It's been quite a while since I regularly kept up to date with the 
newsgroups. Who have we still got with us from my former time? Have we 
losts and notible members?

I recognise almost all of the names so far, there don't seem too many 
new faces. Is the bold RTT still with us?

"Will"  wrote in message 
news:fn1tsu$vd0$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> It's been quite a while since I regularly kept up to date with the 
> newsgroups. Who have we still got with us from my former time? Have we 
> losts and notible members?
>
> I recognise almost all of the names so far, there don't seem too many new 
> faces. Is the bold RTT still with us?

A certain Rangers fan here has report them for so called ' abuse' , others 
call it a bit of friendly banter, but he decided to policed this group and 
reported, Celtic fans for 'abuse' and now they have gone. he banter has gone 
and they just don't come back anymore.

"Will"  wrote in message 
news:fn1tsu$vd0$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> It's been quite a while since I regularly kept up to date with the 
> newsgroups. Who have we still got with us from my former time? Have we 
> losts and notible members?
>
> I recognise almost all of the names so far, there don't seem too many new 
> faces. Is the bold RTT still with us?

Ronnie the Tim bold......

celticbhoy60 wrote:
> "Will"  wrote in message 
> news:fn1tsu$vd0$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>> It's been quite a while since I regularly kept up to date with the 
>> newsgroups. Who have we still got with us from my former time? Have we 
>> losts and notible members?
>>
>> I recognise almost all of the names so far, there don't seem too many new 
>> faces. Is the bold RTT still with us?
> 
> A certain Rangers fan here has report them for so called ' abuse' , others 
> call it a bit of friendly banter, but he decided to policed this group and 
> reported, Celtic fans for 'abuse' and now they have gone. he banter has gone 
> and they just don't come back anymore. 
> 
> 


I thought it seemed very quiet...

Will  wrote in news:fn1v4m$55s$1@registered.motzarella.org:

> celticbhoy60 wrote:
>> "Will"  wrote in message 
>> news:fn1tsu$vd0$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>> It's been quite a while since I regularly kept up to date with the 
>>> newsgroups. Who have we still got with us from my former time? Have
>>> we losts and notible members?
>>>
>>> I recognise almost all of the names so far, there don't seem too
>>> many new faces. Is the bold RTT still with us?
>> 
>> A certain Rangers fan here has report them for so called ' abuse' ,
>> others call it a bit of friendly banter, but he decided to policed
>> this group and reported, Celtic fans for 'abuse' and now they have
>> gone. he banter has gone and they just don't come back anymore. 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> I thought it seemed very quiet...

I think you'll find there are only a few of the old posters still on 
here, some have been hounded out by Jim on his one man netkop routine and 
others (probably most of them) have just given up posting. You do get the 
odd post from ZB and the sheriff but most of the old regs have gone.

-- 
sme

"sme"  wrote in message 
news:5vjdplF1mideqU1@mid.individual.net...
> Will  wrote in news:fn1v4m$55s$1@registered.motzarella.org:
>
>> celticbhoy60 wrote:
>>> "Will"  wrote in message
>>> news:fn1tsu$vd0$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>>> It's been quite a while since I regularly kept up to date with the
>>>> newsgroups. Who have we still got with us from my former time? Have
>>>> we losts and notible members?
>>>>
>>>> I recognise almost all of the names so far, there don't seem too
>>>> many new faces. Is the bold RTT still with us?
>>>
>>> A certain Rangers fan here has report them for so called ' abuse' ,
>>> others call it a bit of friendly banter, but he decided to policed
>>> this group and reported, Celtic fans for 'abuse' and now they have
>>> gone. he banter has gone and they just don't come back anymore.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> I thought it seemed very quiet...
>
> I think you'll find there are only a few of the old posters still on
> here, some have been hounded out by Jim on his one man netkop routine and
> others (probably most of them) have just given up posting. You do get the
> odd post from ZB and the sheriff but most of the old regs have gone.
>
> -- 
> sme

Yep the groups just aint what they used to be !!

The Law

acknowledge being
    concerned in an illegal transaction.' In a few days the papers
    were returned to me with the following opinion of the Attorney
    General: 'The transaction referred to would not be recognized in
    our laws as giving any rights, except perhaps as to guardianship,
    but I am unable to say there is anything illegal in the matter
    beyond that. I do not think it a criminal offence if it goes no
    further than the adoption of a child and the payment of money to
    its parents for the privilege.'"

Later, when His Excellency was calling the attention of Acting
Attorney General Russell to a somewhat similar case, he states, in
reference to this above-described case:

    "Mr. Phillipo, before whom the papers were laid, did not seem
    disposed to enforce the rights of the father, on the ground that
    he had sold the child. I did not agree with Mr. Phillipo's view of
    the law."




CHAPTER 8.

JUSTICE FROM THE SUPREME BENCH.


On October 6th, 1879, Sir John Smale, the Hon. Chief Justice for Hong
Kong, passed judgment in three cases on prisoners convicted of various
degrees of crime connected with the enticing, detaining, buying and
selling of children. Governor Hennessy, in reporting the remarks made
by the Chief Justice on that occasion to the Secretary of State for
the Colonies, pronounced it "an able and elaborate judgment on the
existence of slavery at Hong Kong."

Said Sir John Smale:

    "Various causes have occasioned delay in passing sentence, of
    which I will only refer to one: The gravity of the fact that these
    and other cases have recently brought so prominently to the notice
    of the Court that two specific classes of slavery exist in this
    Colony to a very great extent, viz., so-called domestic slavery,
    and slavery for the purposes of prostitution. The three cases now
    awaiting the sentence of the Court are specially

when His Excellency was calling the attention of Acting
Attorney General Russell to a somewhat similar case, he states, in
reference to this above-described case:

    "Mr. Phillipo, before whom the papers were laid, did not seem
    disposed to enforce the rights of the father, on the ground that
    he had sold the child. I did not agree with Mr. Phillipo's view of
    the law."




CHAPTER 8.

JUSTICE FROM THE SUPREME BENCH.


On October 6th, 1879, Sir John Smale, the Hon. Chief Justice for Hong
Kong, passed judgment in three cases on prisoners convicted of various
degrees of crime connected with the enticing, detaining, buying and
selling of children. Governor Hennessy, in reporting the remarks made
by the Chief Justice on that occasion to the Secretary of State for
the Colonies, pronounced it "an able and elaborate judgment on the
existence of slavery at Hong Kong."

Said Sir John Smale:

    "Various causes have occasioned delay in passing sentence, of
    which I will only refer to one: The gravity of the fact that these
    and other cases have recently brought so prominently to the notice
    of the Court that two specific classes of slavery exist in this
    Colony to a very great extent, viz., so-called domestic slavery,
    and slavery for the purposes of prostitution. Th

On 2008-01-21 11:25:41 +0000, sme  said:

>> 
>> I thought it seemed very quiet...
> 
> I think you'll find there are only a few of the old posters still on
> here, some have been hounded out by Jim on his one man netkop routine and
> others (probably most of them) have just given up posting. You do get the
> odd post from ZB and the sheriff but most of the old regs have gone.

I doubt that Jimmy Liar had much to do with it, I expect that as things 
in peoples lives change (jobs, relationships etc) that the free time to 
post dries up.

"andy"  wrote in message 
news:z5ydnVUNxePI4wnaRVnyvAA@bt.com...
>
> "Will"  wrote in message 
> news:fn1tsu$vd0$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>> It's been quite a while since I regularly kept up to date with the 
>> newsgroups. Who have we still got with us from my former time? Have we 
>> losts and notible members?
>>
>> I recognise almost all of the names so far, there don't seem too many new 
>> faces. Is the bold RTT still with us?
>
> Ronnie the Tim bold......

I have a very good head of hair, actually.
-- 
Ronnie the Tim

On Jan 29, 9:02 pm, "Ronnie the Tim"
 wrote:

>
> > Ronnie the Tim bold......
>
> I have a very good head of hair, actually.
> --
he said bold not bald.

"Chuckles McGuigan"  wrote in message 
news:a5823064-582e-4193-a134-91010eca7ef6@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 29, 9:02 pm, "Ronnie the Tim"
 wrote:

>
> > Ronnie the Tim bold......
>
> I have a very good head of hair, actually.
> --
>>he said bold not bald.

Stupid Hun fuckwit.

Well done, Jim.

Here, since you never replied the last time I asked, could you tell me how 
you got on with that abuse report you sent in to my ISP?
-- 
Ronnie the Tim

"Ronnie the Tim"  wrote in message 
news:47a10a8c_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> "Chuckles McGuigan"  wrote in message 
> news:a5823064-582e-4193-a134-91010eca7ef6@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 29, 9:02 pm, "Ronnie the Tim"
>  wrote:
>
>>
>> > Ronnie the Tim bold......
>>
>> I have a very good head of hair, actually.
>> --
>>>he said bold not bald.
>
> Stupid Hun fuckwit.
>
> Well done, Jim.
>
> Here, since you never replied the last time I asked, could you tell me how 
> you got on with that abuse report you sent in to my ISP?
> -- 
> Ronnie the Tim
They've got the fat hun in their blocked senders list.

"dü the hüsker"  wrote in message 
news:xs8oj.42462$Kt4.8379@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "Ronnie the Tim"  wrote in 
> message news:47a10a8c_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>> "Chuckles McGuigan"  wrote in message 
>> news:a5823064-582e-4193-a134-91010eca7ef6@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jan 29, 9:02 pm, "Ronnie the Tim"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> > Ronnie the Tim bold......
>>>
>>> I have a very good head of hair, actually.
>>> --
>>>>he said bold not bald.
>>
>> Stupid Hun fuckwit.
>>
>> Well done, Jim.
>>
>> Here, since you never replied the last time I asked, could you tell me 
>> how you got on with that abuse report you sent in to my ISP?
>> -- 
>> Ronnie the Tim
> They've got the fat hun in their blocked senders list.
>

did you know the term "hun" is now banned by some organisations for its 
sectarian meaning?

"andy"  wrote in message 
news:Rr6dnba4dZvhiTzanZ2dnUVZ8uWdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "dü the hüsker"  wrote in message 
> news:xs8oj.42462$Kt4.8379@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>> "Ronnie the Tim"  wrote in 
>> message news:47a10a8c_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>>> "Chuckles McGuigan"  wrote in message 
>>> news:a5823064-582e-4193-a134-91010eca7ef6@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Jan 29, 9:02 pm, "Ronnie the Tim"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> > Ronnie the Tim bold......
>>>>
>>>> I have a very good head of hair, actually.
>>>> --
>>>>>he said bold not bald.
>>>
>>> Stupid Hun fuckwit.
>>>
>>> Well done, Jim.
>>>
>>> Here, since you never replied the last time I asked, could you tell me 
>>> how you got on with that abuse report you sent in to my ISP?
>>> -- 
>>> Ronnie the Tim
>> They've got the fat hun in their blocked senders list.
>>
>
> did you know the term "hun" is now banned by some organisations for its 
> sectarian meaning?

Those organisations are clearly idiots. Or huns. Or both...

On 2008-01-30 23:37:47 +0000, "Ronnie the Tim" 
 said:

> "Chuckles McGuigan"  wrote in message
> news:a5823064-582e-4193-a134-91010eca7ef6@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 29, 9:02 pm, "Ronnie the Tim"
>  wrote:
> 
>> 
>>> Ronnie the Tim bold......
>> 
>> I have a very good head of hair, actually.
>> --
>>> he said bold not bald.
> 
> Stupid Hun fuckwit.
> 
> Well done, Jim.
> 
> Here, since you never replied the last time I asked, could you tell me how
> you got on with that abuse report you sent in to my ISP?

Ronnie, have a look in Google, he's probably gone and deleted the post 
where he was gloating about reporting you. He's a pathetic little man 
with no life or friends and should just be killfiled, people like him 
can't stand to be ignored.