The pleasures of illegal cycling

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 00:51:08 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

jms wrote:

Has anyone ever told you that you may be mentally unstable.

I get the feeling that you may be rather used to people telling you that
you are mentally unstable. For example why would you start a crosspost
to unnc of this thread, other than possibly a desire to invalidate any
discussion you subsequently take part in?

There was no need for this crosspost. It serves no useful purpose. It
will not adversely affect Chapman's candidacy as a moderator, it will
adversely affect your prospects. It will also ensure that fewer people
will take you seriously when it comes to a vote.

I can only assume that you are either trolling or, as has been suggested
previously, that you have some form of mental incapacity.


Why thank you Filth - I see Chapman made a fool of you - and that is
saying something.

If you can't get the better of him in any debate then you're not worth
a light.

How's the job hunting?

--

The BMA (British Medical Association) urges legislation to make the wearing of cycle helmets compulsory for both adults and children.

The evidence from those countries where compulsory cycle helmet use has already been introduced
is that such legislation has a beneficial effect on cycle-related deaths and head injuries.
This strongly supports the case for introducing legislation in the UK.
Such legislation should result in a reduction in the morbidity and mortality associated with cycling accidents.

Andy Leighton wrote:

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 10:43:17 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

this is not a forum where one would expect to have to dumb down content
for the benefit of non-cyclists

Why would you expect uk.net.news.config to be full of people who care
about the nuances of various makes of bicycle?

He probably doesn't, which is why the original post was just to
uk.rec.cycling.

He made the post that I commented on to unnc, otherwise I wouldn't have
seen it.

Judith added the crosspost for a reason fathomable
only to her.

I've already commented on her stupidity.

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 10:43:17 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

Why would you expect uk.net.news.config to be full of people who care
about the nuances of various makes of bicycle?

I wouldn't, I posted to urc. Judith cross-posted, which is why I said
where the reference came from, in case anyone was interested.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc | http://www.nohelmetlaw.org.uk/

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Newsgroup may contain nuts.

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 10:43:17 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

Why would you expect uk.net.news.config to be full of people who care
about the nuances of various makes of bicycle?

I wouldn't, I posted to urc.

You didn't you posted to urc and unnc.

Judith cross-posted,

So did you.

which is why I said ere the reference came from, in case anyone was
interested.

You could have removed unnc from your reply, you chose not to.

It's this pig-headedness on both sides that does none of you any
favours.

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 13:18:07 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

Why would you expect uk.net.news.config to be full of people who care
about the nuances of various makes of bicycle?
I wouldn't, I posted to urc.
You didn't you posted to urc and unnc.

I think you will find that the original post in this thread is from
me, and was not cross-posted.

Judith cross-posted,
So did you.

Yes, to clarify the reference to illegality, which is to do with UCI
and their byzantine and ever-changing definition of what constitutes a
bicycle.

which is why I said ere the reference came from, in case anyone was
interested.
You could have removed unnc from your reply, you chose not to.

What, post the clarification only to the group which doesn't need it?
Could do, I guess. Not sure why that would be a good idea, though.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc | http://www.nohelmetlaw.org.uk/

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Newsgroup may contain nuts.

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 13:18:07 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

Why would you expect uk.net.news.config to be full of people who care
about the nuances of various makes of bicycle?
I wouldn't, I posted to urc.
You didn't you posted to urc and unnc.

I think you will find that the original post in this thread is from
me, and was not cross-posted.

You cross-posted. If you hadn't I wouldn't have seen it. Trying to blame
someone else for your conscious decision is bizarre.

Judith cross-posted,
So did you.

Yes, to clarify the reference to illegality, which is to do with UCI
and their byzantine and ever-changing definition of what constitutes a
bicycle.

It's of no relevance to unnc.

which is why I said ere the reference came from, in case anyone was
interested.
You could have removed unnc from your reply, you chose not to.

What, post the clarification only to the group which doesn't need it?
Could do, I guess. Not sure why that would be a good idea, though.

Perhaps then you could have remained quiet, if there was no need to
post. As I say, you are the architect of your misfortune with regard to
"Judith".

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 15:47:50 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

It's of no relevance to unnc.

Over there ---------------------------------

is the queue of all the people who care.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc | http://www.nohelmetlaw.org.uk/

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Newsgroup may contain nuts.

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 15:47:50 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

It's of no relevance to unnc.

Over there ---------------------------------

is the queue of all the people who care.

Guy
could we let Steve reply if he wishes and call it to a halt then?
RT

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 15:47:50 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

It's of no relevance to unnc.

Over there ---------------------------------

is the queue of all the people who care.

Youre doing yourself no favours. And you're obviously not au fait with
the truth. If you didn't care, you wouldn't respond.

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:23:47 +0100, (Steve Firth)
wrote:

[Follow-up set to uk.rec.cycling]

He probably doesn't, which is why the original post was just to
uk.rec.cycling.

He made the post that I commented on to unnc, otherwise I wouldn't have
seen it.

Setting follow-ups is preferable to trimming the newsgroups.