Moderated Google Group?

On 2010-11-18, Mike A Schwab wrote:
On Nov 17, 5:35?pm, Bill wrote:
Gee, it certainly is too bad that you are so easily offended. Perhaps
after you have removed your pink tu-tu and your ballet slippers, you
will give some thought to the question of why you feel so threatened
when you read anything you don't approve of. You could also talk to a
shrink about it. Just don't wear the tu-tu and ballet slippers when
you go see the shrink, OK?

How about a woman in a red tutu and running shoes crawling in the mud
to the finish line?
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1564657731

How about guy in black bicycle shorts, pink tutu, coconut bra, and
cleated road shoes?
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...&id=1519749092

Hey, Mike, how cold is it downstate today? We're at 40F NW of Chicago
right now.

--

Kristian Zoerhoff

On Nov 18, 9:43*am, Kristian M Zoerhoff
wrote:
On 2010-11-18, Mike A Schwab wrote:

On Nov 17, 5:35?pm, Bill wrote:
Gee, it certainly is too bad that you are so easily offended. Perhaps
after you have removed your pink tu-tu and your ballet slippers, you
will give some thought to the question of why you feel so threatened
when you read anything you don't approve of. You could also talk to a
shrink about it. Just don't wear the tu-tu and ballet slippers when
you go see the shrink, OK?

How about a woman in a red tutu and running shoes crawling in the mud
to the finish line?
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1564657731

How about guy in black bicycle shorts, pink tutu, coconut bra, and
cleated road shoes?
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...to.php?fbid=12...

Hey, Mike, how cold is it downstate today? We're at 40F NW of Chicago
right now.

--

Kristian Zoerhoff


Just above freezing.

On Nov 17, 1:16*am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"Tom Sherman °_°" wrote in ...

On 11/16/2010 9:00 AM, SMS aka Steven M. Scharf aka The World's Greatest
(self-proclaimed) Expert™ wrote:
On 11/15/2010 6:13 AM, Dave C wrote:
Does anyone know of a moderated Google group covering bicycles?

I see that this Usenet group is still full of spam and other garbage,
and because of that I've fallen off reading it very often.

Dave

I sure hope you find what you are looking for because I can see that you
would bore us out of our freaking skulls. ALL moderated groups, without any
exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one.

Undermining your credibility by contradicting yourself again? You, in
your sown words ... I recently went unto a moderated forum and was
promptly kicked off of it.

You have even voiced you approval for a moderator. You, again in your
own words...

Newsgroups are nothing but an exercise in futility since they do not
have moderators.

There is no one in this world who is more in favor of a moderator than
Ed Dolan.

I don't like to be baby sat, but still a moderated forum is the only
kind of discussion group that works for the exchange of information.

I have absolutely nothing against moderated forums and believe they
are the wave of the future.

I am not opposed to moderated forums. On the contrary, I think they
are a good idea despite what I may have said about them in the past.

A moderated forum is quite ideal for the vast majority of folks.

All newsgroups are fatally flawed for lack of a moderator.

Without a moderator, nothing is possible.

All newsgroups must have a moderator that will edit (censor) what gets
said. There is no other way.

All newsgroups require moderators. Without a moderator, the lowest
common denominator will prevail.

A newsgroup without a moderator can never be anything but a circus
full of clowns.

You simply must have a moderator or else all you get is bedlam.

A group without a moderator (editor) is like a ship without a captain.

Moderated forums are the only way to go.

Any group MUST have a leader, an editor, a moderator. Without such an
ordering principal, you have nothing but a corral of braying
jackasses.

Anyone with a brain in his head is going to despair of any group that
is not moderated.

Anyone with any brains has long since left and they will not return
because they have discovered that you must have a moderated forum if
you ever want to say anything serious or to be taken seriously.

A moderator could ensure fairness, but Usenet is a free for all.
Hence, the importance of the rules and the importance of observing
them.

Imagine anyone having the effrontery to pass judgment on
a post of mine! What an outrage that would be.
[...]

Imagine worse ... You as a moderator. You, again in your own words...

I would make the ideal moderator for a newsgroup since I would
immediately ban 99% of all posters.

If I were the moderator of this newsgroup I assure you that none of
you would ever get any of your miserable messages posted so that
anyone could ever see them.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"JimmyMac" wrote in message
...
On Nov 17, 1:16 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"Tom Sherman °_°" wrote in
...

On 11/16/2010 9:00 AM, SMS aka Steven M. Scharf aka The World's Greatest
(self-proclaimed) Expert™ wrote:
On 11/15/2010 6:13 AM, Dave C wrote:
Does anyone know of a moderated Google group covering bicycles?

I see that this Usenet group is still full of spam and other garbage,
and because of that I've fallen off reading it very often.

Dave

I sure hope you find what you are looking for because I can see that you
would bore us out of our freaking skulls. ALL moderated groups, without
any
exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one.

Undermining your credibility by contradicting yourself again? You, in
your own words ... I recently went unto a moderated forum and was
promptly kicked off of it.

You have even voiced you approval for a moderator. You, again in your
own words...

Newsgroups are nothing but an exercise in futility since they do not
have moderators.

There is no one in this world who is more in favor of a moderator than
Ed Dolan.

I don't like to be baby sat, but still a moderated forum is the only
kind of discussion group that works for the exchange of information.

I have absolutely nothing against moderated forums and believe they
are the wave of the future.

I am not opposed to moderated forums. On the contrary, I think they
are a good idea despite what I may have said about them in the past.

A moderated forum is quite ideal for the vast majority of folks.

All newsgroups are fatally flawed for lack of a moderator.

Without a moderator, nothing is possible.

All newsgroups must have a moderator that will edit (censor) what gets
said. There is no other way.

All newsgroups require moderators. Without a moderator, the lowest
common denominator will prevail.

A newsgroup without a moderator can never be anything but a circus
full of clowns.

You simply must have a moderator or else all you get is bedlam.

A group without a moderator (editor) is like a ship without a captain.

Moderated forums are the only way to go.

Any group MUST have a leader, an editor, a moderator. Without such an
ordering principal, you have nothing but a corral of braying
jackasses.

Anyone with a brain in his head is going to despair of any group that
is not moderated.

Anyone with any brains has long since left and they will not return
because they have discovered that you must have a moderated forum if
you ever want to say anything serious or to be taken seriously.

A moderator could ensure fairness, but Usenet is a free for all.
Hence, the importance of the rules and the importance of observing
them.

Imagine anyone having the effrontery to pass judgment on
a post of mine! What an outrage that would be.
[...]

Imagine worse ... You as a moderator. You, again in your own words...

I would make the ideal moderator for a newsgroup since I would
immediately ban 99% of all posters.

If I were the moderator of this newsgroup I assure you that none of
you would ever get any of your miserable messages posted so that
anyone could ever see them.

When I reread my own worlds, I realize I am even GREATER than I
thought. Instead of being honored in the breach, I should be worshipped
as a God!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"JimmyMac" wrote in message
...
On Nov 17, 1:16 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
[...]
ALL moderated groups, without any
exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one.

Undermining your credibility by contradicting yourself again? You, in
your own words ... I recently went unto a moderated forum and was
promptly kicked off of it.

You have even voiced you approval for a moderator. You, again in your
own words...

Newsgroups are nothing but an exercise in futility since they do not
have moderators.

There is no one in this world who is more in favor of a moderator than
Ed Dolan.

I don't like to be baby sat, but still a moderated forum is the only
kind of discussion group that works for the exchange of information.

I have absolutely nothing against moderated forums and believe they
are the wave of the future.

I am not opposed to moderated forums. On the contrary, I think they
are a good idea despite what I may have said about them in the past.

A moderated forum is quite ideal for the vast majority of folks.

All newsgroups are fatally flawed for lack of a moderator.

Without a moderator, nothing is possible.

All newsgroups must have a moderator that will edit (censor) what gets
said. There is no other way.

All newsgroups require moderators. Without a moderator, the lowest
common denominator will prevail.

A newsgroup without a moderator can never be anything but a circus
full of clowns.

You simply must have a moderator or else all you get is bedlam.

A group without a moderator (editor) is like a ship without a captain.

Moderated forums are the only way to go.

Any group MUST have a leader, an editor, a moderator. Without such an
ordering principal, you have nothing but a corral of braying
jackasses.

Anyone with a brain in his head is going to despair of any group that
is not moderated.

Anyone with any brains has long since left and they will not return
because they have discovered that you must have a moderated forum if
you ever want to say anything serious or to be taken seriously.

A moderator could ensure fairness, but Usenet is a free for all.
Hence, the importance of the rules and the importance of observing
them.

How do any of the statements you have correctly quoted above contradict
my comment?

Let me reiterate for your enlightenment. Moderated newsgroups are for
others. They are not for me. The reason they are not for me is because
they are dull. I prefer the excitement of groups without moderators, no
matter how worthless such groups are. What is there about any of this
that you do not understand?

Here it is again: "ALL moderated groups, without any
exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one." - Ed Dolan

There is no contradiction. The only sin on Usenet is to be dull. That is
something you need to work on.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On Nov 18, 11:01*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message

...
On Nov 17, 1:16 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
[...]
*ALL moderated groups, without any

exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one.

Undermining your credibility by contradicting yourself again? *You, in
your own words ... I recently went unto a moderated forum and was
promptly kicked off of it.

You have even voiced you approval for a moderator. *You, again in your
own words...

Newsgroups are nothing but an exercise in futility since they do not
have moderators.

There is no one in this world who is more in favor of a moderator than
Ed Dolan.

I don't like to be baby sat, but still a moderated forum is the only
kind of discussion group that works for the exchange of information.

I have absolutely nothing against moderated forums and believe they
are the wave of the future.

I am not opposed to moderated forums. On the contrary, I think they
are a good idea despite what I may have said about them in the past.

A moderated forum is quite ideal for the vast majority of folks.

All newsgroups are fatally flawed for lack of a moderator.

Without a moderator, nothing is possible.

All newsgroups must have a moderator that will edit (censor) what gets
said. There is no other way.

All newsgroups require moderators. Without a moderator, the lowest
common denominator will prevail.

A newsgroup without a moderator can never be anything but a circus
full of clowns.

You simply must have a moderator or else all you get is bedlam.

A group without a moderator (editor) is like a ship without a captain.

Moderated forums are the only way to go.

Any group MUST have a leader, an editor, a moderator. Without such an
ordering principal, you have nothing but a corral of braying
jackasses.

Anyone with a brain in his head is going to despair of any group that
is not moderated.

Anyone with any brains has long since left and they will not return
because they have discovered that you must have a moderated forum if
you ever want to say anything serious or to be taken seriously.

A moderator could ensure fairness, but Usenet is a free for all.
Hence, the importance of the rules and the importance of observing
them.

How do any of the statements you have correctly quoted above contradict
my comment?

Well you should be universally and consistently in favor or not in
favor of a moderator and without exempting yourself in the process.
You have contradicted yourself over and over again on this particular
issue. Your own words testify to that ..

I know what works and what doesn't work. An unmoderated forum does not
work.

Does ARBR really need a moderator? I never thought so for many years,
but now I do think so. Why? Because there are very many posts now
which reek
of nothing but **** and ****. **** these *******s who infringe on our
sacred
precincts of ARBR. Yea, we do need a moderator most badly and I am
just the
man for you

I would make the ideal moderator for a newsgroup since I would
immediately ban 99% of all posters.

If I were the moderator of this newsgroup I assure you that none of
you would ever get any of your miserable messages posted so that
anyone could ever see them.

Let me reiterate for your enlightenment. Moderated newsgroups are for
others. They are not for me. The reason they are not for me is because
they are dull. I prefer the excitement of groups without moderators, no
matter how worthless such groups are. What is there about any of this
that you do not understand?
Here it is again: *"ALL moderated groups, without any

exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one." - Ed Dolan

I'm in no need of enlightenment. You are in need of making up your
mind on issues.

You have never been able to last for any length of time on a moderated
forum before being banned for reasons that should be self-evident.
Your ego was bruised in the process and is reflected by your
embittered opinion concerning a moderator and moderated forums..

There is no contradiction. The only sin on Usenet is to be dull. That is
something you need to work on.

There is so much that you need to work on that it is utterly ludicrous
that you can be so boldly arrogant as to advise anyone that they need
to work on something.

Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"JimmyMac" wrote in message
...
On Nov 18, 11:01 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
[...]
Let me reiterate for your enlightenment. Moderated newsgroups are for
others. They are not for me. The reason they are not for me is because
they are dull. I prefer the excitement of groups without moderators, no
matter how worthless such groups are. What is there about any of this
that you do not understand?
Here it is again: "ALL moderated groups, without any

exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one." - Ed Dolan

I'm in no need of enlightenment. You are in need of making up your
mind on issues.

You have never been able to last for any length of time on a moderated
forum before being banned for reasons that should be self-evident.
Your ego was bruised in the process and is reflected by your
embittered opinion concerning a moderator and moderated forums..

A moderator will not permit any personal attacks. You will be required to
stick to the subject at all costs no matter how dull the subject is. This
means that the dullest most placid messages will always prevail while
putting everyone else to sleep. I repeat, moderated groups are for dullards
and numskulls. They are not for me.

There is no contradiction. The only sin on Usenet is to be dull. That
is
something you need to work on.

There is so much that you need to work on that it is utterly ludicrous
that you can be so boldly arrogant as to advise anyone that they need
to work on something.

You also need to work on that bruised ego of yours.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On Nov 20, 4:05*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message

...
On Nov 18, 11:01 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
[...]

Let me reiterate for your enlightenment. Moderated newsgroups are for
others. They are not for me. The reason they are not for me is because
they are dull. I prefer the excitement of groups without moderators, no
matter how worthless such groups are. What is there about any of this
that you do not understand?
Here it is again: "ALL moderated groups, without any

exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one." - Ed Dolan
I'm in no need of enlightenment. *You are in need of making up your

mind on issues.

You have never been able to last for any length of time on a moderated

forum before being banned for reasons that should be self-evident.
Your ego was bruised in the process and is reflected by your
embittered opinion concerning a moderator and moderated forums..

A moderator will not permit any personal attacks. You will be required to
stick to the subject at all costs no matter how dull the subject is. This
means that the dullest most placid messages will always prevail while
putting everyone else to sleep. I repeat, moderated groups are for dullards
and numskulls. They are not for me.

There is no contradiction. The only sin on Usenet is to be dull. That
is
something you need to work on.
There is so much that you need to work on that it is utterly ludicrous

that you can be so boldly arrogant as to advise anyone that they need
to work on something.

You also need to work on that bruised ego of yours.

Opinion stated as fact. I disagree with much of what you say take and
take issue with how you conduct yourself. Ego has nothing to do with
it.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"JimmyMac" wrote in message
...
On Nov 20, 4:05 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
[...]
You also need to work on that bruised ego of yours.

Opinion stated as fact. I disagree with much of what you say take and
take issue with how you conduct yourself. Ego has nothing to do with
it.

When someone tells me they do not want to hear something, I can only
conclude that their ego is being threatened. That is ever the hallmark of a
pseudo-intellectual who is afraid of words. It is why you can never argue
with working class folks unless you are also willing to fight them
physically.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On Nov 18, 11:36*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message

...
On Nov 17, 1:16 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:



"Tom Sherman °_°" wrote in
...

On 11/16/2010 9:00 AM, SMS aka Steven M. Scharf aka The World's Greatest
(self-proclaimed) Expert™ wrote:
On 11/15/2010 6:13 AM, Dave C wrote:
Does anyone know of a moderated Google group covering bicycles?

I see that this Usenet group is still full of spam and other garbage,
and because of that I've fallen off reading it very often.

Dave

I sure hope you find what you are looking for because I can see that you
would bore us out of our freaking skulls. ALL moderated groups, without
any
exceptions, are for dullards and numbskulls. I personally would not be
caught dead on one.

Undermining your credibility by contradicting yourself again? *You, in
your own words ... I recently went unto a moderated forum and was
promptly kicked off of it.

You have even voiced you approval for a moderator. *You, again in your
own words...

Newsgroups are nothing but an exercise in futility since they do not
have moderators.

There is no one in this world who is more in favor of a moderator than
Ed Dolan.

I don't like to be baby sat, but still a moderated forum is the only
kind of discussion group that works for the exchange of information.

I have absolutely nothing against moderated forums and believe they
are the wave of the future.

I am not opposed to moderated forums. On the contrary, I think they
are a good idea despite what I may have said about them in the past.

A moderated forum is quite ideal for the vast majority of folks.

All newsgroups are fatally flawed for lack of a moderator.

Without a moderator, nothing is possible.

All newsgroups must have a moderator that will edit (censor) what gets
said. There is no other way.

All newsgroups require moderators. Without a moderator, the lowest
common denominator will prevail.

A newsgroup without a moderator can never be anything but a circus
full of clowns.

You simply must have a moderator or else all you get is bedlam.

A group without a moderator (editor) is like a ship without a captain.

Moderated forums are the only way to go.

Any group MUST have a leader, an editor, a moderator. Without such an
ordering principal, you have nothing but a corral of braying
jackasses.

Anyone with a brain in his head is going to despair of any group that
is not moderated.

Anyone with any brains has long since left and they will not return
because they have discovered that you must have a moderated forum if
you ever want to say anything serious or to be taken seriously.

A moderator could ensure fairness, but Usenet is a free for all.
Hence, the importance of the rules and the importance of observing
them.

Imagine anyone having the effrontery to pass judgment on
a post of mine! What an outrage that would be.
[...]

Imagine worse ... You as a moderator. *You, again in your own words...

I would make the ideal moderator for a newsgroup since I would
immediately ban 99% of all posters.

That's what I've thought: You'd be assuming the role of God.

But why don't you create your own group?
"GreatEd.rec.bicycles.moderated"