|
|
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Mon, 9 Nov 2009 15:04:28 +0000
On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 13:13:06 +0000
%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > I just have to stop wasting my time telling him what he can't or
> > won't accept and just get on with the job, apparently to the
> > satisfaction of many more than are complaining ...
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:48:56 +0000
On 2009-11-08, Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:03:17 +0000, Peter Clinch
><p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>>Quite why anything you've questioned over the last fortnight is
>>meant to be in any way underhand is a genuine mystery to me.
>
> 1. People are confused that their posts take a long ti ...
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Sun, 8 Nov 2009 08:42:57 +0000 (UTC)
"Trevor A Panther" <tapan@PSANTISPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:Q3iJm.39732$ep1.35519@newsfe30.ams2:
>
> "Tom Crispin" <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote in message
> news:e2q9f5l6ab4dgi06rgftj85l3fn529fu1b@4ax.com...
>> On 06 Nov 2009 22:52:40 +0000 (GMT), armb@chiark.greenend.org.uk
>> (Alan ...
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
8 Nov 2009 02:07:02 GMT
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:35:43 +0000, Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:46:29 -0600, Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:23:32 +0000, Tom Crispin
>><kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:02:31 +0000, Peter Clinch
>>><p.j.clinch@d ...
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:30:29 -0600
On 7 Nov 2009 19:22:17 GMT, Simon Brooke <stillyet+nntp@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:46:29 -0600, Andy Leighton wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:23:32 +0000, Tom Crispin
>> <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:02:31 +0000, Peter Clinch
>>><p.j.clinch@dund ...
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:37:19 +0000
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:21:33 +0000, Peter Clinch
<p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
>Tom Crispin wrote:
><snip>
>> However, if you judge both groups by urcm's charter (as I suspect you
>> would wish) then urcm almost certainly has more traffic.
>
>Exactly.
>
>And do you think that extra traffic is related to ...
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:29:22 +0000
On 7 Nov 2009 09:57:06 GMT, Simon Brooke
<stillyet+nntp@googlemail.com> wrote:
>But hey! If you don't like the group and the process, that's fine. Don't
>use it. There is a perfectly good group, uk.rec.cycling, which will serve
>you well.
That is at least the third invitation I have had to use a group I use ...
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:57:09 +0000
On 7 Nov 2009 09:57:06 GMT, Simon Brooke
<stillyet+nntp@googlemail.com> wrote:
>But hey! If you don't like the group and the process, that's fine. Don't
>use it. There is a perfectly good group, uk.rec.cycling, which will serve
>you well.
That's the second invitation I have had to use a group I already use. ...
|
Re: Formal Complaint uk.rec.cycling.moderated
Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:21:33 +0000
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 09:28:02 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<guy.chapman@spamcop.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:32:41 +0000, Tom Crispin
><kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
>
>>"Fictional"? - the use of the delay-list (the list that Ian Jackson
>>calls the watchlist) has now been uncovered.
...
|
Re: Hustings question
Sat, 7 Nov 2009 11:03:49 +0000
In article <tmu8f5hkdbac04gei1dlpr918cjqb9o7u2@4ax.com>,
Mike Fleming <{mike}@tauzero.co.uk> writes:
>In article <lcq7f5dajhchs4mobh23mbasj10p1345j8@4ax.com>, Dick Gaughan
><dg@dickgaughan.co.uk> writes:
>
>> Well, according to what's-his-face, I'm one of your sockpuppets
>> and I plagiarised the Absolute Begin ...
|
|
|
