Was Cycling Rant : Back in Black - summary please

I've not been following this thread - far too much 'cyclists shouldn't
be allowed on the roads' and 'cars go though red lights too' for me to
be bothered with. But with over 1000 replies somebody must be (a)
trolling like mad or (b) ... not too sure.

silangdon wrote:
| I've not been following this thread - far too much 'cyclists shouldn't
| be allowed on the roads' and 'cars go though red lights too' for me to
| be bothered with. But with over 1000 replies somebody must be (a)
| trolling like mad or (b) ... not too sure.

No, it's just that it's crossposted to (or from, or with) the Outside World.

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:09:48 +0000, silangdon wrote:

I've not been following this thread - far too much 'cyclists shouldn't
be allowed on the roads' and 'cars go though red lights too' for me to
be bothered with. But with over 1000 replies somebody must be (a)
trolling like mad or (b) ... not too sure.

We have been troll-baiting, yes. The troll in question has now, I
think, slunk off with his tail between his legs, assuring us that he
/really isn't/ giving up because he's lost, honest.

Actually this has been one of the least bad-tempered cross-posted
threads for a long time. Obviously urd are less militant than
uk.tosspot.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:09:48 +0000, silangdon wrote:

I've not been following this thread - far too much 'cyclists shouldn't
be allowed on the roads' and 'cars go though red lights too' for me to
be bothered with. But with over 1000 replies somebody must be (a)
trolling like mad or (b) ... not too sure.

We have been troll-baiting, yes. The troll in question has now, I
think, slunk off with his tail between his legs, assuring us that he
/really isn't/ giving up because he's lost, honest.

Actually this has been one of the least bad-tempered cross-posted
threads for a long time. Obviously urd are less militant than
uk.tosspot.

Actually uk.rec.cars.misc, which is actually generally quite a pleasant
place - the speed limit rants tend to happen on uk.rec.driving, which is
about as bad as uk.tosspot.

cheers,
clive

in message , silangdon
') wrote:

I've not been following this thread - far too much 'cyclists shouldn't
be allowed on the roads' and 'cars go though red lights too' for me to
be bothered with. But with over 1000 replies somebody must be (a)
trolling like mad or (b) ... not too sure.

At this stage it appears the main combatants have reached the point
where they agree on all the significant points but disagree on
terminology. Heat, but bugger all light.

I confess I've been dropping the odd bomb in with follow-ups set to the
motoring group (which I don't read) only, in order to try to keep the
flame war off our patch.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; 'I think we should trust our president in every decision
;; that he makes and we should just support that'
;; Britney Spears of George W Bush, CNN 04:09:03

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
[snip]

Actually this has been one of the least bad-tempered cross-posted
threads for a long time. Obviously urd are less militant than
uk.tosspot.

Usenet seems to be getting a bit conciliatory. As well as "Cyling
Rant", I have been joining in a "C++ versus Ada" language war on
com.lang.ada as well as about half a dozen other cross-posted groups and
that has been staggering civil. Wierd.

Peter

--

www.amey.org.uk

silangdon wrote:
I've not been following this thread - far too much 'cyclists shouldn't
be allowed on the roads' and 'cars go though red lights too' for me to
be bothered with. But with over 1000 replies somebody must be (a)
trolling like mad or (b) ... not too sure.

With all these much-heat-little-light threads, the problem is that the
thread tends to splinter off into so many threadlets that it becomes a pain
following the debate (except perhaps for the combatants).

What I'd really like is for each opposing group to nominate a representative
to do battle on its behalf - at least, that way the points of debate would
be easier to follow. Unfortunately, Usenet doesn't work like that.

"Epetruk" wrote in message
...

What I'd really like is for each opposing group to nominate a
representative
to do battle on its behalf - at least, that way the points of debate would
be easier to follow. Unfortunately, Usenet doesn't work like that.

I'm having fun. A petrolhead named *Dewi* provided fun for a while but we
burned him off. A new petrolhead named *Adrian* appeared and was fun for a
while -- but he has staying power and a nasty tendency to reasonableness.

Still, there is life in it yet.

:~)

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:09:30 +0000, Peter Amey wrote:

Usenet seems to be getting a bit conciliatory. As well as "Cyling
Rant", I have been joining in a "C++ versus Ada" language war on
com.lang.ada as well as about half a dozen other cross-posted groups
and that has been staggering civil. Wierd.

Indeed.
My LUG (Linux User Group) had the obligtory 'vi versus emacs' thread
recently, and no limbs lost or eyes gouged out. 'Tis not normal.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:26:20 +0000, John Hearns wrote:

My LUG (Linux User Group) ....

Member of a LUG eh? You do realise that you're headed for the darkside?


Mike ('Bent? check. Beard? check. LUG? check. Sandals? too cold atm ....)