|
|
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:20:41 +0100
On 01 Aug 2009 07:14:47 GMT, Ian Smith <ian@astounding.org.uk> wrote:
<snip>
>Hmm. That's too complex for me. I'll let judith answer - she knows
>so much more than everyone else about everything.
>
>regards, Ian SMith
Yes - very good.
Now what was that about people encouraging those who they beli ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:20:17 +0100
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 01:08:51 +0100, "Clive George"
<clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
>If you think that was a flamefest, then you're mind-bogglingly naive. I
>suggest you have a dig around some of the less salubrious areas of usenet.
>
>
"If you think that was a flamefest, then you're mind-bogg ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:16:35 +0100
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 10:21:37 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<guy.chapman@spamcop.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:48:37 +0100, Tom Crispin
><kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
>
>>There was
>>plenty of nastiness, including a particularly vicious suggestion by
>>one potential moderator that Kri ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:14:43 +0100
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:30:20 -0700 (PDT), James
<james.annan@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Aug 1, 7:48?am, Tom Crispin <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge>
>wrote:
>> On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:29:09 +0100, "Clive George"
>>
>> <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >Earlier Tom Crispin gave the example of a thread whic ...
|
Re: Moderated group voting procedure
Sat, 1 Aug 2009 05:37:12 +0100
In message <2Ich5JvC3jcKFwkw@molly.mockford>, at 01:41:38 on Fri, 31 Jul
2009, Molly Mockford <nospamnobody@mollymockford.me.uk> wibbled
>At 21:09:09 on Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Pedt <"\"@ @\""@operations.force9.net>
>wrote in <MddmQ3Nl3fcKFwi8@stuff-the-spammers.mx2.org.uk>:
>
>>Hope your daughter and soon to be SiL ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:35:41 +0100
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:08:24 -0700 (PDT), Simon Brooke
<stillyet@googlemail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>Thank you for that, Guy. Illuminating and amusing.
Yes many thanks Guy.
Did you perhaps see why I called the person a fuckwit?
I asked why cyclist had not used a cycle path which was provided for
him at ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:07:26 +0100
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:18:06 -0700 (PDT), Simon Brooke
<stillyet@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On 31 July, 18:00, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.chap...@spamcop.net>
>wrote:
>
>> The group uk.rec.cycling has some very knowledgeable people in it -
>> Ian Smith, for example, has performed finite element analysis on
> ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:47:54 +0100
On 31 Jul 2009 20:48:11 GMT, Ian Smith <ian@astounding.org.uk> wrote:
>The definitions I prefer are at http://www.astounding.org.uk/ian/wheel/
>but you might like different ones.
An excellent description of why simplistic terminology doesn't work.
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk ...
|
Re: Moderated group voting procedure
Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:51:44 +0100
Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:10:15 <QNx4oa$3VycKFwxE@molly.mockford>
uk.net.news.config Molly Mockford <nospamnobody@mollymockford.me.uk>
>At 17:03:52 on Fri, 31 Jul 2009, Wm...
><tcnw71@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote in
><DMoWqUfoXxcKFwDy@[127.0.0.1]>:
>
>>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:37:29 <Q564Vg0ZrkcKFwSG@molly.mockf ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:00:04 +0100
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:26:11 +0100, Aard <aardvark@the.zoo> wrote:
>You forgot to mention the bit where the psycholists type stuff such as
>"yeah well, you're a troll and a fuckwit, and PLONK". When you slag
>off an individual by name, they're perfectly within their rights to
>use a different nym to avoid your k ...
|
|
|
