Re: Oops, bloody cyclists ...

[DR]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:29:44 GMT, Señor Chris <[email protected]> is
alleged to have written:

>DR wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:30:10 GMT, Señor Chris <[email protected]> is
>> alleged to have written:
>>
>>> The Older Gentleman wrote:
>>>> Paul Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 08/03/2008 17:35, The Older Gentleman said,
>>>>>
>>>>>> Have a look at his home page....
>>>>> Amongst all the **** that seems to comprise your signature, the link to
>>>>> your home page seems to be missing.
>>>> And?
>>>>
>>> And slagging off other people's efforts when you haven't got the wit or
>>> intelligence to produce anything of your own makes you look a bit of a ****.
>>
>> Is there a law stating that you must have a personal home page? Not
>> having one does not equate to the lack of ability to produce one. Nor
>> is it necessary to tell the world if you do have one, after all there
>> are some particularly unsavoury characters out there.
>>
>
>Exactly. People who are willing to put personal information on the web
>in order to provide useful information to others should be
>congratulated, not put down with inane criticism.

You're a loony.


--
Darren
GSF1200N K3

 

[The Older Gentleman]

Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:

> The Older Gentleman wrote:
> > Paul Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/03/2008 17:35, The Older Gentleman said,
> >>
> >>> Have a look at his home page....
> >> Amongst all the **** that seems to comprise your signature, the link to
> >> your home page seems to be missing.
> >
> > And?
> >
> >
>
> And slagging off other people's efforts when you haven't got the wit or
> intelligence to produce anything of your own makes you look a bit of a ****.

By that logic, art critics would not be permitted to exist. Nor would
test pilots, come to that.

Secondly, who says I slagged it off? I didn't.

You really need to apply the thinking process a bit harder, because at
present, you're looking a complete ****, rather than a fragment of one.

And who says that I haven't produced a home page anyway?


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

 

[The Older Gentleman]

Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:

> Exactly. People who are willing to put personal information on the web
> in order to provide useful information to others should be
> congratulated, not put down with inane criticism.

Idiot. Think of all the conspiracy theorists and assorted nutters who do
just that? It's 'useful' in their minds. Oh, I forgot, you don't allow
third party criticism, do you?

And who criticised anyway?


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

 

[The Older Gentleman]

DR <[email protected]> wrote:

> You're a loony.

No. Just someone bereft of intelligence.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

 

[Ben]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:29:44 GMT, Señor Chris <[email protected]>
wrote:

>DR wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:30:10 GMT, Señor Chris <[email protected]> is
>> alleged to have written:
>>
>>> The Older Gentleman wrote:
>>>> Paul Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 08/03/2008 17:35, The Older Gentleman said,
>>>>>
>>>>>> Have a look at his home page....
>>>>> Amongst all the **** that seems to comprise your signature, the link to
>>>>> your home page seems to be missing.
>>>> And?
>>>>
>>> And slagging off other people's efforts when you haven't got the wit or
>>> intelligence to produce anything of your own makes you look a bit of a ****.
>>
>> Is there a law stating that you must have a personal home page? Not
>> having one does not equate to the lack of ability to produce one. Nor
>> is it necessary to tell the world if you do have one, after all there
>> are some particularly unsavoury characters out there.
>>
>
>Exactly. People who are willing to put personal information on the web
>in order to provide useful information to others should be
>congratulated, not put down with inane criticism.

Why should someone be congratulated for displaying their vanity?
--
ZX-10R

 

[TOG@Toil]

On 10 Mar, 09:48, Ben <ben@bensales_DOT_ME.uk> wrote:


>
> Why should someone be congratulated for displaying their vanity?

Good point. Senor Chris is a bit lacking in the logic department.

 

[Pip]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 03:47:43 -0700 (PDT), "TOG@Toil"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On 10 Mar, 09:48, Ben <ben@bensales_DOT_ME.uk> wrote:

>> Why should someone be congratulated for displaying their vanity?
>
>Good point. Senor Chris is a bit lacking in the logic department.

He insists on using physical pedalling for propulsion purposes. QED.

--
Pip: B12

 

[[email protected]]

The Older Gentleman wrote:
> By that logic, art critics would not be permitted to exist.

That sounds like a feature, not a bug.


-dan

 

[Veggie Dave]

Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote the following literary
masterpiece:
>And slagging off other people's efforts when you haven't got the wit or
>intelligence to produce anything of your own makes you look a bit of a
>****.

Yeah, TOG could never produce any sort of written media that was
remotely legible never mind to a professional level, that was
informative and entertaining.

Er, oh...

--
Veggie Dave
UKRMHRC#2 BOTAFOF#08
IQ 18 FILMS http://www.iq18films.com
POST PRODUCTION http://www.iq18films.co.uk
Toxic Shock Syndrome Gets More Girls Than Me

 

[Eiron]

Veggie Dave wrote:
> Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote the following literary
> masterpiece:
>> And slagging off other people's efforts when you haven't got the wit or
>> intelligence to produce anything of your own makes you look a bit of a
>> ****.
>
> Yeah, TOG could never produce any sort of written media that was
> remotely legible never mind to a professional level, that was
> informative and entertaining.
>
> Er, oh...

I don't think cyclists understand irony.

--
Eiron.

 

[Señor Chris]

The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Exactly. People who are willing to put personal information on the web
>> in order to provide useful information to others should be
>> congratulated, not put down with inane criticism.
>
> Idiot. Think of all the conspiracy theorists and assorted nutters who do
> just that? It's 'useful' in their minds. Oh, I forgot, you don't allow
> third party criticism, do you?
>

Now it appears you can't tell the difference between a page about cycle
touring and 'conspiracy theorist' garbage. I'm losing the will here -
please say something intelligent.

> And who criticised anyway?
>
>

 

[The Older Gentleman]

Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:

> The Older Gentleman wrote:
> > Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Exactly. People who are willing to put personal information on the web
> >> in order to provide useful information to others should be
> >> congratulated, not put down with inane criticism.
> >
> > Idiot. Think of all the conspiracy theorists and assorted nutters who do
> > just that? It's 'useful' in their minds. Oh, I forgot, you don't allow
> > third party criticism, do you?
> >
>
> Now it appears you can't tell the difference between a page about cycle
> touring and 'conspiracy theorist' garbage. I'm losing the will here -
> please say something intelligent.

No, you are the one who is saying that people who put up websites are to
be encouraged. I merely point out that a lot of what people think is
useful isn't.
>
> > And who criticised anyway?
> >
And you have left this question unanswered, I see. And studiously
ignored my (correct) dismissal of your other points. And have given up
on the issue of my home page (which can very easily be found, should you
look) as well.

So: what's your next move?


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

 

[geoff]

In message <[email protected]>, Veggie Dave
<[email protected]> writes
>Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote the following literary
>masterpiece:
>>And slagging off other people's efforts when you haven't got the wit or
>>intelligence to produce anything of your own makes you look a bit of a
>>****.
>
>Yeah, TOG could never produce any sort of written media that was
>remotely legible never mind to a professional level, that was
>informative and entertaining.
>
>Er, oh...
>
Yeah - lucky he doesn't work for a magazine, innit

.... err as you were

--
geoff

 

[Señor Chris]

The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The Older Gentleman wrote:
>>> Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Exactly. People who are willing to put personal information on the web
>>>> in order to provide useful information to others should be
>>>> congratulated, not put down with inane criticism.
>>> Idiot. Think of all the conspiracy theorists and assorted nutters who do
>>> just that? It's 'useful' in their minds. Oh, I forgot, you don't allow
>>> third party criticism, do you?
>>>
>> Now it appears you can't tell the difference between a page about cycle
>> touring and 'conspiracy theorist' garbage. I'm losing the will here -
>> please say something intelligent.
>
> No, you are the one who is saying that people who put up websites are to
> be encouraged. I merely point out that a lot of what people think is
> useful isn't.

Citing conspiracy theorists as a meaningful example.


>>> And who criticised anyway?
>>>
> And you have left this question unanswered, I see

You facetiously mocked someone else's genuine efforts to provide free
and helpful information to people with similar interests.


> And studiously ignored my (correct) dismissal of your other points.

I would expect a test pilot and even an art critic to use a little more
wit and intelligence than you managed.


> And have given up on the issue of my home page (which can very easily be found, should you
> look) as well.
>

Others will criticise you for displaying your vanity but in my opinion
it looks a useful page. Congratulations.


> So: what's your next move?
>
>

 

[The Older Gentleman]

Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> You facetiously mocked someone else's genuine efforts to provide free
> and helpful information to people with similar interests.

OK, so that makes you a liar. Congratulations. It's a well-known trick,
to say, in a long thread,m that someone said such-and-such when they
didn't, and rely on nobody being arsed to check through the thread to
confirm it.

I did not mock. I did not criticise. You lose.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

 

[Señor Chris]

The Older Gentleman wrote:
>
> I did not mock. I did not criticise. You lose.
>
>

When you make the suggestion "have a look at this" and people respond
with "I've seen worse" and "What? I don't see anything remarkable",
doesn't that give you an inkling that your comment might have been
perceived as criticism ?

For a moment back there I was hoping you were going to prove me wrong by
showing some signs of intelligence but as it turns out, I was right all
along. It's time you were binned.

 

[The Older Gentleman]

Señor Chris <[email protected]> wrote:

> When you make the suggestion "have a look at this" and people respond
> with "I've seen worse" and "What? I don't see anything remarkable",
> doesn't that give you an inkling that your comment might have been
> perceived as criticism ?

Ah. So just a suggestion that someone view a home page is criticism?
How do you know, pray? Can you find one word of criticism there?

You *do* read a lot into postings. What an imaginative little mammal you
must be.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com