with me is now zip!
>

What are you talking about? In what way do I "not even
take responsibility for my magazine"? Of course, we see
that you are continuing the tradition of your friend,
claiming that it's MY magazine
- it's not. And now you're all puffed up, and you're going
to "stay as far away from it" as you can. There's nothing
new there, Dolan - you didn't read it before, did you?
Regardless, I do think it's a wise decision on your part
to continue not reading it.

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> > "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>>He meant by sponsor that you were being paid by the
> >>>magazine for your review. But it is ever the way of
> >>>small minds to attach to details and
> >
> > make
> >
> >>>a big issue out of nothing. I occasionally like to set
> >>>up straw men
too,
> >
> > but
> >
> >>>I try not to make a habit of it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> I'll know who to go to from now on, when I have
> >> questions about what Lorenzo says, especially if what
> >> he said seems pretty stupid. But that is the way of
> >> details, I suppose. Anyway, I have not been making a
> >> "big issue" out of any of this - who has been
> >> constantly ranting and raving about this BiGHA, and
> >> now my being "sponsored" by them? Certainly not me.
> >> But I do agree with you - his behavior does indicate
> >> a small mind.
> >
> >
> > I now learn from another one of Lorenzo's posts that you
> > are an EDITOR
of
> > your magazine. True or false? You do not merely just
> > submit articles as
a
> > writer. Now my estimate of you is in the cellar. You do
> > not even take responsibility for your magazine even
> > though you are an editor of it. I
will
> > let the readers of ARBR draw their own conclusions about
> > you and your magazine, but I will stay as far away as I
> > can get from it. Your
credibility
> > with me is now zip!
> >
>
> What are you talking about? In what way do I "not even
> take responsibility for my magazine"? Of course, we see
> that you are continuing the tradition of your friend,
> claiming that it's MY magazine
> - it's not. And now you're all puffed up, and you're going
> to "stay as far away from it" as you can. There's
> nothing new there, Dolan - you didn't read it before,
> did you? Regardless, I do think it's a wise decision on
> your part to continue not reading it.

You were leaving the impression that you were merely a
writer who was submitting articles to the magazine. Now
instead we learn that you are one of the editors. Big
difference! I take it that Mr. Ball is the publisher and
owner, but it is impossible to get any useful information
out of you about your relationship to the magazine of which
you are an editor. You have had plenty of opportunity on
this thread to explain yourself, but instead Lorenzo had to
drag it out of you inch by inch. It strikes me that you are
not particularly fond of your association with the magazine.
If I were Mr. Ball, I would fire you for not defending the
magazine better.

I will never have to read that magazine of which you are an
editor as long as RCN is around, of that I can assure you!

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>>"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>
>>>[...]
>>>
>>>
>>>>>He meant by sponsor that you were being paid by the
>>>>>magazine for your review. But it is ever the way of
>>>>>small minds to attach to details and
>>>
>>>make
>>>
>>>
>>>>>a big issue out of nothing. I occasionally like to set
>>>>>up straw men
>
> too,
>
>>>but
>>>
>>>
>>>>>I try not to make a habit of it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll know who to go to from now on, when I have
>>>> questions about what Lorenzo says, especially if what
>>>> he said seems pretty stupid. But that is the way of
>>>> details, I suppose. Anyway, I have not been making a
>>>> "big issue" out of any of this - who has been
>>>> constantly ranting and raving about this BiGHA, and
>>>> now my being "sponsored" by them? Certainly not me.
>>>> But I do agree with you - his behavior does indicate a
>>>> small mind.
>>>
>>>
>>>I now learn from another one of Lorenzo's posts that you
>>>are an EDITOR
>
> of
>
>>>your magazine. True or false? You do not merely just
>>>submit articles as
>
> a
>
>>>writer. Now my estimate of you is in the cellar. You do
>>>not even take responsibility for your magazine even
>>>though you are an editor of it. I
>
> will
>
>>>let the readers of ARBR draw their own conclusions about
>>>you and your magazine, but I will stay as far away as I
>>>can get from it. Your
>
> credibility
>
>>>with me is now zip!
>>>
>>
>> What are you talking about? In what way do I "not even
>> take responsibility for my magazine"? Of course, we see
>> that you are continuing the tradition of your friend,
>> claiming that it's MY magazine
>>- it's not. And now you're all puffed up, and you're going
>> to "stay as far away from it" as you can. There's
>> nothing new there, Dolan - you didn't read it before,
>> did you? Regardless, I do think it's a wise decision on
>> your part to continue not reading it.
>
>
> You were leaving the impression that you were merely a
> writer who was submitting articles to the magazine. Now
> instead we learn that you are one of the editors. Big
> difference! I take it that Mr. Ball is the publisher and
> owner, but it is impossible to get any useful information
> out of you about your relationship to the magazine of
> which you are an editor. You have had plenty of
> opportunity on this thread to explain yourself, but
> instead Lorenzo had to drag it out of you inch by inch. It
> strikes me that you are not particularly fond of your
> association with the magazine. If I were Mr. Ball, I would
> fire you for not defending the magazine better.
>
> I will never have to read that magazine of which you
> are an editor as long as RCN is around, of that I can
> assure you!
>

There you go again, reading the "impression" rather than
what is written. All I said was, and I continue to say,
is that it is not my magazine, I don't own it, and that I
am NOT the magazine. And you, as usual, do not do any
work of your own - you don't read anything, you don't
investigate anything, you don't actually go out and look
at the magazine. After all, that would count as personal
experience, and we already know how worthless you think
that is. Lorenzo has not had to "drag" anything out of
me. In fact, I've kept saying the same things, over and
over, hoping that one of you would finally understand
what I've writen, and perhaps tell the other. I have
explained myself, over and over, but you and your pal
seem unable to understand the simplest of English words
and phrases. Instead of reading what is written, you go
by your "impressions". Instead of going by what is said,
you go by what you think the writer "intended". The
magazine needs no defense, Dolan. But then, you wouldn't
know anything about it, would you? Have you ever bothered
to read it? Have you ever bothered to read ANYTHING? Or
do you form your opinions of EVERYTHING without actual
knowledge? And just to be on the safe side, I'm sending
in my RCN renewal today.

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> He meant by sponsor that you were being paid by the
>>>>>> magazine for your review. But it is ever the way of
>>>>>> small minds to attach to details and
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> make
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> a big issue out of nothing. I occasionally like to
>>>>>> set up straw men
>>
>>
>> too,
>>
>>>> but
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I try not to make a habit of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll know who to go to from now on, when I have
>>>>> questions about what Lorenzo says, especially if what
>>>>> he said seems pretty stupid. But that is the way of
>>>>> details, I suppose. Anyway, I have not been making a
>>>>> "big issue" out of any of this - who has been
>>>>> constantly ranting and raving about this BiGHA, and
>>>>> now my being "sponsored" by them? Certainly not me.
>>>>> But I do agree with you - his behavior does indicate
>>>>> a small mind.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I now learn from another one of Lorenzo's posts that
>>>> you are an EDITOR
>>
>>
>> of
>>
>>>> your magazine. True or false? You do not merely just
>>>> submit articles as
>>
>>
>> a
>>
>>>> writer. Now my estimate of you is in the cellar. You do
>>>> not even take responsibility for your magazine even
>>>> though you are an editor of it. I
>>
>>
>> will
>>
>>>> let the readers of ARBR draw their own conclusions
>>>> about you and your magazine, but I will stay as far
>>>> away as I can get from it. Your
>>
>>
>> credibility
>>
>>>> with me is now zip!
>>>>
>>>
>>> What are you talking about? In what way do I "not even
>>> take responsibility for my magazine"? Of course, we
>>> see that you are continuing the tradition of your
>>> friend, claiming that it's MY magazine
>>> - it's not. And now you're all puffed up, and you're
>>> going to "stay as far away from it" as you can.
>>> There's nothing new there, Dolan - you didn't read it
>>> before, did you? Regardless, I do think it's a wise
>>> decision on your part to continue not reading it.
>>
>>
>>
>> You were leaving the impression that you were merely a
>> writer who was submitting articles to the magazine. Now
>> instead we learn that you are one of the editors. Big
>> difference! I take it that Mr. Ball is the publisher and
>> owner, but it is impossible to get any useful information
>> out of you about your relationship to the magazine of
>> which you are an editor. You have had plenty of
>> opportunity on this thread to explain yourself, but
>> instead Lorenzo had to drag it out of you inch by inch.
>> It strikes me that you are not particularly fond of your
>> association with the magazine. If I were
>> Mr.Ball, I would fire you for not defending the magazine
>> better.
>>
>> I will never have to read that magazine of which you
>> are an editor as long as RCN is around, of that I can
>> assure you!
>>
>
> There you go again, reading the "impression" rather than
> what is written. All I said was, and I continue to say,
> is that it is not my magazine, I don't own it, and that
> I am NOT the magazine. And you, as usual, do not do any
> work of your own - you don't read anything, you don't
> investigate anything, you don't actually go out and look
> at the magazine. After all, that would count as personal
> experience, and we already know how worthless you think
> that is. Lorenzo has not had to "drag" anything out of
> me. In fact, I've kept saying the same things, over and
> over, hoping that one of you would finally understand
> what I've writen, and perhaps tell the other. I have
> explained myself, over and over, but you and your pal
> seem unable to understand the simplest of English words
> and phrases. Instead of reading what is written, you go
> by your "impressions". Instead of going by what is said,
> you go by what you think the writer "intended". The
> magazine needs no defense, Dolan. But then, you wouldn't
> know anything about it, would you? Have you ever
> bothered to read it? Have you ever bothered to read
> ANYTHING? Or do you form your opinions of EVERYTHING
> without actual knowledge? And just to be on the safe
> side, I'm sending in my RCN renewal today.
>

I have read your magazine, that's how I know it is your
magazine, that is a magazine that you are an editor of.
That's how I know Bigha is a paid sponsor. That's how I know
why you have been so fanatically attacking anyone who
expresses a negative opinion of one of your sponsors,
because that's where the money comes from. And that's how I
know you have been creating a disreputable public opinion of
yourself and your magazine by misrepresenting yourself. Does
Bryan Ball know what you are doing?

Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

"If you do not tell the truth about yourself you cannot tell
it about other people." Virginia Woolf (1882-1941).

 

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> Larry Varney wrote:

>> There you go again, reading the "impression" rather
>> than what is written. All I said was, and I continue to
>> say, is that it is not my magazine, I don't own it, and
>> that I am NOT the magazine. And you, as usual, do not
>> do any work of your own - you don't read anything, you
>> don't investigate anything, you don't actually go out
>> and look at the magazine. After all, that would count
>> as personal experience, and we already know how
>> worthless you think that is. Lorenzo has not had to
>> "drag" anything out of me. In fact, I've kept saying
>> the same things, over and over, hoping that one of you
>> would finally understand what I've writen, and perhaps
>> tell the other. I have explained myself, over and over,
>> but you and your pal seem unable to understand the
>> simplest of English words and phrases. Instead of
>> reading what is written, you go by your "impressions".
>> Instead of going by what is said, you go by what you
>> think the writer "intended". The magazine needs no
>> defense, Dolan. But then, you wouldn't know anything
>> about it, would you? Have you ever bothered to read it?
>> Have you ever bothered to read ANYTHING? Or do you form
>> your opinions of EVERYTHING without actual knowledge?
>> And just to be on the safe side, I'm sending in my RCN
>> renewal today.
>>
>
> I have read your magazine, that's how I know it is your
> magazine, that is a magazine that you are an editor of.
> That's how I know Bigha is a paid sponsor. That's how I
> know why you have been so fanatically attacking anyone who
> expresses a negative opinion of one of your sponsors,
> because that's where the money comes from. And that's how
> I know you have been creating a disreputable public
> opinion of yourself and your magazine by misrepresenting
> yourself. Does Bryan Ball know what you are doing?
>
> Lorenzo L. Love

It is not my magazine. I do not own it. I have not
attacked anyone who has expressed a negative opinion of
BiGHA, neither here nor in the magazine. Quote me if you
can - but you can't. I have not misrepresented myself at
all. I have merely been wasting my time trying to
explain these simple concepts, over and over, to you.
Why are you having such a hard time with this? What is
wrong with you? Is it deliberate? Do you think that I
own the magazine? Do you think I am the magazine? Can
you post one, absolutely ONE, attack I've made against
anyone because they've expressed a negative opinion of
this bike? No, you can't. And you won't. You'll just
continue this silly nonsense of yours. You are either a
congeital liar, one of the stupidest people I hope never
to meet, or you just delight in passing yourself off as
one or both. Which is it, Love? If you really do have a
mental problem, then I apologize. Otherwise, your game
is very tiresome, and a waste of time. If you ever say
anything sensible in the future, I may respond.
Otherwise, I am through
- you'll have to play with yourself from here on.

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:2kjlmfF32tccU1@uni-
> berlin.de...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>[Nothing]
>>
>>Hey Ed, type something before hitting send, you dolt!
>
>
> I do this occasionally to keep you are your toes and to
> give you something to post about.
>
> But I am waiting for your response to Freewheeling (Scott)
> on another current thread. Nothing to say? I thought so.
> It is getting harder and harder to defend liberalism these
> days isn't it, let alone Marxism and Communism....

I will leave it to Mr. Dolan to defend avarice, violence,
class warfare against those born in the working classes, and
hatred of cultural and religious values not shared by the
Christian Coalition, as these are the values of the current
leadership of the Republican Party that he so strongly
advocates.

Note: I will be too occupied with pile driving for the next
to weeks to engage in any lengthy discussions.

--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> > You were leaving the impression that you were merely a
> > writer who was submitting articles to the magazine. Now
> > instead we learn that you are
one
> > of the editors. Big difference! I take it that Mr. Ball
> > is the publisher
and
> > owner, but it is impossible to get any useful
> > information out of you
about
> > your relationship to the magazine of which you are an
> > editor. You have
had
> > plenty of opportunity on this thread to explain
> > yourself, but instead Lorenzo had to drag it out of you
> > inch by inch. It strikes me that you
are
> > not particularly fond of your association with the
> > magazine. If I were
Mr.
> > Ball, I would fire you for not defending the magazine
> > better.
> >
> > I will never have to read that magazine of which you are
> > an editor as
long
> > as RCN is around, of that I can assure you!
> >
>
> There you go again, reading the "impression" rather
> than what is written. All I said was, and I continue to
> say, is that it is not my magazine, I don't own it, and
> that I am NOT the magazine.

Why the hell didn't you tell us what it is that you DO for
the magazine instead of telling us what it is that you do
NOT do for the magazine. You underestimate the intelligence
of ARBR members. Any one with their head screwed on straight
would have immediately said that he was an editor and a
writer for the magazine. What else have you neglected to
tell us about your relationship to the magazine I wonder?
Apparently you are not the publisher and you do not own the
magazine. All of this should have been said about a hundred
posts ago.

And you, as
> usual, do not do any work of your own - you don't read
> anything, you don't investigate anything, you don't
> actually go out and look at the magazine. After all, that
> would count as personal experience, and we already know
> how worthless you think that is.

I only read what interests me, just like you do.

> Lorenzo has not had to "drag" anything out of me. In
> fact, I've kept saying the same things, over and over,
> hoping that one of you would finally understand what
> I've writen, and perhaps tell the other. I have
> explained myself, over and over, but you and your pal
> seem unable to understand the simplest of English words
> and phrases. Instead of reading what is written, you go
> by your "impressions". Instead of going by what is
> said, you go by what you think the writer "intended".

I did not know you were an editor of the magazine. I didn't
know because you never mentioned it. Why? I had to find out
that bit of information from Lorenzo.

> The magazine needs no defense, Dolan. But then, you
> wouldn't know anything about it, would you? Have you ever
> bothered to read it? Have you ever bothered to read
> ANYTHING? Or do you form your opinions of EVERYTHING
> without actual knowledge?

Second hand knowledge is as good if not better than first
hand knowledge in most cases. All you have to know is the
trustworthiness of the provider of the knowledge. For
instance, I trust Mr. Bob Bryant of RCN; I do not trust
Ms. Larry Varney of Bentrideronline. Elementary my
dear Watson!

> And just to be on the safe side, I'm sending in my RCN
> renewal today.

You can't go wrong with RCN. It is an honest recumbent
publication and informative as hell. And it will tell you
what is a good buy and what is a bad buy, something you and
your magazine will never do apparently.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:

>
> Why the hell didn't you tell us what it is that you DO for
> the magazine instead of telling us what it is that you do
> NOT do for the magazine. You underestimate the
> intelligence of ARBR members. Any one with their head
> screwed on straight would have immediately said that he
> was an editor and a writer for the magazine. What else
> have you neglected to tell us about your relationship to
> the magazine I wonder? Apparently you are not the
> publisher and you do not own the magazine. All of this
> should have been said about a hundred posts ago.
>

No one has asked me what I do for the magazine, Dolan -
proably for the simple reason that all they have to do is
READ IT! Look at the website, and there it is for all to
see! No, I've just responded to the idiots who keep
claiming that I *AM* the magazine, that I *own* the
magazine, that some particular bike company sponsors
*me*! These accusations were all wrong - should I have
let people think that they were true? Or should I have
gone on and told them the bloody obvious, the things that
they could see for themselves, so long as they're not too
lazy or cowardly to READ!

>
> I did not know you were an editor of the magazine. I
> didn't know because you never mentioned it. Why? I had to
> find out that bit of information from Lorenzo.
>
>
Wy didn't you know? Because you never read the magazine.
Don't be so lazy, Dolan! Do some work for yourself -
READ! You did NOT have to find that out from your pal -
you could have seen it for yourself!

>>The magazine needs no defense, Dolan. But then, you
>>wouldn't know anything about it, would you? Have you ever
>>bothered to read it? Have you ever bothered to read
>>ANYTHING? Or do you form your opinions of EVERYTHING
>>without actual knowledge?
>
>
> Second hand knowledge is as good if not better than first
> hand knowledge in most cases.

I am so thankful that you were a librarian and not a
surgeon. Such an
attitude inspires lots of confidence in your abilities and
opinions - not.

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> > Larry Varney wrote:
>
> >> There you go again, reading the "impression" rather
> >> than what is written. All I said was, and I continue
> >> to say, is that it is not my magazine, I don't own
> >> it, and that I am NOT the magazine. And you, as
> >> usual, do not do any work of your own - you don't
> >> read anything, you don't investigate anything, you
> >> don't actually go out and look at the magazine. After
> >> all, that would count as personal experience, and we
> >> already know how worthless you think that is. Lorenzo
> >> has not had to "drag" anything out of me. In fact,
> >> I've kept saying the same things, over and over,
> >> hoping that one of you would finally understand what
> >> I've writen, and perhaps tell the other. I have
> >> explained myself, over and over, but you and your pal
> >> seem unable to understand the simplest of English
> >> words and phrases. Instead of reading what is
> >> written, you go by your "impressions". Instead of
> >> going by what is said, you go by what you think the
> >> writer "intended". The magazine needs no defense,
> >> Dolan. But then, you wouldn't know anything about it,
> >> would you? Have you ever bothered to read it? Have
> >> you ever bothered to read ANYTHING? Or do you form
> >> your opinions of EVERYTHING without actual knowledge?
> >> And just to be on the safe side, I'm sending in my
> >> RCN renewal today.
> >>
> >
> > I have read your magazine, that's how I know it is your
> > magazine, that is a magazine that you are an editor of.
> > That's how I know Bigha is a paid sponsor. That's how I
> > know why you have been so fanatically attacking anyone
> > who expresses a negative opinion of one of your
> > sponsors, because that's where the money comes from. And
> > that's how I know you have been creating a disreputable
> > public opinion of yourself and your magazine by
> > misrepresenting yourself. Does Bryan Ball know what you
> > are doing?
> >
> > Lorenzo L. Love
>
> It is not my magazine. I do not own it. I have not
> attacked anyone who has expressed a negative opinion of
> BiGHA, neither here nor in the magazine. Quote me if
> you can - but you can't. I have not misrepresented
> myself at all. I have merely been wasting my time
> trying to explain these simple concepts, over and over,
> to you. Why are you having such a hard time with this?
> What is wrong with you? Is it deliberate? Do you think
> that I own the magazine? Do you think I am the
> magazine? Can you post one, absolutely ONE, attack I've
> made against anyone because they've expressed a
> negative opinion of this bike? No, you can't. And you
> won't. You'll just continue this silly nonsense of
> yours. You are either a congeital liar, one of the
> stupidest people I hope never to meet, or you just
> delight in passing yourself off as one or both. Which
> is it, Love? If you really do have a mental problem,
> then I apologize. Otherwise, your game is very
> tiresome, and a waste of time. If you ever say anything
> sensible in the future, I may respond. Otherwise, I am
> through
> - you'll have to play with yourself from here on.

this subject thread Varney. If Mr. Ball were to stumble on
this he would most likely fire you. I know I would if I were
him. You did not defend your magazine properly and you did
not even defend Bigha properly. The latter is probably the
more serious offense. But Hells Bells! You did not even
defend yourself properly. Strike three - you are out!

I note that Mr. Ball has left ARBR for greener pastures
elsewhere. I think that was very smart of him. I think if I
were you I would do the same. It is impossible for you to
open your mouth without putting your foot in it. You have
certainly done your magazine no good by your being here.

Mr. Lorenzo T. Love has been dead on from the beginning
and you have never answered a single one of his
objections to your disreputable conduct on this
thread. We should all save this thread to our
Documents as an example of what never to do. Varney
can be an object lesson to us all.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>>
>>>Larry Varney wrote:
>>
>>>> There you go again, reading the "impression" rather
>>>> than what is written. All I said was, and I continue
>>>> to say, is that it is not my magazine, I don't own it,
>>>> and that I am NOT the magazine. And you, as usual, do
>>>> not do any work of your own - you don't read anything,
>>>> you don't investigate anything, you don't actually go
>>>> out and look at the magazine. After all, that would
>>>> count as personal experience, and we already know how
>>>> worthless you think that is. Lorenzo has not had to
>>>> "drag" anything out of me. In fact, I've kept saying
>>>> the same things, over and over, hoping that one of you
>>>> would finally understand what I've writen, and perhaps
>>>> tell the other. I have explained myself, over and
>>>> over, but you and your pal seem unable to understand
>>>> the simplest of English words and phrases. Instead of
>>>> reading what is written, you go by your "impressions".
>>>> Instead of going by what is said, you go by what you
>>>> think the writer "intended". The magazine needs no
>>>> defense, Dolan. But then, you wouldn't know anything
>>>> about it, would you? Have you ever bothered to read
>>>> it? Have you ever bothered to read ANYTHING? Or do you
>>>> form your opinions of EVERYTHING without actual
>>>> knowledge? And just to be on the safe side, I'm
>>>> sending in my RCN renewal today.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I have read your magazine, that's how I know it is your
>>>magazine, that is a magazine that you are an editor of.
>>>That's how I know Bigha is a paid sponsor. That's how I
>>>know why you have been so fanatically attacking anyone
>>>who expresses a negative opinion of one of your sponsors,
>>>because that's where the money comes from. And that's how
>>>I know you have been creating a disreputable public
>>>opinion of yourself and your magazine by misrepresenting
>>>yourself. Does Bryan Ball know what you are doing?
>>>
>>>Lorenzo L. Love
>>
>> It is not my magazine. I do not own it. I have not
>> attacked anyone who has expressed a negative opinion of
>> BiGHA, neither here nor in the magazine. Quote me if
>> you can - but you can't. I have not misrepresented
>> myself at all. I have merely been wasting my time
>> trying to explain these simple concepts, over and over,
>> to you. Why are you having such a hard time with this?
>> What is wrong with you? Is it deliberate? Do you think
>> that I own the magazine? Do you think I am the
>> magazine? Can you post one, absolutely ONE, attack I've
>> made against anyone because they've expressed a
>> negative opinion of this bike? No, you can't. And you
>> won't. You'll just continue this silly nonsense of
>> yours. You are either a congeital liar, one of the
>> stupidest people I hope never to meet, or you just
>> delight in passing yourself off as one or both. Which
>> is it, Love? If you really do have a mental problem,
>> then I apologize. Otherwise, your game is very
>> tiresome, and a waste of time. If you ever say anything
>> sensible in the future, I may respond. Otherwise, I am
>> through
>>- you'll have to play with yourself from here on.
>
>

> this subject thread Varney. If Mr. Ball were to stumble on
> this he would most likely fire you. I know I would if I
> were him. You did not defend your magazine properly

Defend it against what? What accusations were made
against it?

and you did not even defend Bigha properly.

I haven't defended it at all - haven't you noticed?

The latter is
> probably the more serious offense. But Hells Bells! You
> did not even defend yourself properly. Strike three - you
> are out!
>
> I note that Mr. Ball has left ARBR for greener pastures
> elsewhere. I think that was very smart of him. I think
> if I were you I would do the same. It is impossible for
> you to open your mouth without putting your foot in it.
> You have certainly done your magazine no good by your
> being here.

Actually, I disagree. Many people have said that while they
feel bad for the sty that ARBR has become as a result of you
and your pal, they're glad to know that there is a place
online they can go to, for good information without the
embarrassing bigotry and vulgar language.

>
> Mr. Lorenzo T. Love has been dead on from the beginning
> and you have never answered a single one of his
> objections to your disreputable conduct on this
> thread.

I answered them over and over again. It's not my fault that
you two are deficient in understanding.

We should all save this thread to our Documents as an
example of
> what never to do. Varney can be an object lesson to us
> all.
>

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> ...
> Mr. Lorenzo T. Love...

Who is Lorenzo T. Love - related to Lorenzo L. Love,
perchance?

--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:
> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>
>> Larry Varney wrote:
>
>
>>> There you go again, reading the "impression" rather
>>> than what is written. All I said was, and I continue
>>> to say, is that it is not my magazine, I don't own it,
>>> and that I am NOT the magazine. And you, as usual, do
>>> not do any work of your own - you don't read anything,
>>> you don't investigate anything, you don't actually go
>>> out and look at the magazine. After all, that would
>>> count as personal experience, and we already know how
>>> worthless you think that is. Lorenzo has not had to
>>> "drag" anything out of me. In fact, I've kept saying
>>> the same things, over and over, hoping that one of you
>>> would finally understand what I've writen, and perhaps
>>> tell the other. I have explained myself, over and
>>> over, but you and your pal seem unable to understand
>>> the simplest of English words and phrases. Instead of
>>> reading what is written, you go by your "impressions".
>>> Instead of going by what is said, you go by what you
>>> think the writer "intended". The magazine needs no
>>> defense, Dolan. But then, you wouldn't know anything
>>> about it, would you? Have you ever bothered to read
>>> it? Have you ever bothered to read ANYTHING? Or do you
>>> form your opinions of EVERYTHING without actual
>>> knowledge? And just to be on the safe side, I'm
>>> sending in my RCN renewal today.
>>>
>>
>> I have read your magazine, that's how I know it is your
>> magazine, that is a magazine that you are an editor of.
>> That's how I know Bigha is a paid sponsor. That's how I
>> know why you have been so fanatically attacking anyone
>> who expresses a negative opinion of one of your sponsors,
>> because that's where the money comes from. And that's how
>> I know you have been creating a disreputable public
>> opinion of yourself and your magazine by misrepresenting
>> yourself. Does Bryan Ball know what you are doing?
>>
>> Lorenzo L. Love
>
>
> It is not my magazine. I do not own it. I have not
> attacked anyone who has expressed a negative opinion of
> BiGHA, neither here nor in the magazine. Quote me if you
> can - but you can't. I have not misrepresented myself at
> all. I have merely been wasting my time trying to
> explain these simple concepts, over and over, to you.
> Why are you having such a hard time with this? What is
> wrong with you? Is it deliberate? Do you think that I
> own the magazine? Do you think I am the magazine? Can
> you post one, absolutely ONE, attack I've made against
> anyone because they've expressed a negative opinion of
> this bike? No, you can't. And you won't. You'll just
> continue this silly nonsense of yours. You are either a
> congeital liar, one of the stupidest people I hope never
> to meet, or you just delight in passing yourself off as
> one or both. Which is it, Love? If you really do have a
> mental problem, then I apologize. Otherwise, your game
> is very tiresome, and a waste of time. If you ever say
> anything sensible in the future, I may respond.
> Otherwise, I am through
> - you'll have to play with yourself from here on.
>
>

Again with the attacks, again defending a paid sponsor.
There is a liar there, it is the one misrepresenting his
position in his magazine and his financial relationship with
Bigha. What other reason is there to so ferociously attack
anyone who makes the obvious observation that $3000.00 is a
ridiculous price for a 52 pound comfort bike then to protect
a source of income? It could be insanity, but I never
attribute to insanity what can be explained by greed.

Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Thirst makes any wine drinkable And greed makes any crime
thinkable.

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>Edward Dolan wrote:
> >>
> >>[Nothing]
> >>
> >>Hey Ed, type something before hitting send, you dolt!
> >
> >
> > I do this occasionally to keep you are your toes and to
> > give you
something
> > to post about.
> >
> > But I am waiting for your response to Freewheeling
> > (Scott) on another current thread. Nothing to say? I
> > thought so. It is getting harder and harder to defend
> > liberalism these days isn't it, let alone Marxism and
> > Communism....
>
> I will leave it to Mr. Dolan to defend avarice, violence,
> class warfare against those born in the working classes,
> and hatred of cultural and religious values not shared by
> the Christian Coalition, as these are the values of the
> current leadership of the Republican Party that he so
> strongly advocates.

I am only attacking liberal and leftist nostrums to the
eternal problems of mankind on this earth. These liberal and
leftist nostrums have never yet accomplished much. In fact,
they have mostly made matters infinitely worse.

I have the common sense never to make the kind of equations
which Mr. Sherman constantly makes. He thinks the Christian
West is no better than the Muslim East. Have you ever heard
of anything so ridiculous? He also thinks the Israeli
military is no different than the Palestinian terrorists.
And so it goes with him. He is a case of diversity and
relativism gone stark raving mad. He is unable to make any
judgments about anything in the cultural and religious
sphere. We are all equally good or we are all equally bad.
It is nothing but brainless nonsense.

> Note: I will be too occupied with pile driving for the
> next to weeks to engage in any lengthy discussions.

I think I have just divined the source of all your troubles
in this world - it is those pile driving machines. They have
rattled your brains. You need to find a more contemplative
type of work. As Rush is constantly saying on his radio
program, if you don't like your work, then quit it and find
something else to do. I think 5 minutes around a pile
driving machine would be more than enough for me. I thought
engineers were suppose to be intellectuals. That pile
driving is the death of intellect. No wonder you are so
confused and shook up all the time.

One other thing, this pile driving **** is what could be
giving you your headaches you know. 2 + 2 = 4!

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:

> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>>
>> Why the hell didn't you tell us what it is that you DO
>> for the magazine instead of telling us what it is that
>> you do NOT do for the magazine. You underestimate the
>> intelligence of ARBR members. Any one with their head
>> screwed on straight would have immediately said that he
>> was an editor and a writer for the magazine. What else
>> have you neglected to tell us about your relationship to
>> the magazine I wonder? Apparently you are not the
>> publisher and you do not own the magazine. All of this
>> should have been said about a hundred posts ago.
>>
>
> No one has asked me what I do for the magazine, Dolan -
> proably for the simple reason that all they have to do
> is READ IT! Look at the website, and there it is for all
> to see! No, I've just responded to the idiots who keep
> claiming that I *AM* the magazine, that I *own* the
> magazine, that some particular bike company sponsors
> *me*! These accusations were all wrong - should I have
> let people think that they were true? Or should I have
> gone on and told them the bloody obvious, the things
> that they could see for themselves, so long as they're
> not too lazy or cowardly to READ!
>
>>
>> I did not know you were an editor of the magazine. I
>> didn't know because you never mentioned it. Why? I had to
>> find out that bit of information from Lorenzo.
>>
>>
> Wy didn't you know? Because you never read the magazine.
> Don't be so lazy, Dolan! Do some work for yourself -
> READ! You did NOT have to find that out from your pal -
> you could have seen it for yourself!
>
>>> The magazine needs no defense, Dolan. But then, you
>>> wouldn't know anything about it, would you? Have you
>>> ever bothered to read it? Have you ever bothered to read
>>> ANYTHING? Or do you form your opinions of EVERYTHING
>>> without actual knowledge?
>>
>>
>>
>> Second hand knowledge is as good if not better than first
>> hand knowledge in most cases.
>
>
> I am so thankful that you were a librarian and not a
> surgeon. Such an
>attitude inspires lots of confidence in your abilities and
> opinions - not.
>
>
>
>

Anyone who reads your magazine knows that you are an editor
and that Bigha is an paid sponsor. No other reason is
needed for your ferocious defense of a $3000.00, 52 pound
comfort bike.

Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Thirst makes any wine drinkable And greed makes any crime
thinkable.

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > ...
> > Mr. Lorenzo T. Love...
>
> Who is Lorenzo T. Love - related to Lorenzo L. Love,
> perchance?

Good Grief! You mean this guy has got three L's in his name?
Hells Bells! He could easily just sign his posts LLL and it
would be a unique signature.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[William Higley]

>and then so and so said something about what's his face and
>the horse he
rode in on
>and then Helen said "Klaatu Barada Nikto" which all leads
>to my blatherings.

Dear Mr. Varney,

Perhaps you were unaware that L.L.L. studied under the
Master of Misdirection, "Baghdad Bob". I started noticing a
certain similarity in his complete and utter disregard for
anything other than his point of view.

Please do not be despondent over your inability to persuade
him of anything. I doubt that you would worry about an
inability to befriend a rabid dog.

I think perhaps it is time to move on before you step in any
of the leavings of this individual.

Say good night Gracie.

William Higley, Sr. Vision R-50 RANS Rocket