A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Absurd urcm decision



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 23rd 12, 12:07 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default Absurd urcm decision

Don't get me wrong - I think that David Lang enjoys stirring up
trouble with cyclists, and appears to be crass and ignorant; the
quality of his decking is atrocious to boot. However, this rejection
in urcm in response to a post of mine is ridiculous.

=================================
On 15/11/2012 19:25, Bertie Wooster wrote:
The Greenwich Foot Tunnel is part of National Cycle Route 1, Dover to
Shetland, and the Woolwich Foot Tunnel is the furthest downstream 24
hour crossing of the River Thames for cyclists and pedestrians.

http://853blog.com/2012/10/12/foot-t...nches-inquiry/

=====Quote=====
Greenwich Council is to launch an independent inquiry after the
collapse of a 11m project to refurbish the Greenwich and Woolwich
foot tunnels, it has been revealed. Both tunnels have been left
uncompleted and in a poor condition following the failure of the
scheme, which began in April 2010. Now Greenwich Council is taking
legal action against three contractors, after it was forced to step in
and run the scheme itself.
=====/Quote=====

I understand that it has been necessary to erect barriers to prevent
cyclists illegally riding in the pedestrian tunnels.

Shouldn't cyclists dismount & push their bicycles through the pedestrian
tunnels?

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

=================================

Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?

Perhaps the moderators are moderating on poster not content.
Ads
  #2  
Old December 23rd 12, 12:18 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
Dave - Cyclists VOR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,703
Default Absurd urcm decision

On 23/12/2012 12:07, Bertie Wooster wrote:
Don't get me wrong - I think that David Lang enjoys stirring up
trouble with cyclists,


Who me?


and appears to be crass and ignorant;


Is that why I consistently make you look foolish?


the quality of his decking is atrocious to boot.


How many decks have you built in the last 10 years Cwispie?

Oh, I remember now - none.

Do you know which way up the boards go?


However, this rejection
in urcm in response to a post of mine is ridiculous.


At last we agree on something.

=================================
On 15/11/2012 19:25, Bertie Wooster wrote:
The Greenwich Foot Tunnel is part of National Cycle Route 1, Dover to
Shetland, and the Woolwich Foot Tunnel is the furthest downstream 24
hour crossing of the River Thames for cyclists and pedestrians.

http://853blog.com/2012/10/12/foot-t...nches-inquiry/

=====Quote=====
Greenwich Council is to launch an independent inquiry after the
collapse of a 11m project to refurbish the Greenwich and Woolwich
foot tunnels, it has been revealed. Both tunnels have been left
uncompleted and in a poor condition following the failure of the
scheme, which began in April 2010. Now Greenwich Council is taking
legal action against three contractors, after it was forced to step in
and run the scheme itself.
=====/Quote=====

I understand that it has been necessary to erect barriers to prevent
cyclists illegally riding in the pedestrian tunnels.

Shouldn't cyclists dismount & push their bicycles through the pedestrian
tunnels?

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

=================================

Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?


Other than being too thick you mean?

Perhaps the moderators are moderating on poster not content.

Seems that way. Psycholists are unable to accept any form of criticism.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."
  #3  
Old December 23rd 12, 12:29 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
Squashme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,146
Default Absurd urcm decision

On Dec 23, 12:07*pm, Bertie Wooster wrote:
Don't get me wrong - I think that David Lang enjoys stirring up
trouble with cyclists, and appears to be crass and ignorant; the
quality of his decking is atrocious to boot. However, this rejection
in urcm in response to a post of mine is ridiculous.

=================================







On 15/11/2012 19:25, Bertie Wooster wrote:
The Greenwich Foot Tunnel is part of National Cycle Route 1, Dover to
Shetland, and the Woolwich Foot Tunnel is the furthest downstream 24
hour crossing of the River Thames for cyclists and pedestrians.


http://853blog.com/2012/10/12/foot-t...wich-council-l....


=====Quote=====
Greenwich Council is to launch an independent inquiry after the
collapse of a 11m project to refurbish the Greenwich and Woolwich
foot tunnels, it has been revealed. Both tunnels have been left
uncompleted and in a poor condition following the failure of the
scheme, which began in April 2010. Now Greenwich Council is taking
legal action against three contractors, after it was forced to step in
and run the scheme itself.
=====/Quote=====


I understand that it has been necessary to erect barriers to prevent
cyclists illegally riding in the pedestrian tunnels.


Shouldn't cyclists dismount & push their bicycles through the pedestrian
tunnels?


--
Dave - The Medway Handymanwww.medwayhandyman.co.uk


=================================

Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?

Perhaps the moderators are moderating on poster not content.


So no harm done. You get to see his inspiring words and you can reply
to them here. And, of course, if Dave gets rejected, he gets to count
coup amongst his tribe, and, if he gets through moderation, he also
gets to count coup because he can claim to have put one over the urcm
mods. For such as Dave it is win-win either way.

Personally, I hope that they let some of his best attempts through. It
is funny to see him turn up trying to look all butter wouldn't melt,
in his grey flannel Sunday school suit, with the badge in the lapel,
and his stockings pulled up to just below his knees and folded over so
neatly at the top, and his hair all flat and shiny with what one hopes
is Brylcreem, and his cap all square.

Why he bothers is another question entirely. Possibly something to do
with differing boredom thresholds.
  #4  
Old December 23rd 12, 01:00 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
Dave - Cyclists VOR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,703
Default Absurd urcm decision

On 23/12/2012 12:45, Luke Moore wrote:
Squashme wrote:

On Dec 23, 12:07 pm, Bertie Wooster wrote:
Don't get me wrong - I think that David Lang enjoys stirring up
trouble with cyclists, and appears to be crass and ignorant; the
quality of his decking is atrocious to boot. However, this rejection
in urcm in response to a post of mine is ridiculous.

=================================

On 15/11/2012 19:25, Bertie Wooster wrote:
The Greenwich Foot Tunnel is part of National Cycle Route 1, Dover to
Shetland, and the Woolwich Foot Tunnel is the furthest downstream 24
hour crossing of the River Thames for cyclists and pedestrians.

http://853blog.com/2012/10/12/foot-t...wich-council-l...

=====Quote=====
Greenwich Council is to launch an independent inquiry after the
collapse of a 11m project to refurbish the Greenwich and Woolwich
foot tunnels, it has been revealed. Both tunnels have been left
uncompleted and in a poor condition following the failure of the
scheme, which began in April 2010. Now Greenwich Council is taking
legal action against three contractors, after it was forced to step in
and run the scheme itself.
=====/Quote=====

I understand that it has been necessary to erect barriers to prevent
cyclists illegally riding in the pedestrian tunnels.

Shouldn't cyclists dismount & push their bicycles through the pedestrian
tunnels?

--
Dave - The Medway Handymanwww.medwayhandyman.co.uk

=================================

Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?

Perhaps the moderators are moderating on poster not content.


So no harm done. You get to see his inspiring words and you can reply
to them here. And, of course, if Dave gets rejected, he gets to count
coup amongst his tribe, and, if he gets through moderation, he also
gets to count coup because he can claim to have put one over the urcm
mods. For such as Dave it is win-win either way.

Personally, I hope that they let some of his best attempts through. It
is funny to see him turn up trying to look all butter wouldn't melt,
in his grey flannel Sunday school suit, with the badge in the lapel,
and his stockings pulled up to just below his knees and folded over so
neatly at the top, and his hair all flat and shiny with what one hopes
is Brylcreem, and his cap all square.


I also hope that they let some of his best attempts through, if only
for the joy of conjuring up that image you have just painted of him
should a post of his appear.

Squashme seems to have unnatural fantasies about schoolboys....

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."
  #5  
Old December 23rd 12, 01:08 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Absurd urcm decision

Bertie Wooster wrote:


Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?


You aren't.

His question did not appear in the group; therefore an attempt to reply
is a nullity. This issue has been previously dealt with: a quote from a
rejected post was itself grounds for rejection, and rightfully so; and I
think you know that - otherwise you would have submitted a post with
your reply to the quote you obtained by assiduously scanning the logs
until you found something with which you could continue your
group-wrecking activities.

--
The usenet price promise: all opinions are guaranteed to be worth at
least what you paid for them.



  #6  
Old December 23rd 12, 01:21 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
Dave - Cyclists VOR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,703
Default Absurd urcm decision

On 23/12/2012 13:08, wrote:
Bertie Wooster wrote:


Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?


You aren't.

His question did not appear in the group; therefore an attempt to reply
is a nullity. This issue has been previously dealt with: a quote from a
rejected post was itself grounds for rejection, and rightfully so; and I
think you know that - otherwise you would have submitted a post with
your reply to the quote you obtained by assiduously scanning the logs
until you found something with which you could continue your
group-wrecking activities.


There you are Cwispie - slapped legs.

I think a spell in the naughty corner is called for, you little group
wrecker.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."
  #7  
Old December 23rd 12, 01:37 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
Squashme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,146
Default Absurd urcm decision

On Dec 23, 1:00*pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 23/12/2012 12:45, Luke Moore wrote:







Squashme wrote:


On Dec 23, 12:07 pm, Bertie Wooster wrote:
Don't get me wrong - I think that David Lang enjoys stirring up
trouble with cyclists, and appears to be crass and ignorant; the
quality of his decking is atrocious to boot. However, this rejection
in urcm in response to a post of mine is ridiculous.


=================================


On 15/11/2012 19:25, Bertie Wooster wrote:
The Greenwich Foot Tunnel is part of National Cycle Route 1, Dover to
Shetland, and the Woolwich Foot Tunnel is the furthest downstream 24
hour crossing of the River Thames for cyclists and pedestrians.


http://853blog.com/2012/10/12/foot-t...wich-council-l...


=====Quote=====
Greenwich Council is to launch an independent inquiry after the
collapse of a 11m project to refurbish the Greenwich and Woolwich
foot tunnels, it has been revealed. Both tunnels have been left
uncompleted and in a poor condition following the failure of the
scheme, which began in April 2010. Now Greenwich Council is taking
legal action against three contractors, after it was forced to step in
and run the scheme itself.
=====/Quote=====


I understand that it has been necessary to erect barriers to prevent
cyclists illegally riding in the pedestrian tunnels.


Shouldn't cyclists dismount & push their bicycles through the pedestrian
tunnels?


--
Dave - The Medway Handymanwww.medwayhandyman.co.uk


=================================


Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?


Perhaps the moderators are moderating on poster not content.


So no harm done. You get to see his inspiring words and you can reply
to them here. And, of course, if Dave gets rejected, he gets to count
coup amongst his tribe, and, if he gets through moderation, he also
gets to count coup because he can claim to have put one over the urcm
mods. For such as Dave it is win-win either way.


Personally, I hope that they let some of his best attempts through. It
is funny to see him turn up trying to look all butter wouldn't melt,
in his grey flannel Sunday school suit, with the badge in the lapel,
and his stockings pulled up to just below his knees and folded over so
neatly at the top, and his hair all flat and shiny with what one hopes
is Brylcreem, and his cap all square.


I also hope that they let some of his best attempts through, if only
for the joy of conjuring up that image you have just painted of him
should a post of his appear.


Squashme seems to have unnatural fantasies about schoolboys....


Perhaps you would favour the group with some of your natural fantasies
about schoolboys.



  #8  
Old December 23rd 12, 02:18 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,760
Default Absurd urcm decision

On 23/12/2012 12:07, Bertie Wooster wrote:
Don't get me wrong - I think that David Lang enjoys stirring up
trouble with cyclists, and appears to be crass and ignorant; the
quality of his decking is atrocious to boot. However, this rejection
in urcm in response to a post of mine is ridiculous.

=================================
On 15/11/2012 19:25, Bertie Wooster wrote:
The Greenwich Foot Tunnel is part of National Cycle Route 1, Dover to
Shetland, and the Woolwich Foot Tunnel is the furthest downstream 24
hour crossing of the River Thames for cyclists and pedestrians.

http://853blog.com/2012/10/12/foot-t...nches-inquiry/

=====Quote=====
Greenwich Council is to launch an independent inquiry after the
collapse of a 11m project to refurbish the Greenwich and Woolwich
foot tunnels, it has been revealed. Both tunnels have been left
uncompleted and in a poor condition following the failure of the
scheme, which began in April 2010. Now Greenwich Council is taking
legal action against three contractors, after it was forced to step in
and run the scheme itself.
=====/Quote=====

I understand that it has been necessary to erect barriers to prevent
cyclists illegally riding in the pedestrian tunnels.

Shouldn't cyclists dismount & push their bicycles through the pedestrian
tunnels?

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

=================================

Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?

Perhaps the moderators are moderating on poster not content.


How is it possible for people other than the moderators to know the
content and origin of posts which have been rejected?

If anyone can see them (somewhere or other), what is the point of
moderation?
  #9  
Old December 23rd 12, 02:19 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
michael adams[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 55
Default Absurd urcm decision


wrote in message
...
Bertie Wooster wrote:


Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?


You aren't.

His question did not appear in the group; therefore an attempt to
reply
is a nullity. This issue has been previously dealt with: a quote
from a
rejected post was itself grounds for rejection, and rightfully so;
and I
think you know that - otherwise you would have submitted a post with
your reply to the quote you obtained by assiduously scanning the
logs
until you found something with which you could continue your
group-wrecking activities.



Hello there Peter. Your third ever post on Usenet and all on
this group. But this time with the colons.

What is it with some poster(s) and colons ?

But there again, a change is as good as a rest, I suppose.


michael adams

....









--
The usenet price promise: all opinions are guaranteed to be worth at
least what you paid for them.





  #10  
Old December 23rd 12, 02:24 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.net.news.moderation
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,760
Default Absurd urcm decision

On 23/12/2012 14:19, michael adams wrote:

wrote:
Bertie Wooster wrote:


Why should I be barred from responding to his polite and reasonable
question in the moderated group?


You aren't.


His question did not appear in the group; therefore an attempt
to reply is a nullity. This issue has been previously dealt
with: a quote from a rejected post was itself grounds for
rejection, and rightfully so; and I think you know that -
otherwise you would have submitted a post with your reply to
the quote you obtained by assiduously scanning the logs
until you found something with which you could continue your
group-wrecking activities.


Hello there Peter. Your third ever post on Usenet and all on
this group. But this time with the colons.


What is it with some poster(s) and colons ?

But there again, a change is as good as a rest, I suppose.


michael adams


I see only one colon in his contribution (not including those placed
automatically by the attribution).

Did you mean semi-colons (the punctuation mark which time had almost
forgotten)?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
URCM : A difficult decision Judith[_4_] UK 13 November 5th 12 02:43 PM
Absurd Landis "analysis" in media Mike Jacoubowsky Racing 28 July 30th 06 11:50 AM
Kevin Zeese, on how Zionists are trying to stop him from getting elected, and how our support of Israel is absurd harbinger Australia 2 June 2nd 06 10:50 AM
Decision? Dre General 5 January 24th 06 01:25 PM
bad decision alan General 10 October 19th 04 04:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.