The Outlying Fells

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:30:05 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Roger
(Sig file permanently deconstructed following adverse comments)

Eh? How are we now supposed to keep an eye on your progress???

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

GPS, personal satellite, or wireless pc with webcam any help?
;-)

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

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:30:05 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Roger
(Sig file permanently deconstructed following adverse comments)

Eh? How are we now supposed to keep an eye on your progress???

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

The message <[email hidden]>
from Rooney <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Roger
(Sig file permanently deconstructed following adverse comments)

Quoted message said:

Eh? How are we now supposed to keep an eye on your progress???

I didn't no anyone was in the slightest bit interested. All I seem to
get these days is derogatory comments.

--
Roger
(Sig file permanently deconstructed following adverse comments)

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:23:21 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The message <[email hidden]>
from Rooney <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Roger
(Sig file permanently deconstructed following adverse comments)

Quoted message said:

Eh? How are we now supposed to keep an eye on your progress???

I didn't no anyone was in the slightest bit interested. All I seem to
get these days is derogatory comments.

Ignore them, Roger. I'm keeping an eye on your totals - though I've
not done much at all in recent months in the way of Wainwrights. I've
been out and about to pastures new.
Incidentally, all your TRs are read with interest - but they don't
always call for any reply.

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

Rooney <[email hidden]> wrote in news:b1kbq05f9vhe3b3vcqi8f8istb2ocjaom7@
4ax.com:

Quoted message said:

Incidentally, all your TRs are read with interest

Likewise - please do keep them coming, Roger.

Stuart

The message <[email hidden]>
from Stuart Mann <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Rooney <[email hidden]> wrote in news:b1kbq05f9vhe3b3vcqi8f8istb2ocjaom7@
4ax.com:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Incidentally, all your TRs are read with interest

Quoted message said:

Likewise - please do keep them coming, Roger.

I am touched some would say completely bonkers). I haven't done many TRs
of late not least because it is hard to say much about short walks over
soggy boggy visiting often insignificant summits.

--
Roger
(Sig file permanently deconstructed following adverse comments)

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:23:21 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Roger
(Sig file permanently deconstructed following adverse comments)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Eh? How are we now supposed to keep an eye on your progress???

Quoted message said:

I didn't no anyone was in the slightest bit interested. All I seem to
get these days is derogatory comments.

In my respectful opinion, you shouldn't allow other people to decide
what goes in your sig file. Do they allow you to decide what they'll
eat for dinner, of the colour of their next car?

Illegitimi non carborundum, as they say 🙂

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:01:48 +0000, Peewiglet wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

In my respectful opinion, you shouldn't allow other people to decide
what goes in your sig file. Do they allow you to decide what they'll eat
for dinner, of the colour of their next car?

OTOH he does not have the dinner or the car thrust into his field of
vision every time they post on usenet. (Actually the sig never bothered me
in the least, but I am a pedant with a spare minute to fill.)

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Best wishes,

Reciprocated,

saki

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:28:54 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I haven't done many TRs
of late not least because it is hard to say much about short walks over
soggy boggy visiting often insignificant summits.

Oh, I dunno... I seem to manage to put a lot of words together, and
I'm not climbing anything utlra-sophisticated either 🙂 (Long winded
etc...) I enjoy your TRs.

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

saki said:

Quoted message said:

In my respectful opinion, you shouldn't allow other people to decide
what goes in your sig file. Do they allow you to decide what they'll eat
for dinner, of the colour of their next car?

OTOH he does not have the dinner or the car thrust into his field of
vision every time they post on usenet. (Actually the sig never bothered me
in the least, but I am a pedant with a spare minute to fill.)

You can't be serious...

People who don't want to see sig's are in the wrong place on usenet.

I think what you've written arises more out of misunderstanding than
pedantry... (Or maybe you just like to argue? Yawn....)

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

Peewiglet <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

In my respectful opinion, you shouldn't allow other people to decide
what goes in your sig file. Do they allow you to decide what they'll
eat for dinner, of the colour of their next car?

Illegitimi non carborundum, as they say 🙂

,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

Yeaah, better than some stoopid mythical animal!

As far as I know the only recommendation is that it should not exceed
four lines.
--
Gordon

Peewiglet said:

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:10:20 +0000, saki <[email hidden]> wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

You can't be serious...

People who don't want to see sig's are in the wrong place on usenet.

Entirely serious. Sigs are indeed ubiquitous, though their function as
defined in RFC 1855 has probably been lost (o tempora, o mores!), but that
does not prevent them from being irritating, and subject to criticism on
that account.

Quoted message said:

I think what you've written arises more out of misunderstanding than
pedantry...

No. I was pedantically taking exception to the frailty of your analogy.

<snip>

saki

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:24:55 +0000, Peewiglet <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

People who don't want to see sig's are in the wrong place on usenet.

Absolutely. We'll have none of that nonsense here!

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

saki said:

Entirely serious. Sigs are indeed ubiquitous, though their function as
defined in RFC 1855 has probably been lost (o tempora, o mores!), but that
does not prevent them from being irritating, and subject to criticism on
that account.

Start moaning about peak-bagging sigs here and you'll rapidly find
yourself plonked. They are a tradition.

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

Rooney said:

saki said:

Entirely serious. Sigs are indeed ubiquitous, though their function as
defined in RFC 1855 has probably been lost (o tempora, o mores!), but that
does not prevent them from being irritating, and subject to criticism on
that account.

Start moaning about peak-bagging sigs here and you'll rapidly find
yourself plonked. They are a tradition.

To quote from my original post (hardly lost in the mists of
time), "Actually the sig never bothered me in the least .."

saki

Peewiglet said:

saki said:

Quoted message said:

In my respectful opinion, you shouldn't allow other people to decide
what goes in your sig file. Do they allow you to decide what they'll eat
for dinner, of the colour of their next car?

OTOH he does not have the dinner or the car thrust into his field of
vision every time they post on usenet. (Actually the sig never bothered me
in the least, but I am a pedant with a spare minute to fill.)

You can't be serious...

People who don't want to see sig's are in the wrong place on usenet.

I think what you've written arises more out of misunderstanding than
pedantry... (Or maybe you just like to argue? Yawn....)

Best wishes,

Did not! :-)

Katherine

saki said:

Rooney said:

saki said:

Entirely serious. Sigs are indeed ubiquitous, though their function as
defined in RFC 1855 has probably been lost (o tempora, o mores!), but that
does not prevent them from being irritating, and subject to criticism on
that account.

Start moaning about peak-bagging sigs here and you'll rapidly find
yourself plonked. They are a tradition.

To quote from my original post (hardly lost in the mists of
time), "Actually the sig never bothered me in the least .."

saki

Glad to hear it. We also have a tradition of highly technical
photography threads. This is uk.sci.photography&peak-bagging, and we
shoot ramblers on sight (unless they are trespassing).

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:22:44 +0000, Rooney wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

we shoot ramblers on sight (unless they are trespassing).

I knew there was something symbolic in that masterfully erect sig of
yours.

saki

saki said:

Quoted message said:

People who don't want to see sig's are in the wrong place on usenet.

Entirely serious. Sigs are indeed ubiquitous, though their function as
defined in RFC 1855 has probably been lost (o tempora, o mores!),

Well things develop and therefore change etc 🙂

Quoted message said:

but that
does not prevent them from being irritating, and subject to criticism on
that account.

Right, but there seem to be quite a lot of people who never actually
contribute anything other than the expression of irritation. An
example is the people who complain about the topics other people are
discussing, but never initiate a discussion themselves.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think what you've written arises more out of misunderstanding than
pedantry...

No. I was pedantically taking exception to the frailty of your analogy.

Fair enough said:

Quoted message said:

In my respectful opinion, you shouldn't allow other people to decide
what goes in your sig file. Do they allow you to decide what they'll eat
for dinner, of the colour of their next car?

I feel it's a fair analagy. Decisions about what (if anything) to have
in a sig file are personal, as are decisions about what to eat, the
colour of one's car etc. I can't see how other people might feel
entiteld to get involved (assuming that the poster isn't breaking some
univerally acknowledged 'rule', and Roger wasn't). Naturally you're
entitled to take a different view, though...

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \