Here you go, Carl

Sorni said:

From
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/b6d951373d37c12/51e3cf4aef1ff726?lnk=st&q=Cunningly+mis-spells+Baggins&rnum=1&hl=en#51e3cf4aef1ff726 :

I ended a post to Alan Braggins (his correct name) with

Quoted message said:

Well done.

Quoted message said:

(Whoever you are.)

To which you replied:

"Sorni scores another brilliant debating point--he doesn't know someone
else posting on the internet, whose name he cunningly mis-spells! Alan
Baggins must be regretting the lack of a proper introduction!"

So now you want people to think you were "purposely lying" to be "ironic"?
Ladies and Germs, judge for yourself.

(And stop hyphenating misspells, Professor. It's sloppy and lazy.)

Ta TA.

Well, I'm sure Carl can defend himself, but... have you read The Lord of
the Rings? The characters named Baggins would regret "the lack of a
proper introduction." I suspect Carl was making a joke that you missed.

Or maybe he just thought Alan's name was Baggins. Who can tell?

I don't really get it anyway... maybe it's because I kill helmet threads
(I clicked your link, saw the thread title, and closed the window).

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

One of the most time-consuming things is to have an enemy. -E.B. White,
writer (1899-1985)

dvt said:

Well, I'm sure Carl can defend himself, but... have you read The Lord of
the Rings? The characters named Baggins would regret "the lack of a
proper introduction." I suspect Carl was making a joke that you missed.

Or maybe he just thought Alan's name was Baggins. Who can tell?

I don't really get it anyway... maybe it's because I kill helmet threads
(I clicked your link, saw the thread title, and closed the window).

Dave, it is so much more convoluted than just that. All of these guys
have so much time invested in the semi annual helmet debate, for
anyone to come in midway through it, and try to explain anything, is
just not possible.

I tend to read, maybe one or two posts, each time I download my
newsgroup. I will say, in the Braggins/Baggins melee, Sorni did offer
Carl a chance to embarrass him. if it happened, I missed it.

The inclusion of the Brits has added another dimension, mostly a
concern of MHLs. Which no one here, I repeat NO ONE has supported.

The whole thing is a waste of time, for me. I'm comfortable with my
decision, helmet wise and don't care what anyone else chooses to do.

It has brought out the worst in many/most of the posters. And in my
opinion, there are no winners, but there are clearly some losers;-)

Life is Good!
Jeff

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

Quoted message said:

The inclusion of the Brits has added another dimension, mostly a
concern of MHLs. Which no one here, I repeat NO ONE has supported.

Sorni and one other (Ozark?) have stated that they believe the "brits"
deserve to have MHL's.

jtaylor said:

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

Quoted message said:

The inclusion of the Brits has added another dimension, mostly a
concern of MHLs. Which no one here, I repeat NO ONE has supported.

Sorni and one other (Ozark?) have stated that they believe the "brits"
deserve to have MHL's.

Enough, already! It was nothing more than a throw-away remark. Stop
stirring.

--
Dave...

jtaylor said:

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

Quoted message said:

The inclusion of the Brits has added another dimension, mostly a
concern of MHLs. Which no one here, I repeat NO ONE has supported.

Sorni and one other (Ozark?) have stated that they believe the "brits"
deserve to have MHL's.

You're a double moron. Ed made that statement -- and even that was
tongue-in-cheek, as anyone with a modicum of understanding OR a sense of
humor/irony would know.

Keep flailing. Flailor.

dkahn400 said:

jtaylor said:

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

Quoted message said:

The inclusion of the Brits has added another dimension, mostly a
concern of MHLs. Which no one here, I repeat NO ONE has supported.

Sorni and one other (Ozark?) have stated that they believe the
"brits" deserve to have MHL's.

Enough, already! It was nothing more than a throw-away remark. Stop
stirring.

I really do think he's got OCD. Seriously.

Maybe I'll start giving him the benefit of the doubt on these things. He's
ill.

Explains a lot...

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

Quoted message said:

jtaylor said:

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

Quoted message said:

The inclusion of the Brits has added another dimension, mostly a
concern of MHLs. Which no one here, I repeat NO ONE has supported.

Sorni and one other (Ozark?) have stated that they believe the "brits"
deserve to have MHL's.

You're a double moron. Ed made that statement

To which post you and Ozark immediately concurred.

It appears that the three most vociferous (and foul-mouthed) pro-helmet
zealots all wish MHL's on the "brits". Perhaps you think that America has
rather too many of these laws, and could afford to give one away?

jtaylor said:

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

Quoted message said:

jtaylor wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sorni and one other (Ozark?) have stated that they believe the
"brits" deserve to have MHL's.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You're a double moron. Ed made that statement

{hey, where did the rest go?!?}

Quoted message said:

To which post you and Ozark immediately concurred.

Allow me to put /back/ what I said:

"Ed made that statement -- and even that was tongue-in-cheek, as anyone with
a modicum of understanding OR a sense of humor/irony would know."

Leaves you out, obviously.

Quoted message said:

It appears that the three most vociferous (and foul-mouthed)
pro-helmet zealots all wish MHL's on the "brits". Perhaps you think
that America has rather too many of these laws, and could afford to
give one away?

I hear new medications are amazing these days. For God's sake go see your
doctor.

Best of luck to you.

BS (50-50)

"jtaylor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]!nnrp1.uunet.ca...

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

jtaylor said:

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

>
> The inclusion of the Brits has added another dimension, mostly a
> concern of MHLs. Which no one here, I repeat NO ONE has supported.
>

Sorni and one other (Ozark?) have stated that they believe the "brits"
deserve to have MHL's.

You're a double moron. Ed made that statement

To which post you and Ozark immediately concurred.

It appears that the three most vociferous (and foul-mouthed) pro-helmet
zealots all wish MHL's on the "brits". Perhaps you think that America has
rather too many of these laws, and could afford to give one away?

However, given that you're the one who's cross-posting, it appears that
you're wishing tedious unpleasant helmet flamewars on the Brits. We were
quite enjoying the peace and quiet of being able to talk about recreational
cycling for a while there.

A

Jeff Starr said:

dvt said:

I don't really get it anyway... maybe it's because I kill helmet threads
(I clicked your link, saw the thread title, and closed the window).

Dave, it is so much more convoluted than just that. All of these guys
have so much time invested in the semi annual helmet debate, for
anyone to come in midway through it, and try to explain anything, is
just not possible.

I guess you're right... this thread is jumping into my killfile after
I've seen a few of the messages following your reply. Thanks for your
attempt to help. I think I prefer to remain in the dark.

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

One of the most time-consuming things is to have an enemy. -E.B. White,
writer (1899-1985)