How can I blacken stainless steel spokes?

On May 14, 9:56*pm, jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
jtaylor wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
Stainless spokes are always made of 300-series _austenitic_ stainless
alloy, doctor. They don't heat treat. You can have martensitic
spokes or whatever you like, but you'll have to make them yourself.
er, on deformation, they become martensitic, circus clown. that's why
they're magnetic. because you /do/ know austenitic steels are not
magnetic don't you? you /have/ put a magnet up against bike spokes and
pondered these things haven't you?
As always with the stuff "jim beam" posts, it is wise to check.

First off, a quick refresher on 300-series; these are Chromium-Nickle
Austentic steels - the book I grabbed uses the old SAE numbers, but the
last three digits are the same; 301 has the lowest Nickle, and 325 the
highest; the range is from about 6% to over 20% Nickle enhances the
stainless-ness, and most importantly in the instant discussion tends to
maintain the austentic structure, with the result that the steel remains
non-magnetic, even after cold-working.

I do not know what variety of stainless is found in the spokes I have used.
And, as we know, 'jim beam" places a value on experience that far exceeds
that of fact as reported by his elders and betters...

...so...

...I took a magnet - one of those good strong "super-magnets" that they put
in kids building toys, and went to where the spokes are.

First some spokes I pulled out of a push-bike wheel some time ago - butted,
stainless, marked with a "Z" (or perhaps an "N"; depends on how you look at
it). The magnet didn't attract any of them.

Next some spokes on the recumbent trike; straight, stainless, marked with
something that is either a shield of a thickish "U". The magnet didn't
attract any of 'em.

THEN, just for fun, some motor-bike spokes - a set that I built in the
70's, stainless butted spokes from Buchannan's. Not magnetic.

Another set from Buchannans, not built yet; also stainless and butted -
just got em a few weeks ago. Not magnetic.

This of course, is not exhaustive. And cold-working can & does affect the
magnetic qualities of some stainless steels; but so far, it appears that
for spokes is does so to a remarkable degree only in that small part of the
cycle world where the sky is a different colour and there are no
shift-keys.

I shouldn't even bother correcting "jim beam's" more noteworthy
technical errors within his purported field of expertise. *All it nets
us us more erroneous bull puckey and unwarranted abuse.

But thanks for confirming what I was saying anyway.

Chalo

wow!

q: so how many liars does it take to deceive a clown?
a: none - he can deceive himself.

http://i42.tinypic.com/25ez3uf.jpg

of course, all the ignorati will get their panties in a bunch and shout
"superglue" long before they bother to get a magnet and expose the
idiocy of the famous jtaylor who apparently doesn't know what a magnet
is, but hey, stupidity is not a barrier to entry on usenet.

I went in the back room and discovered easy access
to 13 (!) wheels. Out come the magnets. One of the
wheels had galvanized spokes and of course the magnet
was strongly attracted to those. A useful control.
Of the remaining 12 wheels with stainless spokes, the kitchen
magnet was very weakly attracted to 2, and not at all
to the remaining 10. The 2 that were slightly magnetic
both had DT 2.0/1.8mm butted spokes. However, I also
tried other wheels with DT butted and non-butted spokes
and found almost no attraction. A few wheels with Asahi and
Wheelsmith stainless spokes had no attraction.

Wheelsmith butted spokes have an obvious transition
diameter where the swaging takes effect and I tested that
part to see if the cold working had rendered them
ferromagnetic at that particular spot. Nope.

I then went back with a very strong magnet removed from
a hard drive, and confirmed that two wheels with DT spokes
were a little magnetic, the rest of the DT spokes were
slightly magnetic, and the Asahi/Wheelsmith spokes weren't
magnetic at all.

For comparison, I tested some other household goods.
Most stainless pans and my old film developing tanks are
non- or very weakly ferromagnetic. The only stainless items
I found to be strongly ferromagnetic were some
kitchen utensils, silverware, and knives, plus a climbing
implement. The ferromagnetic stainless utensils were labeled
"18/0" which of course means 18% chromium and 0% nickel.
This is relevant given the assertion above that higher nickel
content preserves austenitic structure and hence
non-magnetism.

This test is repeatable by anyone, so it shouldn't be hard
for rbt readers to verify for themselves.

Of course, getting a magnet to stick to spokes doesn't
prove they will be heat-annealed at the smoking temperature
of motor oil, but I think paint is a more likely method
for blackening spokes anyway.

Ben

On Thu, 14 May 2009 21:56:07 -0700, jim beam wrote:


q: so how many liars does it take to deceive a clown?
a: none - he can deceive himself.

http://i42.tinypic.com/25ez3uf.jpg

of course, all the ignorati will get their panties in a bunch and shout
"superglue" long before they bother to get a magnet and expose the
idiocy of the famous jtaylor who apparently doesn't know what a magnet
is, but hey, stupidity is not a barrier to entry on usenet.

Now, this wouldn't be a repeat of the "jim beam" fabrication in the
brake-bolts-with-cut-threads vein, would it?

(For the newer readers, "jim beam" claimed that cut threads were a
"disaster waiting to happen", as they are weaker than rolled threads -
true, but such bolts even with such threads are strong enough for the
purpose, and no examples of broken brake bolts with cut threads have been
seen, even thoug they have been used on brake bolts; when this was pointed
out, "jim beam" posted a link to a photo of a brake with a broken bolt as
an example.

Unfortunately the text accompanying the photo in the link provided clearly
stated that the bolt was broken from a dfferent cause.)

_ wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 21:56:07 -0700, jim beam wrote:


q: so how many liars does it take to deceive a clown?
a: none - he can deceive himself.

http://i42.tinypic.com/25ez3uf.jpg

of course, all the ignorati will get their panties in a bunch and shout
"superglue" long before they bother to get a magnet and expose the
idiocy of the famous jtaylor who apparently doesn't know what a magnet
is, but hey, stupidity is not a barrier to entry on usenet.

Now, this wouldn't be a repeat of the "jim beam" fabrication in the
brake-bolts-with-cut-threads vein, would it?

(For the newer readers, "jim beam" claimed that cut threads were a
"disaster waiting to happen", as they are weaker than rolled threads -
true, but such bolts even with such threads are strong enough for the
purpose, and no examples of broken brake bolts with cut threads have been
seen, even thoug they have been used on brake bolts; when this was pointed
out, "jim beam" posted a link to a photo of a brake with a broken bolt as
an example.

so my cite of a fatigued brake bolt was /not/ a cite of a fatigued brake
bolt??? even though the article clearly stated that it was???



Unfortunately the text accompanying the photo in the link provided clearly
stated that the bolt was broken from a dfferent cause.)

well, you're consistent in one thing jtaylor - the shamelessness of your
[non-magnetic] bull****.

wrote:
On May 14, 9:56�pm, jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
jtaylor wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
Stainless spokes are always made of 300-series _austenitic_ stainless
alloy, doctor. They don't heat treat. You can have martensitic
spokes or whatever you like, but you'll have to make them yourself.
er, on deformation, they become martensitic, circus clown. that's why
they're magnetic. because you /do/ know austenitic steels are not
magnetic don't you? you /have/ put a magnet up against bike spokes and
pondered these things haven't you?
As always with the stuff "jim beam" posts, it is wise to check.
First off, a quick refresher on 300-series; these are Chromium-Nickle
Austentic steels - the book I grabbed uses the old SAE numbers, but the
last three digits are the same; 301 has the lowest Nickle, and 325 the
highest; the range is from about 6% to over 20% Nickle enhances the
stainless-ness, and most importantly in the instant discussion tends to
maintain the austentic structure, with the result that the steel remains
non-magnetic, even after cold-working.
I do not know what variety of stainless is found in the spokes I have used.
And, as we know, 'jim beam" places a value on experience that far exceeds
that of fact as reported by his elders and betters...
...so...
...I took a magnet - one of those good strong "super-magnets" that they put
in kids building toys, and went to where the spokes are.
First some spokes I pulled out of a push-bike wheel some time ago - butted,
stainless, marked with a "Z" (or perhaps an "N"; depends on how you look at
it). The magnet didn't attract any of them.
Next some spokes on the recumbent trike; straight, stainless, marked with
something that is either a shield of a thickish "U". The magnet didn't
attract any of 'em.
THEN, just for fun, some motor-bike spokes - a set that I built in the
70's, stainless butted spokes from Buchannan's. Not magnetic.
Another set from Buchannans, not built yet; also stainless and butted -
just got em a few weeks ago. Not magnetic.
This of course, is not exhaustive. And cold-working can & does affect the
magnetic qualities of some stainless steels; but so far, it appears that
for spokes is does so to a remarkable degree only in that small part of the
cycle world where the sky is a different colour and there are no
shift-keys.
I shouldn't even bother correcting "jim beam's" more noteworthy
technical errors within his purported field of expertise. �All it nets
us us more erroneous bull puckey and unwarranted abuse.
But thanks for confirming what I was saying anyway.
Chalo
wow!

q: so how many liars does it take to deceive a clown?
a: none - he can deceive himself.

http://i42.tinypic.com/25ez3uf.jpg

of course, all the ignorati will get their panties in a bunch and shout
"superglue" long before they bother to get a magnet and expose the
idiocy of the famous jtaylor who apparently doesn't know what a magnet
is, but hey, stupidity is not a barrier to entry on usenet.

I went in the back room and discovered easy access
to 13 (!) wheels. Out come the magnets. One of the
wheels had galvanized spokes and of course the magnet
was strongly attracted to those. A useful control.
Of the remaining 12 wheels with stainless spokes, the kitchen
magnet was very weakly attracted to 2, and not at all
to the remaining 10. The 2 that were slightly magnetic
both had DT 2.0/1.8mm butted spokes. However, I also
tried other wheels with DT butted and non-butted spokes
and found almost no attraction. A few wheels with Asahi and
Wheelsmith stainless spokes had no attraction.

Wheelsmith butted spokes have an obvious transition
diameter where the swaging takes effect and I tested that
part to see if the cold working had rendered them
ferromagnetic at that particular spot. Nope.

I then went back with a very strong magnet removed from
a hard drive, and confirmed that two wheels with DT spokes
were a little magnetic, the rest of the DT spokes were
slightly magnetic, and the Asahi/Wheelsmith spokes weren't
magnetic at all.

remember i've said that i believe wheelsmith to be ground and polished?
well, apart from physical features being consistent with this, low
magnetism is another one of the reasons.



For comparison, I tested some other household goods.
Most stainless pans and my old film developing tanks are
non- or very weakly ferromagnetic. The only stainless items
I found to be strongly ferromagnetic were some
kitchen utensils, silverware, and knives, plus a climbing
implement.

consistent with being cold worked.


The ferromagnetic stainless utensils were labeled
"18/0" which of course means 18% chromium and 0% nickel.

no "of course" - it's /much/ more likely to actually be "1810", a common
kitchen grade. it's /highly/ unusual for a commercial stainless to have
a high chrome content with no nickel.


This is relevant given the assertion above that higher nickel
content preserves austenitic structure and hence
non-magnetism.

indeed. but that phase will transition...

http://www.springerlink.com/content/...1/fulltext.pdf



This test is repeatable by anyone, so it shouldn't be hard
for rbt readers to verify for themselves.

the blowhards won't - it might get in the way of their circle-jerking
with jtaylor.



Of course, getting a magnet to stick to spokes doesn't
prove they will be heat-annealed at the smoking temperature
of motor oil, but I think paint is a more likely method
for blackening spokes anyway.

Ben

On Fri, 15 May 2009 06:00:49 -0700, jim beam wrote:


Now, this wouldn't be a repeat of the "jim beam" fabrication in the
brake-bolts-with-cut-threads vein, would it?

(For the newer readers, "jim beam" claimed that cut threads were a
"disaster waiting to happen", as they are weaker than rolled threads -
true, but such bolts even with such threads are strong enough for the
purpose, and no examples of broken brake bolts with cut threads have been
seen, even thoug they have been used on brake bolts; when this was pointed
out, "jim beam" posted a link to a photo of a brake with a broken bolt as
an example.

so my cite of a fatigued brake bolt was /not/ a cite of a fatigued brake
bolt??? even though the article clearly stated that it was???


No, the article clearly stated that the bolt was inproperly tightened and
that that was the reason for failure.

And there was no indication that the bolt had cut threads.

This was pointed out to you at the time by several posters - perhaps you
hoped they would just take your word for it instead of clicking on the link
and reading the page.

On May 14, 11:56 pm, jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
jtaylor wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
Stainless spokes are always made of 300-series _austenitic_ stainless
alloy, doctor. They don't heat treat. You can have martensitic
spokes or whatever you like, but you'll have to make them yourself.
er, on deformation, they become martensitic, circus clown. that's why
they're magnetic. because you /do/ know austenitic steels are not
magnetic don't you? you /have/ put a magnet up against bike spokes and
pondered these things haven't you?
As always with the stuff "jim beam" posts, it is wise to check.

First off, a quick refresher on 300-series; these are Chromium-Nickle
Austentic steels - the book I grabbed uses the old SAE numbers, but the
last three digits are the same; 301 has the lowest Nickle, and 325 the
highest; the range is from about 6% to over 20% Nickle enhances the
stainless-ness, and most importantly in the instant discussion tends to
maintain the austentic structure, with the result that the steel remains
non-magnetic, even after cold-working.

I do not know what variety of stainless is found in the spokes I have used.
And, as we know, 'jim beam" places a value on experience that far exceeds
that of fact as reported by his elders and betters...

...so...

...I took a magnet - one of those good strong "super-magnets" that they put
in kids building toys, and went to where the spokes are.

First some spokes I pulled out of a push-bike wheel some time ago - butted,
stainless, marked with a "Z" (or perhaps an "N"; depends on how you look at
it). The magnet didn't attract any of them.

Next some spokes on the recumbent trike; straight, stainless, marked with
something that is either a shield of a thickish "U". The magnet didn't
attract any of 'em.

THEN, just for fun, some motor-bike spokes - a set that I built in the
70's, stainless butted spokes from Buchannan's. Not magnetic.

Another set from Buchannans, not built yet; also stainless and butted -
just got em a few weeks ago. Not magnetic.

This of course, is not exhaustive. And cold-working can & does affect the
magnetic qualities of some stainless steels; but so far, it appears that
for spokes is does so to a remarkable degree only in that small part of the
cycle world where the sky is a different colour and there are no
shift-keys.

I shouldn't even bother correcting "jim beam's" more noteworthy
technical errors within his purported field of expertise. All it nets
us us more erroneous bull puckey and unwarranted abuse.

But thanks for confirming what I was saying anyway.

Chalo

wow!

q: so how many liars does it take to deceive a clown?
a: none - he can deceive himself.

http://i42.tinypic.com/25ez3uf.jpg

A small horseshoe magnet readily picked up a DT 1.8/2.0 spoke lying on
my bench. It was even more strongly attracted to a "brand x" (head
broken off) Japanese 2.0 spoke also lying there.

of course, all the ignorati will get their panties in a bunch and shout
"superglue" long before they bother to get a magnet and expose the
idiocy of the famous jtaylor who apparently doesn't know what a magnet
is, but hey, stupidity is not a barrier to entry on usenet.

"jtaylor" is demonstrably *insane*, just ignore it.

On May 15, 12:33 am, Hank Wirtz wrote:
On May 14, 9:56 pm, jim beam wrote:



Chalo wrote:
jtaylor wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
Stainless spokes are always made of 300-series _austenitic_ stainless
alloy, doctor. They don't heat treat. You can have martensitic
spokes or whatever you like, but you'll have to make them yourself.
er, on deformation, they become martensitic, circus clown. that's why
they're magnetic. because you /do/ know austenitic steels are not
magnetic don't you? you /have/ put a magnet up against bike spokes and
pondered these things haven't you?
As always with the stuff "jim beam" posts, it is wise to check.

First off, a quick refresher on 300-series; these are Chromium-Nickle
Austentic steels - the book I grabbed uses the old SAE numbers, but the
last three digits are the same; 301 has the lowest Nickle, and 325 the
highest; the range is from about 6% to over 20% Nickle enhances the
stainless-ness, and most importantly in the instant discussion tends to
maintain the austentic structure, with the result that the steel remains
non-magnetic, even after cold-working.

I do not know what variety of stainless is found in the spokes I have used.
And, as we know, 'jim beam" places a value on experience that far exceeds
that of fact as reported by his elders and betters...

...so...

...I took a magnet - one of those good strong "super-magnets" that they put
in kids building toys, and went to where the spokes are.

First some spokes I pulled out of a push-bike wheel some time ago - butted,
stainless, marked with a "Z" (or perhaps an "N"; depends on how you look at
it). The magnet didn't attract any of them.

Next some spokes on the recumbent trike; straight, stainless, marked with
something that is either a shield of a thickish "U". The magnet didn't
attract any of 'em.

THEN, just for fun, some motor-bike spokes - a set that I built in the
70's, stainless butted spokes from Buchannan's. Not magnetic.

Another set from Buchannans, not built yet; also stainless and butted -
just got em a few weeks ago. Not magnetic.

This of course, is not exhaustive. And cold-working can & does affect the
magnetic qualities of some stainless steels; but so far, it appears that
for spokes is does so to a remarkable degree only in that small part of the
cycle world where the sky is a different colour and there are no
shift-keys.

I shouldn't even bother correcting "jim beam's" more noteworthy
technical errors within his purported field of expertise. All it nets
us us more erroneous bull puckey and unwarranted abuse.

But thanks for confirming what I was saying anyway.

Chalo

wow!

q: so how many liars does it take to deceive a clown?
a: none - he can deceive himself.

http://i42.tinypic.com/25ez3uf.jpg

of course, all the ignorati will get their panties in a bunch and shout
"superglue" long before they bother to get a magnet and expose the
idiocy of the famous jtaylor who apparently doesn't know what a magnet
is, but hey, stupidity is not a barrier to entry on usenet.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

RBT SATs time!

Is "SAT" shorthand for being a Sad Ass Troll, Hank? Take care, lest
you become that which you (allegedly) abhor.

On May 15, 12:33 am, Hank Wirtz wrote:
On May 14, 9:56 pm, jim beam wrote:



Chalo wrote:
jtaylor wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
Stainless spokes are always made of 300-series _austenitic_ stainless
alloy, doctor. They don't heat treat. You can have martensitic
spokes or whatever you like, but you'll have to make them yourself.
er, on deformation, they become martensitic, circus clown. that's why
they're magnetic. because you /do/ know austenitic steels are not
magnetic don't you? you /have/ put a magnet up against bike spokes and
pondered these things haven't you?
As always with the stuff "jim beam" posts, it is wise to check.

First off, a quick refresher on 300-series; these are Chromium-Nickle
Austentic steels - the book I grabbed uses the old SAE numbers, but the
last three digits are the same; 301 has the lowest Nickle, and 325 the
highest; the range is from about 6% to over 20% Nickle enhances the
stainless-ness, and most importantly in the instant discussion tends to
maintain the austentic structure, with the result that the steel remains
non-magnetic, even after cold-working.

I do not know what variety of stainless is found in the spokes I have used.
And, as we know, 'jim beam" places a value on experience that far exceeds
that of fact as reported by his elders and betters...

...so...

...I took a magnet - one of those good strong "super-magnets" that they put
in kids building toys, and went to where the spokes are.

First some spokes I pulled out of a push-bike wheel some time ago - butted,
stainless, marked with a "Z" (or perhaps an "N"; depends on how you look at
it). The magnet didn't attract any of them.

Next some spokes on the recumbent trike; straight, stainless, marked with
something that is either a shield of a thickish "U". The magnet didn't
attract any of 'em.

THEN, just for fun, some motor-bike spokes - a set that I built in the
70's, stainless butted spokes from Buchannan's. Not magnetic.

Another set from Buchannans, not built yet; also stainless and butted -
just got em a few weeks ago. Not magnetic.

This of course, is not exhaustive. And cold-working can & does affect the
magnetic qualities of some stainless steels; but so far, it appears that
for spokes is does so to a remarkable degree only in that small part of the
cycle world where the sky is a different colour and there are no
shift-keys.

I shouldn't even bother correcting "jim beam's" more noteworthy
technical errors within his purported field of expertise. All it nets
us us more erroneous bull puckey and unwarranted abuse.

But thanks for confirming what I was saying anyway.

Chalo

wow!

q: so how many liars does it take to deceive a clown?
a: none - he can deceive himself.

http://i42.tinypic.com/25ez3uf.jpg

of course, all the ignorati will get their panties in a bunch and shout
"superglue" long before they bother to get a magnet and expose the
idiocy of the famous jtaylor who apparently doesn't know what a magnet
is, but hey, stupidity is not a barrier to entry on usenet.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

RBT SATs time!

Is "SAT" shorthand for being a Sad Ass Troll, Hank? Take care, lest
you become that which you (allegedly) abhor.

wrote:

I went in the back room and discovered easy access
to 13 (!) wheels. Out come the magnets. One of the
wheels had galvanized spokes and of course the magnet
was strongly attracted to those. A useful control.
Of the remaining 12 wheels with stainless spokes, the kitchen
magnet was very weakly attracted to 2, and not at all
to the remaining 10. The 2 that were slightly magnetic
both had DT 2.0/1.8mm butted spokes. However, I also
tried other wheels with DT butted and non-butted spokes
and found almost no attraction. A few wheels with Asahi and
Wheelsmith stainless spokes had no attraction.

Wheelsmith butted spokes have an obvious transition
diameter where the swaging takes effect and I tested that
part to see if the cold working had rendered them
ferromagnetic at that particular spot. Nope.

I then went back with a very strong magnet removed from
a hard drive, and confirmed that two wheels with DT spokes
were a little magnetic, the rest of the DT spokes were
slightly magnetic, and the Asahi/Wheelsmith spokes weren't
magnetic at all.


For comparison, I tested some other household goods.
Most stainless pans and my old film developing tanks are
non- or very weakly ferromagnetic. The only stainless items
I found to be strongly ferromagnetic were some
kitchen utensils, silverware, and knives, plus a climbing
implement.


All of which confirms that cycle spokes are not, in the main, martensitic,
even when cold-worked - at best a few were found to be "a little" or
"slightly" magnetic, indicating little change from austenitic steel.

Which of course means that "jim beams"s claim that if you put stainless
spokes in a kitchen oven they will come out austenitic is sort of correct -
because they were austenitic to begin with.

Hey ho.

On May 15, 6:33*am, Hank Wirtz wrote:
On May 14, 9:56*pm, jim beam wrote:



Chalo wrote:
jtaylor wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Chalo wrote:
Stainless spokes are always made of 300-series _austenitic_ stainless
alloy, doctor. They don't heat treat. You can have martensitic
spokes or whatever you like, but you'll have to make them yourself..
er, on deformation, they become martensitic, circus clown. that's why
they're magnetic. because you /do/ know austenitic steels are not
magnetic don't you? you /have/ put a magnet up against bike spokes and
pondered these things haven't you?
As always with the stuff "jim beam" posts, it is wise to check.

First off, a quick refresher on 300-series; these are Chromium-Nickle
Austentic steels - the book I grabbed uses the old SAE numbers, but the
last three digits are the same; 301 has the lowest Nickle, and 325 the
highest; the range is from about 6% to over 20% Nickle enhances the
stainless-ness, and most importantly in the instant discussion tends to
maintain the austentic structure, with the result that the steel remains
non-magnetic, even after cold-working.

I do not know what variety of stainless is found in the spokes I have used.
And, as we know, 'jim beam" places a value on experience that far exceeds
that of fact as reported by his elders and betters...

...so...

...I took a magnet - one of those good strong "super-magnets" that they put
in kids building toys, and went to where the spokes are.

First some spokes I pulled out of a push-bike wheel some time ago - butted,
stainless, marked with a "Z" (or perhaps an "N"; depends on how you look at
it). The magnet didn't attract any of them.

Next some spokes on the recumbent trike; straight, stainless, marked with
something that is either a shield of a thickish "U". The magnet didn't
attract any of 'em.

THEN, just for fun, some motor-bike spokes - a set that I built in the
70's, stainless butted spokes from Buchannan's. Not magnetic.

Another set from Buchannans, not built yet; also stainless and butted -
just got em a few weeks ago. Not magnetic.

This of course, is not exhaustive. And cold-working can & does affect the
magnetic qualities of some stainless steels; but so far, it appears that
for spokes is does so to a remarkable degree only in that small part of the
cycle world where the sky is a different colour and there are no
shift-keys.

I shouldn't even bother correcting "jim beam's" more noteworthy
technical errors within his purported field of expertise. *All it nets
us us more erroneous bull puckey and unwarranted abuse.

But thanks for confirming what I was saying anyway.

Chalo

wow!

q: so how many liars does it take to deceive a clown?
a: none - he can deceive himself.

http://i42.tinypic.com/25ez3uf.jpg

of course, all the ignorati will get their panties in a bunch and shout
"superglue" long before they bother to get a magnet and expose the
idiocy of the famous jtaylor who apparently doesn't know what a magnet
is, but hey, stupidity is not a barrier to entry on usenet.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

RBT SATs time!

"Andre" is to "Scum" as "jim" is to "_____"

a) clown
b) ignorati
c) bull****ter
d) all of the above

Hey, Wirtzie, you know that thing that you do that makes people think
you're a troll? You're doing it again.

Andre Jute
Charisma is the art of infuriating the undeserving by merely
existing elegantly