Hit gravel, broke leg



"Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >snip<
>>>> Politically correct liberal idiots are the greatest kill filers. They
>>>> are like ostriches, but I don't mind. With their heads in the sand and
>>>> their asses in the air, they make very tempting targets.
>>>
>>> It's rather ironic really...
>>>
>>> The killfile system, politically, is very libertarian (considered the
>>> extreme right-wing). It is not at all left-wing. It is completely
>>> about the rights and freedoms of the individual, free from influence
>>> by others.
>>
>> What influence? Simply do not read those who annoy or irritate you. It is
>> never necessary to kill file anyone on Usenet since you are not required
>> to read anything you do not want to read.
>
> What do you think kill files are? In their basic form kill files are
> nothing more then an automatic way to not read those people, threads,
> or
> topics which annoy you. -Weighted kill files are more complex, but the
> same basic idea still applies albeit with the addition that it if it
> can
> also apply in the inverse.

I may want to read someone on one subject but not on another subject. If I
kill file that person, then I am prevented from reading him on any subject.
My objection to kill files remains - they are not necessary.

However, the turth of the matter is that no one ever annoys me, at least not
in writing. Plenty of people annoy me in the flesh, but words can never hurt
me. But of course criminality via Usenet is another matter altogether.

>> By the way, the only class of people I hate worse than liberals are
>> libertarians! The ought to be taken out and shot - or at least not
>> allowed
>> to live in society. I would exile them to Antarctica myself.
>
> That's convenient, since right-wing* libertarians are anti-society. :)

We conservatives are very pro-society! But we know what works and what
doesn't work, which is why we are not much in favor of social
experimentation.

>> I am speaking from long experience when I say that the greatest kill
>> filers are liberals.They ruled the roost for most of my life and now that
>> they are no longer ruling the roost, they act like spoiled children.
>> There
>> are only a very few good reasons for kill filing someone on Usenet and
>> they are all related to criminal behavior and none of them are related to
>> disagreements, however impolite.
>
> Me thinks you completely misunderstand the way kill files function.
>
>>> Your wish for "group think" where everyone must follow some strict
>>> set
>>> of lowest common denominator rules is actually what is considered
>>> left-wing.
>>
>> The Google rules just make sense and if everyone played by them we could
>> have a much better newsgroup.
>
> Got a link? I've looked through what I could find on Google Groups and
> can't seem to find any mention of the rules you preach. Would you
> please humble me with your greatness and illuminate my path?

Sigh! I MAY get back to you on this at a later date. I just hate to look up
anything. It comes from my being a former college librarian.

> *There are left-wing libertarians, ala libertarian socialists. All around
> a much more practical and kind hearted bread then their right-wing
> relatives.

I have only read libertarians briefly as I just can't stand their confounded
ideology. In any event, it is all hopelessly utopian.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota
 
Jeff Grippe wrote:

> Understood but I will always speak out against racism and ignorance. I
> realize that it may be pointless at times but (I feel) that we must have a
> zero tolerance policy.

That's fair, though I've come around to the feeling that the only reason
Ed hasn't been hanged is he's still feverishly paying out rope for
himself. He's so clearly an intolerant numpty that there's little point
in me saying so, he's saying it himself, and he's showing what a vacuous
way to be it is by providing an ongoing example. Anyone but Ed want to
be like Ed?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Re Posting Style:
>
> Ed, I'm not going to edit you. Our outlook on things is almost 180
> degrees. There is no way for my bias not to creep in. If you think you can
> edit without bias then feel free to do so. I know you can't. People
> (warning, whopping generalization coming...whoop whoop whoop) can't do
> anything without bias.

I can edit anyone perfectly without any bias whatsoever. I will simply
include all of the relevant post and only eliminate that which is irrelevant
to what I am responding to. This is not difficult at all for anyone with a
college education. Even smart high schoolers can be very good at this.
However, in the absence of any education at all, simply include the entire
preceding post and forget about relevancy. Your objections to proper posting
do not make any sense to me.

> You say that people aren't going to go through the thread to pickup the
> conversation? Then they will have limited understanding and if that is
> what they want then it is ok with me.

But I am not as selfish as you are. I want others to benefit from my wisdom
and so I want to make it easy for them to read what I have written and what
others have written. It must be the educator in me. I do not understand why
you do not follow my example since it is not only correct but easy to do.

> Re: Kill filing you and encouraging other to do the same.

Most others will not know to what you are referring, whereas if you had
included my message in quotation it would be immediately apparent. Even I
had to recollect what I had said. You must have other reasons why you do not
quote me. I am beginning to suspect your motivations!
[...]

> Re: Liberterianism
>
> I sort of like the idea but I feel the same way about it that I do about
> communisim. They are both interesting ideas that will never work. I do
> feel that personal liberty and freedom should be a lot less restricted
> than they are now but I don't really think that will ever happen. I also
> recognize that there must be incentive and large rewards to innovate and
> succeed. I would like to see the lowest of the low taken care of but I
> also think that everyone deserves the chance to "play for the big money".
> You can't do that unless there is big money to play for. So I recognize my
> various utopian dreams are just that, dreams, and I seek to make things
> better (by my definiation which is very different from yours) within the
> current system.

Liberals, socialists and communists hate libertarians the same as we
conservatives.

> Books, etc.
>
> You know I didn't respond to that the first time because I thought you
> were just trying to provke a response. Ofcourse people read books. They
> may not read as much as they did when books were the only entertainment
> available but literaure is far from dead. Maybe you don't read novels but
> a lot of people do. But Ed you are too smart not to know this alerady. So
> is this the response you were trying to provoke. I told you it was easy to
> do.

Novels are hardly even being written any more so few people are reading
them. According to Gore Vidal, the novel is now as dead as the Dodo Bird. It
died a couple of generations ago.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

PS. I believe you are not quoting me because you do not want others to kill
file you. Zenin came right out and said it. He is devious like a fox, but he
is truthful too. I cannot give your messages the time and effort they
deserve if you do not quote me in your messages.
 
Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What do you think kill files are? In their basic form kill files are
>> nothing more then an automatic way to not read those people, threads,
>> or topics which annoy you. -Weighted kill files are more complex, but
>> the same basic idea still applies albeit with the addition that it if
>> it can also apply in the inverse.
>
> I may want to read someone on one subject but not on another subject. If I
> kill file that person, then I am prevented from reading him on any
> subject.

This type of situation is what weighted kill files (aka scoring) were
created for. They allow this type of granularity...but with much lower
user overhead to manage then you'd initially expect. You might find
them to your liking.

You can also give things a positive score in such systems. For example
I could give "Edward Dolan" a +1000 score, basically guaranteeing that
reguardless of any other rules I'd see your posts. So even in a thread
that I'd scored -100 ("I don't care about this topic"), if you happened
to find the topic worthy of attention it would show up anyway (-100 +
1000 > 0).

> My objection to kill files remains - they are not necessary.

And the great thing about Usenet is that objection is perfectly fine,
for you. Everyone is free to use or not use any filtering systems they
personally find useful, without any imposition on anyone else.

>>> By the way, the only class of people I hate worse than liberals are
>>> libertarians! The ought to be taken out and shot - or at least not
>>> allowed to live in society. I would exile them to Antarctica myself.
>>
>> That's convenient, since right-wing* libertarians are anti-society. :)
>
> We conservatives are very pro-society! But we know what works and what
> doesn't work, which is why we are not much in favor of social
> experimentation.

You can't be right-wing libertarian and be pro-society as right-wing
libertarian is basically anarchy. But then you're mixing up the term
"conservative" into the topic here where it was not before. Right-wing
conservative and right-wing libertarian are two very, very different
beasts.

>snip<
>> Got a link? I've looked through what I could find on Google Groups
>> and can't seem to find any mention of the rules you preach. Would you
>> please humble me with your greatness and illuminate my path?
>
> Sigh! I MAY get back to you on this at a later date. I just hate to look
> up anything. It comes from my being a former college librarian.

Well, that might explain your odd distain for the inherent article
retention and threading systems of Usenet and subsequent love of
extraneous quoting.

-Zenin
 
"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Jeff Grippe wrote:
>
>> Understood but I will always speak out against racism and ignorance. I
>> realize that it may be pointless at times but (I feel) that we must have
>> a zero tolerance policy.
>
> That's fair, though I've come around to the feeling that the only reason
> Ed hasn't been hanged is he's still feverishly paying out rope for
> himself. He's so clearly an intolerant numpty that there's little point
> in me saying so, he's saying it himself, and he's showing what a vacuous
> way to be it is by providing an ongoing example. Anyone but Ed want to be
> like Ed?

Hey Jeff ... with friends like this you do not need any enemies. By the way,
all these UK cyclists are nothing if not PC (politically correct). Regular
knee jerks - all of them!

> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

I am trying to figure out if this Medical Physics IT Officer by the name of
Peter Clinch of the University of Dundee, Scotland has kill filed me or not.
It would seem not as he continues to see fit to comment on my posts (or is
it just little old me regardless of my posts). Well, he has always been a
scoundrel and a coward who refuses to confront anyone directly. He only
knows how to weasel indirectly via another's post. He is the Cletus Lee of
the UK. Anyone here really want to be like Peetah!

Clinch took a big time powder when the criminal vandal troll was here
wrecking ARBR a few months ago. But it is always good to know who you can
depend upon to be a scoundrel and a coward when the going gets rough. Clinch
is no good in a clinch despite his name.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
 
Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:
>snip<
> I can edit anyone perfectly without any bias whatsoever. I will simply
> include all of the relevant post and only eliminate that which is
> irrelevant to what I am responding to.

I did exactly this with your post and you called it biased because I
didn't include the full paragraph(s). In that example (as in this one),
I was responding to a point made within a paragraph that consisted of
many sub-points as well as the over-all point. When such situations
occur one is required to split the quote to display correct context for
the reply (eg, this reply). Perhaps if your paragraphs were not so
long-winded this type of edit would not be so often required.

> PS. I believe you are not quoting me because you do not want others to
> kill file you.

Or he could simply be respecting the wishes of those who have chosen to
avoid your ramblings. Or he could not care about any of it (the most
likely case).

> Zenin came right out and said it.

Said what? I did suggest that your real intent in promoting the
complete and unedited quoting of your messages was to circumvent kill
files, but I never suggested Jeff had thought at all about kill files.

> I cannot give your messages the time and effort they deserve if you do not
> quote me in your messages.

You've already said your piece; demanding others recite you again is
simply being obnoxious.

-Zenin
 
"Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> What do you think kill files are? In their basic form kill files are
>>> nothing more then an automatic way to not read those people, threads,
>>> or topics which annoy you. -Weighted kill files are more complex, but
>>> the same basic idea still applies albeit with the addition that it if
>>> it can also apply in the inverse.
>>
>> I may want to read someone on one subject but not on another subject. If
>> I
>> kill file that person, then I am prevented from reading him on any
>> subject.
>
> This type of situation is what weighted kill files (aka scoring) were
> created for. They allow this type of granularity...but with much lower
> user overhead to manage then you'd initially expect. You might find
> them to your liking.
>
> You can also give things a positive score in such systems. For example
> I could give "Edward Dolan" a +1000 score, basically guaranteeing that
> reguardless of any other rules I'd see your posts. So even in a thread
> that I'd scored -100 ("I don't care about this topic"), if you happened
> to find the topic worthy of attention it would show up anyway (-100 +
> 1000 > 0).

All of that is way too much work and I would never even think of doing it.
It is just so much simpler to decide at the moment whether I care to read
someone or not. I do not believe in creating complication when it is not
necessary.

The real question however is why anyone would ever want to kill file dear
lovable Ed Dolan, the greatest charmer ARBR has ever known.

>> My objection to kill files remains - they are not necessary.
>
> And the great thing about Usenet is that objection is perfectly fine,
> for you. Everyone is free to use or not use any filtering systems they
> personally find useful, without any imposition on anyone else.

I do not care in the slightest if some dumbbell wants to kill file me. Hells
Bells! It is his loss, not mine!

>>>> By the way, the only class of people I hate worse than liberals are
>>>> libertarians! The ought to be taken out and shot - or at least not
>>>> allowed to live in society. I would exile them to Antarctica myself.
>>>
>>> That's convenient, since right-wing* libertarians are anti-society.
>>> :)
>>
>> We conservatives are very pro-society! But we know what works and what
>> doesn't work, which is why we are not much in favor of social
>> experimentation.
>
> You can't be right-wing libertarian and be pro-society as right-wing
> libertarian is basically anarchy. But then you're mixing up the term
> "conservative" into the topic here where it was not before. Right-wing
> conservative and right-wing libertarian are two very, very different
> beasts.

I distinguish conservative entirely from libertarian, of whatever stripe. I
have never mixed the term conservative with libertarian. I believe you did
that.

> >snip<
>>> Got a link? I've looked through what I could find on Google Groups
>>> and can't seem to find any mention of the rules you preach. Would
>>> you
>>> please humble me with your greatness and illuminate my path?
>>
>> Sigh! I MAY get back to you on this at a later date. I just hate to look
>> up anything. It comes from my being a former college librarian.
>
> Well, that might explain your odd distain for the inherent article
> retention and threading systems of Usenet and subsequent love of
> extraneous quoting.

Yes, looking things up is for moles, whether scholars or librarians. Such
low types may be necessary, but I sure as hell am not suited to be a mole. I
leave that to my inferiors. You get the facts for me and I will tell you
what to think about them.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
 
"Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >snip<
>> I can edit anyone perfectly without any bias whatsoever. I will simply
>> include all of the relevant post and only eliminate that which is
>> irrelevant to what I am responding to.
>
> I did exactly this with your post and you called it biased because I
> didn't include the full paragraph(s). In that example (as in this
> one),
> I was responding to a point made within a paragraph that consisted of
> many sub-points as well as the over-all point. When such situations
> occur one is required to split the quote to display correct context for
> the reply (eg, this reply). Perhaps if your paragraphs were not so
> long-winded this type of edit would not be so often required.

It is not proper to pull a single sentence out of a paragraph. I never write
that badly that it can be done. My paragraphs are of a very reasonable
length and they hang together. I generally only devote one thought to one
paragraph with maybe a trailing comment at the end as a sort of zinger.

But the truth is there are very few who know how to edit. It is both a skill
and an art. A good writer, such as myself, requires very little editing if
any. You will always be on safe ground if you include my every word in a
paragraph to which you are responding. Only bad writers need to be edited

Note how I have included all of your paragraph because I am responding to
all of your paragraph. I could have easily excluded your last sentence
because it makes me look bad, but I chose not to because I want the reader
to grasp your personality and then my reaction to it. Calling me long-winded
tells the reader more about you than it does me. It is the essence of being
fair which the reader will appreciate and perhaps enjoy at the same time.

>> PS. I believe you are not quoting me because you do not want others to
>> kill file you.
>
> Or he could simply be respecting the wishes of those who have chosen to
> avoid your ramblings. Or he could not care about any of it (the most
> likely case).

No, Jeff is reading me whole, but he wants to paraphrase what I say in a
very minimalist way. I believe I am quite correct in my assessment of why he
is doing what he is doing - he does not want others to kill file him. It is
sad in a way that he should care about such matters. I outgrew all of that
sort of thing by the time I was out of my teens.

>> Zenin came right out and said it.

>
> Said what?

Who the hell even knows what you are talking about at this point? Here is
the complete thought which is what you should have presented to the reader:

"I believe you are not quoting me because you do not want others to kill
file you. Zenin came right out and said it. He is devious like a fox, but he
is truthful too."

> I did suggest that your real intent in promoting the
> complete and unedited quoting of your messages was to circumvent kill
> files, but I never suggested Jeff had thought at all about kill files.

Right! I said that you said it. And then I added the thought that that may
be why Jeff was not quoting me. But you were the one that brought up the
evil thought in the first place, not me and not Jeff. Also, look up the word
devious in a dictionary if you want to see yourself as others see you.

>> I cannot give your messages the time and effort they deserve if you do
>> not
>> quote me in your messages.
>
> You've already said your piece; demanding others recite you again is
> simply being obnoxious.

I told Jeff something that he needs to know if he continues to post in the
manner that he does. I had not previously told him that.

The question arises at this point of how well do you read? Your editing is
just so-so. You have not persuaded me of a single thing so far. You do know
one or two things about the Internet and Usenet, but that is of only slight
interest to me.

Bottom line, you write about what you want to write about and say it how you
please and I will do the same. However, as with Jeff, if I think you are
being unfair in your editing, I will make short work of you. I can't be
bothered wasting time with those who refuse to follow the rules and extend
the elementary courtesies of proper posting form.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
 
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 22:48:51 GMT, Mike Rice <[email protected]> wrote:

> Our 'War On Terror' is an embarrassment. We were lied to so an agenda
> could be follwed, and the source and his buddies are making incredible
> profits while bankrupting the country, and giviing much of the world
> reason to distrust (if not outright hate) us.

Actually, it's more like 'yet more proof that we were right to
distrust you'. HTH.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
 
"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Hey Jeff ... with friends like this you do not need any enemies. By the
> way, all these UK cyclists are nothing if not PC (politically correct).
> Regular knee jerks - all of them!
>

If you say so Ed. All I'm saying is that I don't need to resort to name
calling and insults merely because I don't agree with you. It goes without
saying that I think some of your opinions are completely nuts. That is not
an insult, however, it is my opinion which I am entitled to. It is hugely
different from saying "You and everyone like you (take your pick of groups
that you belong to Irish, Minnesotan, Conservative) is nuts."

Now I know that making these petty distinctions smacks of PC which is
probably why you have stuck me with the label. But the harsh words escalate
and the entire discussion becomes:

"You're an idiot"

"No you're an idiot"

"You and everyone like you is an idiot"

"No you and everyone like you is an idiot"

And burried in this back and forth I eventually find something having to do
with recumbents or cycling.

You must be tired of saying things that just lead to predictable reactions
from others (including me). Then again maybe you aren't.

But you've got to admit you are properly quoted this time...

Jeff
 
"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:p[email protected]...
>
> PS. I believe you are not quoting me because you do not want others to
> kill file you. Zenin came right out and said it. He is devious like a fox,
> but he is truthful too. I cannot give your messages the time and effort
> they deserve if you do not quote me in your messages.
>

Ed, I've already explained my posting style and it really isn't more
complicated than that. I don't care who kill files me or why. I'm sure that
my saying the same things to you over and over has to be boring to some
people and who can blame them.

My motives are straightforward and relatively simple. I write what I believe
to be the way things are as I understand them. So in a nutshell:

1. I'd like you and others to lay off the insults. It is perfectly fine to
disagree but you don't have to be disagreeable.

2. I'll post any damn way I want to. I'll quote if I feel like it or not. If
that is a problem for you then don't read my posts. It isn't going to have a
profound impact on my life if you choose not to read and respond to
something because you don't like the way it is posted.

3. Everyone deserves a voice here. Clearly there are ways to be so obnoxious
as to really destroy the experience for everyone. I don't think you've
crossed that line. You usually begin your responses to a topic "on topic"
and only sometimes do things degrade into a shouting match. But it takes two
or more to do that so no individual (such as you) can be held to blame. If
people don't want the hostile conversations to continue then they can simply
not respond and the topic dies.

4. People read books and write books dispite what Gore Vidal may have said
and dispite what you have come to believe. But these days people also watch
TV, DVD's, Movies, etc. and the novel is clearly not what it once was.
Nothing can replace it, however. All of these things are different and books
will always have a place.

Ed, you may enjoy playing cute games and getting people to respond to all
sorts of things. Fine. That makes me your patsy. I'm the sucker who will
fall for it every time. That is fine with me. As for who I am, I think your
earlier description of me as an "ernest clod" works well. Since my life's
purpose is not seeking your approval I don't mind whatever label you decide
to stick me with.

As always I sincerely wish you all the best on and off the bike.

Jeff
 
On 06/20/2005 18:31:49 "Jeff Grippe" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

>> Hey Jeff ... with friends like this you do not need any enemies. By the
>> way, all these UK cyclists are nothing if not PC (politically correct).
>> Regular knee jerks - all of them!

> If you say so Ed. All I'm saying is that I don't need to resort to name
> calling and insults merely because I don't agree with you. It goes
> without saying that I think some of your opinions are completely nuts.
> That is not an insult, however, it is my opinion which I am entitled to.
> It is hugely different from saying "You and everyone like you (take your
> pick of groups that you belong to Irish, Minnesotan, Conservative) is
> nuts."

It's ok Jeff, Ed is not Irish.

--

Buck

I would rather be out on my Catrike

http://www.catrike.co.uk
 
Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This type of situation is what weighted kill files (aka scoring) were
>> created for. They allow this type of granularity...but with much
>> lower user overhead to manage then you'd initially expect. You might
>> find them to your liking.
>>
> All of that is way too much work and I would never even think of doing it.
> It is just so much simpler to decide at the moment whether I care to read
> someone or not. I do not believe in creating complication when it is not
> necessary.

Well, you only follow this group one group with any frequency.

When one follows many groups, killfiles/scoring drastically reduce the
effort required. It means the difference between making ten decisions
"at the moment" and hundreds. They really are the only effective way to
follow a large number of groups (even if you never kill file individual
people).

> The real question however is why anyone would ever want to kill file dear
> lovable Ed Dolan, the greatest charmer ARBR has ever known.

Because you are an ignorant, arrogant, OT loving, noise posting, troll.

Hey, you said you valued honesty.

I was keeping you around because you amused me, much like the tiny
basketball hoop in my office; something I can toy with that doesn't
require much brain power, leaving my mind free to do my real work.

BTW, it's completely possible Peter kill filed you. But it's just as
likely he kill filed this thread, not individual people. So "the real
question" is why do you jump to the conclusion that it's all about you?
Why are you so paranoid?

BTW, I too think I'm done with this thread...it is no longer amusing me.
I'm only giving you a -50 however...you still might amuse on another
topic.

>> You can't be right-wing libertarian and be pro-society as right-wing
>> libertarian is basically anarchy. But then you're mixing up the term
>> "conservative" into the topic here where it was not before.
>> Right-wing conservative and right-wing libertarian are two very, very
>> different beasts.
>
> I distinguish conservative entirely from libertarian, of whatever stripe. I
> have never mixed the term conservative with libertarian. I believe you did
> that.

Review the thread, Ed.

You compared the kill file functionality with liberalism. I countered
with the observation that the system was really far more right-wing
libertarian in nature. You're the one that then came back and confused
the term right-wing libertarian with conservative.

-Zenin
 
"Jeff Grippe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Hey Jeff ... with friends like this you do not need any enemies. By the
>> way, all these UK cyclists are nothing if not PC (politically correct).
>> Regular knee jerks - all of them!
>>
>
> If you say so Ed. All I'm saying is that I don't need to resort to name
> calling and insults merely because I don't agree with you. It goes without
> saying that I think some of your opinions are completely nuts. That is not
> an insult, however, it is my opinion which I am entitled to. It is hugely
> different from saying "You and everyone like you (take your pick of groups
> that you belong to Irish, Minnesotan, Conservative) is nuts."
>
> Now I know that making these petty distinctions smacks of PC which is
> probably why you have stuck me with the label.
[...]

> But you've got to admit you are properly quoted this time...
>
> Jeff

Yes, you quoted me right but you left out your message and Peter's message
which provided the context for my message.

Here is how you should have done it:

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > Jeff Grippe wrote:
>
>> Understood but I will always speak out against racism and ignorance. I
>> realize that it may be pointless at times but (I feel) that we must have
>> a zero tolerance policy.
>
> That's fair, though I've come around to the feeling that the only reason
> Ed hasn't been hanged is he's still feverishly paying out rope for
> himself. He's so clearly an intolerant numpty that there's little point
> in me saying so, he's saying it himself, and he's showing what a vacuous
> way to be it is by providing an ongoing example. Anyone but Ed want to be
> like Ed?

Edward Dolan wrote:

Hey Jeff ... with friends like this you do not need any enemies. By the way,
all these UK cyclists are nothing if not PC (politically correct). Regular
knee jerks - all of them!

The above could then be followed by your message to which I am now
responding.

What did you save by truncating the previous message? You only provided a
bit of confusion and muddle headedness to no purpose. You must provide the
FULL CONTEXT in every message so as to leave no doubt as to what has been
previously said. What I said above makes no sense if what led up to it is
not included.

Very few folks know how to edit for clarity. Most folks only know how to
edit to make themselves look good.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
 
"Buck" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> On 06/20/2005 18:31:49 "Jeff Grippe" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>
>>> Hey Jeff ... with friends like this you do not need any enemies. By
>>> the
>>> way, all these UK cyclists are nothing if not PC (politically correct).
>>> Regular knee jerks - all of them!
>
>> If you say so Ed. All I'm saying is that I don't need to resort to name
>> calling and insults merely because I don't agree with you. It goes
>> without saying that I think some of your opinions are completely nuts.
>> That is not an insult, however, it is my opinion which I am entitled to.
>> It is hugely different from saying "You and everyone like you (take your
>> pick of groups that you belong to Irish, Minnesotan, Conservative) is
>> nuts."
>
> It's ok Jeff, Ed is not Irish.

Anyone with the name Dolan is of Irish ancestry. That is all I have ever
said about myself. I am as American as it is possible to get.

Jeff Grippe tells me that he is of Polish ancestry. Does Grippe sound Polish
to you?

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
 
"Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 22:48:51 GMT, Mike Rice <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Our 'War On Terror' is an embarrassment. We were lied to so an agenda
>> could be follwed, and the source and his buddies are making incredible
>> profits while bankrupting the country, and giviing much of the world
>> reason to distrust (if not outright hate) us.
>
> Actually, it's more like 'yet more proof that we were right to
> distrust you'. HTH.
>
> regards, Ian SMith

The only proof that can be read into the above statement is that the Brits
deserved to have their empire wrested away from them. They were no longer
fit to rule others. Hells Bells! They can just barely rule themselves these
days. Ah, for the good old days of Queen Victoria!

However, the Brits did manage to bestir themselves long enough to hang onto
their pitiful Falkland Islands under PM Thatcher. Apparently, they are not
yet completely feckless.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
 
"Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Zenin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> This type of situation is what weighted kill files (aka scoring) were
>>> created for. They allow this type of granularity...but with much
>>> lower user overhead to manage then you'd initially expect. You might
>>> find them to your liking.
>>>
>> All of that is way too much work and I would never even think of doing
>> it.
>> It is just so much simpler to decide at the moment whether I care to read
>> someone or not. I do not believe in creating complication when it is not
>> necessary.
>
> Well, you only follow this group one group with any frequency.
>
> When one follows many groups, killfiles/scoring drastically reduce the
> effort required. It means the difference between making ten decisions
> "at the moment" and hundreds. They really are the only effective way
> to
> follow a large number of groups (even if you never kill file individual
> people).

There are more than enough idiots available for me here on ARBR. Why would I
ever look elsewhere?

>> The real question however is why anyone would ever want to kill file dear
>> lovable Ed Dolan, the greatest charmer ARBR has ever known.
>
> Because you are an ignorant, arrogant, OT loving, noise posting, troll.
>
> Hey, you said you valued honesty.

That is the price that you pay for Greatness like mine.

> I was keeping you around because you amused me, much like the tiny
> basketball hoop in my office; something I can toy with that doesn't
> require much brain power, leaving my mind free to do my real work.

Not everyone can be Great like me. But you are a good loser, no small
achievement these days when everyone thinks they are winners.

> BTW, it's completely possible Peter kill filed you. But it's just as
> likely he kill filed this thread, not individual people. So "the real
> question" is why do you jump to the conclusion that it's all about you?
> Why are you so paranoid?

No, Peetah picks up at the mere mention of my name. What other proof do you
need of my Greatness?

Everyone is always discussing me and what I say. Yes, you too! That is
because I have the knack of saying interesting things in interesting ways. I
think everyone else is jealous of me, but let them choke on their jealousy.
I am above all such petty concerns. In short, I am Ed Dolan the Great! And
don't you ever forget it!

> BTW, I too think I'm done with this thread...it is no longer amusing
> me.
> I'm only giving you a -50 however...you still might amuse on another
> topic.

If I were you I would be done too since you aren't saying much in any event.

>>> You can't be right-wing libertarian and be pro-society as right-wing
>>> libertarian is basically anarchy. But then you're mixing up the term
>>> "conservative" into the topic here where it was not before.
>>> Right-wing conservative and right-wing libertarian are two very, very
>>> different beasts.
>>
>> I distinguish conservative entirely from libertarian, of whatever stripe.
>> I
>> have never mixed the term conservative with libertarian. I believe you
>> did
>> that.
>
> Review the thread, Ed.
>
> You compared the kill file functionality with liberalism. I countered
> with the observation that the system was really far more right-wing
> libertarian in nature. You're the one that then came back and confused
> the term right-wing libertarian with conservative.

No, I never mentioned anything about libertarians being either right or
left. You did that. All I ever said about libertarians is that they are
nuts.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
 
"Jeff Grippe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:p[email protected]...
>>
>> PS. I believe you are not quoting me because you do not want others to
>> kill file you. Zenin came right out and said it. He is devious like a
>> fox, but he is truthful too. I cannot give your messages the time and
>> effort they deserve if you do not quote me in your messages.
>>
>
> Ed, I've already explained my posting style and it really isn't more
> complicated than that. I don't care who kill files me or why. I'm sure
> that my saying the same things to you over and over has to be boring to
> some people and who can blame them.

Your posting style is unique. That right there ought to give you pause.

> My motives are straightforward and relatively simple. I write what I
> believe to be the way things are as I understand them. So in a nutshell:
>
> 1. I'd like you and others to lay off the insults. It is perfectly fine to
> disagree but you don't have to be disagreeable.

I like to say things forcefully so as to get the attention of the brain
dead. I am in good company as all writers strive for a such a style.

> 2. I'll post any damn way I want to. I'll quote if I feel like it or not.
> If that is a problem for you then don't read my posts. It isn't going to
> have a profound impact on my life if you choose not to read and respond to
> something because you don't like the way it is posted.

I will never rest from my labors as long as you post the way you do.
However, I will not expend much time or energy on you either. I can't be
bothered overly much with those who do not observe the rules of proper
posting.

> 3. Everyone deserves a voice here. Clearly there are ways to be so
> obnoxious as to really destroy the experience for everyone. I don't think
> you've crossed that line. You usually begin your responses to a topic "on
> topic" and only sometimes do things degrade into a shouting match. But it
> takes two or more to do that so no individual (such as you) can be held to
> blame. If people don't want the hostile conversations to continue then
> they can simply not respond and the topic dies.

Agreed, but you do not know what obnoxious posting is. You are a naif and do
not know what a real troll is all about. Where were you when this group was
being destroyed a few months ago by a criminal vandal troll. This was not
fun and games. A real troll can easily destroy a newsgroup without half
trying, especially when everyone on the group is either a coward or worse.

> 4. People read books and write books dispite what Gore Vidal may have said
> and dispite what you have come to believe. But these days people also
> watch TV, DVD's, Movies, etc. and the novel is clearly not what it once
> was. Nothing can replace it, however. All of these things are different
> and books will always have a place.

The place for books will never again be what it was though due to the
electronic media. Don't you think that was pretty much what I was saying in
the first place? You see how we can find areas of agreement when you listen
to the small quiet voice in the back of your mind.

> Ed, you may enjoy playing cute games and getting people to respond to all
> sorts of things. Fine. That makes me your patsy. I'm the sucker who will
> fall for it every time. That is fine with me. As for who I am, I think
> your earlier description of me as an "ernest clod" works well. Since my
> life's purpose is not seeking your approval I don't mind whatever label
> you decide to stick me with.

Newsgroups are all about playing games and having some fun. Very strange
that a smart fellow like you do not realize this.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
 
"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Jeff Grippe tells me that he is of Polish ancestry. Does Grippe sound
> Polish to you?
>

Well this is where your various built in bias fail you Ed.

Grippe is my step-father's name acquired by me when I was ten. I only use
the word "step-father" to describe the relationship technically. He is my
Dad. He is the best Dad I could ever hope for and I wear his name proudly
and with love and fondness give it to my son as well. He does not, however,
have a drop of Polish blood in him.

My Mother's family, with whom I am very close, is from Poland. So regardless
of what I call myself, I am Polish.

You probably don't know about the Jewish Ferguson's do you?

Jeff
 
Ed,

Re:Quoting Techniquie

Asked and answered. Sorry if you don't like it (but not sorry enough to do
it the way you think is right.)

Jeff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Killing of two cyclist by a hit an run drunk while they
Replies
1
Views
404
Recumbent bicycles
Me
M
A
Hit by car and very lucky to be alive
Replies
5
Views
547
Recumbent bicycles
bent_pilot
B
D
Re: MOEPED3 is ready to hit the road
Replies
0
Views
494
Recumbent bicycles
DGoncz 22044-0394
D
D
Re: MOEPED3 is ready to hit the road
Replies
1
Views
488
Recumbent bicycles
Tom Sherman
T
D
Re: MOEPED3 is ready to hit the road
Replies
0
Views
447
Recumbent bicycles
DGoncz 22044-0394
D
Top Bottom Back