> On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 17:44 +0100 (BST), me@privacy.net (Paul Cummins -
> G7FUJ) wrote:
> 
> >Likewise He has no right to push his spam into systems I control. 
> I am >perfectly entitled to cancel his messages locally. That my 
> cancels >propagated is a demonstration that others agree with my 
> position, no >more no less. By allowing my cancels to propagate 
> over their PRIVATE >systems, they implicitly grant me the right to 
> cancel.
> 
> Now, tell me what right you had to cancel MY post.

OK, I see that I have indeed cancelled two of your posts. 

I can only apologise. 

I have cancelled the cancel messages, and superseded the posts with 
your originals.

AS you're aware, I've now stopped cancelling G4SDW's posts, provided 
he stops spamming the group.

-- 
Paul Cummins 
*FREE* mobile phone  -  http://tinyurl.com/2yw23x
*0845, 0870, 070*    -  http://tinyurl.com/ywwdk6
*FREE* ADSL for life -  http://tinyurl.com/22dlhh
*PDA/Palm Insurance* -  http://tinyurl.com/3y9u2r



-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:04 +0100 (BST), agree2pay4uce@spam.vlaad.co.uk
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

>> Now, tell me what right you had to cancel MY post.
>
>OK, I see that I have indeed cancelled two of your posts. 

Three.

>I can only apologise. 

At last.

>I have cancelled the cancel messages, and superseded the posts with 
>your originals.

Still waiting...

>AS you're aware, I've now stopped cancelling G4SDW's posts, provided 
>he stops spamming the group.

That's not what you've just said in uk.net.news.config:

Message-ID: 

"As to the original poster, he continues to spew spam, and continues
to be cancelled as a result."

More lies.

BTW. You posted this to uk.radio.amateur yet set the followups to
these three groups. Why?

Paul Cummins  wrote:

> OK, I see that I have indeed cancelled two of your posts. 
> 
> I can only apologise.

And once again Cummins proves that as fuckwits go, he's at the cutting
edge of fuckwittery.

%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

> And once again xxxxxxx proves that as xxxxxxxx go, he's at the cutting
> edge of xxxxxxxxxxx.

normally i would object to this type of language being used on a newsgroup
where young people with M3 callsigns can read it...

but then again i *CAN* see where youre coming from on this one.

On 10/04/2007 at 23:25:04 zpk wrote :
> %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

>> And once again xxxxxxx proves that as xxxxxxxx go, he's at the cutting
>> edge of xxxxxxxxxxx.

> normally i would object to this type of language being used on a newsgroup
> where young people with M3 callsigns can read it...

> but then again i *CAN* see where youre coming from on this one.

I see you too are at this censoring lark, is it the latest craze?

-- 
P~K
It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny 
day
that you realise how often they burst into flames.
- Harry Hill

zpk  wrote:

> %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> 
> > And once again Cummins proves that as fuckwits go, he's at the cutting
> > edge of fuckwittery.
> 
> normally i would object to this type of language being used on a newsgroup
> where young people with M3 callsigns can read it...

Take your censorship and shove it up your arse. You are cut from the
same cloth as Cummins. Do you meticulously cross out all references to
"Scunthorpe" because of those letters in the name that you have an
aversion to? The term fuckwit has nothing to do with "fuck" in the
genital sense.

> but then again i *CAN* see where youre coming from on this one.

Oh how jolly nice for you. I'm sure that must be a comfort to one of us.

Pun_Krocker <punkrocker62<noSPAM>@gmail.com> wrote:

> I see you too are at this censoring lark, is it the latest craze?

youre totally wrong there.

i just dont believe that the use of foul language is required to describe
the totally uncalled for o.t.t reaction of a b-licensee who for some
reason feels the need top pick on a superior licenced class-a licensee.

however - i do understand the apparent bewildered stance that some have
expressed following the realisation that there is a person with network
admin rights who seems to have the ability to delete someone else's
postings from everyone elese's eyes just because this admin type person
has a flea in his ear about this superior licences person.

Pun_Krocker <punkrocker62<noSPAM> wrote:

> I see you too are at this censoring lark, is it the latest craze?

Nah, it's just the same old crazies.

zpk  wrote:

> i just dont believe that the use of foul language is required to describe
> the totally uncalled for o.t.t reaction of a b-licensee who for some
> reason feels the need top pick on a superior licenced class-a licensee.

And you like to show your superiority by being unable to find a shift
key? Indeed you like to show this superiority by being unaware that you
have posted to multiple groups?

Message-ID:  from zpk contained the
following:

>%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
>
>> And once again xxxxxxx proves that as xxxxxxxx go, he's at the cutting
>> edge of xxxxxxxxxxx.
>
>normally i would object to this type of language being used on a newsgroup
>where young people with M3 callsigns can read it...
>

I suspect the young people will be far more comfortable with the
language than you.

Your killfile is your friend.
-- 
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

On 10/04/2007 at 23:44:56 zpk wrote :
> Pun_Krocker <punkrocker62<noSPAM>@gmail.com> wrote:

>> I see you too are at this censoring lark, is it the latest craze?

> youre totally wrong there.

> i just dont believe that the use of foul language is required to describe
> the totally uncalled for o.t.t reaction of a b-licensee who for some
> reason feels the need top pick on a superior licenced class-a licensee.
[snip]

NO I am not, if you quote someone else you *do* *not* edit _their_ 
post, if it offends you, *do* *not* quote it, simple!

I see you on your class high horse, grow up Paul, having a pass in 
Morse code does not make anyone better than someone who does not, only 
a fool would say that.

For the record, I do not support what he did and I do have a pass @ 
12wpm morse code (so what?).

-- 
P~K
It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny 
day
that you realise how often they burst into flames.
- Harry Hill

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:33:32  
uk.net.news.management Geoff Berrow 

>Message-ID:  from zpk contained the
>following:
>
>>%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
>>
>>> And once again xxxxxxx proves that as xxxxxxxx go, he's at the cutting
>>> edge of xxxxxxxxxxx.
>>
>>normally i would object to this type of language being used on a newsgroup
>>where young people with M3 callsigns can read it...
>>
>
>I suspect the young people will be far more comfortable with the
>language than you.

It may be that he objects to the Cummins effluence.

>Your killfile is your friend.

I am a bit "old school" in that I think if you get the disease early you 
are likely to be protected against it later.

You don't want mumps when you are 19 after all.

-- 
Wm ... Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days
Recently read and recommended:
Villages - John Updike
Come Closer - Sara Gran

Pun_Krocker <punkrocker62 wrote:

> I see you on your class high horse, grow up Paul, having a pass in Morse 
> code does not make anyone better than someone who does not, only a fool 
> would say that.

<tongue-in-cheek>
I could be pedantic about the definition of the word 'better' (adj. more desirable, satisfactory, or effective) which would apply to someone 
knowing Morse.... but I won't :)
</tongue-in-cheek>

> For the record, I do not support what he did 

Good man!

-- 
ARRL membership = $39 (~£20)
RSGB membership = £44

Don't let them rip you off any more.
Do the right thing, resign from the RSGB today.

The RSGB said Radio Amateurs were a threat to national security!
Is this the type of organisation you want to represent you?

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:47:11 +0100, Pun_Krocker
<punkrocker62<noSPAM>@gmail.com> wrote:

>I do have a pass @ 12wpm morse code (so what?).

..--. .-.. . .- ... .   - .- -.- .   - .... .. ...   -... .- -.-. -.-
- ---   - .... .   --. .-. --- ..- .--.   .-- .... . .-. .   .. -   ..
....   --- -.   - --- .--. .. -.-.

On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:25:04 GMT,
zpk_pkearn_class_a_licensee@aruba.eircom.india.net.com (zpk) wrote:

>> And once again xxxxxxx proves that as xxxxxxxx go, he's at the cutting
>> edge of xxxxxxxxxxx.
>
>normally i would object to this type of language being used on a newsgroup
>where young people with M3 callsigns can read it...

Indeed - I hate to see the word 'Cummins' used gratuitously - however
usenet is a mature forum without a rating system so any such nanny
ideal of protecting children from nasty C words is a little futile.

The term 'fuckwit' however, is perhaps something you're
misinterpreting? I'd suggest you refer to http://www.fuckwit.info

On 11/04/2007 at 11:22:31 know code wrote :
> .... but I won't

...........Good man (© Jimbo)

-- 
P~K
It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny 
day
that you realise how often they burst into flames.
- Harry Hill

Mother wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:47:11 +0100, Pun_Krocker
> <punkrocker62<noSPAM>@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I do have a pass @ 12wpm morse code (so what?).
> 
> .--. .-.. . .- ... .   - .- -.- .   - .... .. ...   -... .- -.-. -.-
> - ---   - .... .   --. .-. --- ..- .--.   .-- .... . .-. .   .. -   ..
> ...   --- -.   - --- .--. .. -.-. 
> 
That was too slow, can you send it a little faster ??

-- 
Tubbs
I can, I can't

On 11/04/2007 at 13:03:02 Mother  wrote :
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:47:11 +0100, Pun_Krocker
> <punkrocker62<noSPAM>@gmail.com> wrote:

>> I do have a pass @ 12wpm morse code (so what?).

> .--. .-.. . .- ... .   - .- -.- .   - .... .. ...   -... .- -.-. -.-
> - ---   - .... .   --. .-. --- ..- .--.   .-- .... . .-. .   .. -   ..
> ...   --- -.   - --- .--. .. -.-. 

You are not very good at that :( and sorry point taken, (x-posting 
removed)

-- 
P~K
It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny 
day
that you realise how often they burst into flames.
- Harry Hill

In message , zpk 
 writes
>Pun_Krocker <punkrocker62<noSPAM>@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I see you too are at this censoring lark, is it the latest craze?
>
>youre totally wrong there.
>
>i just dont believe that the use of foul language is required to describe
>the totally uncalled for o.t.t reaction of a b-licensee who for some
>reason feels the need top pick on a superior licenced class-a licensee.
>

You are no way superior to me, or any of the other ex class-b licensees. 
Get over yourself, you passed a Morse test, so what. I am sure that like 
myself many ex class-b operators have technical qualifications and 
experience that far exceed the passing of a Morse test.
-- 
Mike Clayton
My prayer to God is a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." God
has granted it.  Voltaire (1694-1778)

In message , Pun_Krocker 
<punkrocker62@?.?.com.invalid> writes
>I see you on your class high horse, grow up Paul, having a pass in 
>Morse code does not make anyone better than someone who does not, only 
>a fool would say that.
>


Must be quite a few fools in this group then :-)
-- 
Mike Clayton
My prayer to God is a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." God
has granted it.  Voltaire (1694-1778)

The ex class-B licensees are those who passed the
Morse test to become class-a licences.

Those who didn't pass the Morse test are either
still class-b licensees, those who let their licences
lapse, or else dead.

In the context of Ham Radio, what are these other
technical qualifications? The only high qualification
of which I am aware is a written RAE pass, with a
multiple-cheat RAE pass coming in at a lower level,
and a pass in the so-called  "Advanced" exam coming
in at the bottom. (Rather like the way in which GCE,
CSE and GCSE exams are treated by private
company employers)

"Mike Clayton"  wrote in message 
news:SI3luiEstQHGFw5+@adsl.ntlworld.com...
>
> You are no way superior to me, or any of the other ex class-b licensees. 
> Get over yourself, you passed a Morse test, so what. I am sure that like 
> myself many ex class-b operators have technical qualifications and 
> experience that far exceed the passing of a Morse test.

"G.A.Evans G4SDW"  wrote in message 
news:evj2ff$mkl$1@aioe.org...
  (Rather like the way in which GCE,
> CSE and GCSE exams are treated by private
> company employers)

Don't forget, below all of those are uncompleted degrees  from Essex 
University!

-- 
73
Brian, G8OSN
www.g8osn.org.uk

e^(-jwt) de 12WPM

Brian, what do you hope to achieve by this continuing
interjection of rather silly and infantile slurs?

Do you seek to resolve your demons of deep insecurity?

You won't.

Do you hope to receive the adulation that you desperately seek?

You won't.

Do you seek to resolve the inferiority complex of your not
being able to pass the 12WPM Morse Test?

You won't

Do you seek to remove your reputation for running away with your
tail between your legs?

You won't.

Do you wish to be thought of as someone whose legs might be
in long trousers, but whose brain is still in nappies?

You will.

Do you wish to come across as someone entirely unsuitable to be
employed in any capacity in any school?

You will.

Do you seek to come across as someone most inappropriate to
be the director of a national book publisher?

You will.

Do you wish to be perceived as a snivelling yellow-bellied coward?

You will.

So Brian, what purpose is your brain serving by coming out
repeatedly with these infantile outbursts? Are you even aware
that your brain is doing it?

73 de 12WPM


"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
news:h58Th.128$Jv3.62@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>   wrote in message
> news:evj2ff$mkl$1@aioe.org...
>  (Rather like the way in which GCE,
>> CSE and GCSE exams are treated by private
>> company employers)
>
> Don't forget, below all of those are uncompleted degrees  from Essex
> University!
>
> -- 
> 73
> Brian, G8OSN
> www.g8osn.org.uk
>
>
>
>

Own goal!!!!!  Own goal!!!

The only context in this NG of not completing something
is someone who ran away from the private pilot's licence
and then also turned out to be either too lazy or too stupid, or
both, to be able to tackle and then pass the 12WPM Morse
test that otherwise-unqualified self-taught 14-year-olds
were taking in thier stride, despite having over 20 years
within which to do it.

Now, who was it? Walt, do you know?

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message 
news:h58Th.128$Jv3.62@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>
> Don't forget, below all of those are uncompleted degrees  from Essex 
> University!
>

%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

> And you like to show your superiority by being unable to find a shift
> key? Indeed you like to show this superiority by being unaware that you
> have posted to multiple groups?


ahhh mr firth - so nice of you to join in.

Pun_Krocker <punkrocker62<noSPAM>@gmail.com> wrote:

> NO I am not, if you quote someone else you *do* *not* edit _their_ 
> post, if it offends you, *do* *not* quote it, simple!

my dear man.... as i already said...

if you have a problem with that then thats your problem.

> 
> I see you on your class high horse, grow up Paul, having a pass in 
wrong again - no high horse here.
just no low horses on my ranch.


> Morse code does not make anyone better than someone who does not, only 
> a fool would say that.
> For the record, I do not support what he did and I do have a pass @ 
> 12wpm morse code (so what?).
oh good.... well done to you too.

Mike Clayton  wrote:

> Get over yourself, you passed a Morse test, so what. I am sure that like 
> myself many ex class-b operators have technical qualifications and 
> experience that far exceed the passing of a Morse test.

did i say you or many others didnt.

the fact remains.

every b-licensee is/was a b-licensee because 
1. no evidence was put forward to show a pass at a morse test
and
2. no applicationw as made to obtain a class-a licence.

Geoff Berrow  wrote:

> I suspect the young people will be far more comfortable with the
> language than you.
> 
this is probably true.... 

however, i do think that the anglo-saxon words should be reserved for
those times when you completely flatten your finger with a hammer when
missing a nail or when you crack that last tile with only one more little
area to fill in on the bathroom wall.

> Your killfile is your friend.
yes again...but just think of the ''wisdom'' i would miss.  :-)

zpk  wrote:

> i do think that the anglo-saxon words should be reserved for
> those times when you completely flatten your finger with a hammer when
> missing a nail or when you crack that last tile with only one more little
> area to fill in on the bathroom wall.

You're a daft Scunthorpe aren't you?

zpk wrote:
>
> however, i do think that the anglo-saxon words should be reserved for
> those times when you completely flatten your finger with a hammer when
> missing a nail or when you crack that last tile with only one more
> little area to fill in on the bathroom wall.

There is no evidence of the words in question in Old English (as spoken by 
the Anglo-Saxons).
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote:

> There is no evidence of the words in question in Old English (as spoken by 
> the Anglo-Saxons).

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profanity

http://wordie.org/people/John?wl=2185

zpk wrote:
> "John Briggs"  wrote:
>
>> There is no evidence of the words in question in Old English (as
>> spoken by the Anglo-Saxons).
>
> http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profanity
>
> http://wordie.org/people/John?wl=2185

It's no good just giving those as references - they don't give detailed 
etymologies. To cut to the chase, most of the words are Middle English or 
later.
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote:

> It's no good just giving those as references - they don't give detailed 
> etymologies. To cut to the chase, most of the words are Middle English or 
> later.

i dont know any different ...but obviously somebody does or those two
websites would exist.

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 13:42:38 GMT, zpk
 wrote in
uk.net.news.config:

> "John Briggs"  wrote:
>
>> It's no good just giving those as references - they don't give detailed 
>> etymologies. To cut to the chase, most of the words are Middle English or 
>> later.
>
> i dont know any different ...but obviously somebody does or those two
> websites would exist.

These three are definitely Old English, since they appear in OE texts:

ears / ærs (noun, pronounced "ars") : "arse"
beallucas (plural noun, prononounced "BAL-lu-kas): "ballocks"
scitan (verb, pronounced "SHEE-tan"): "to shit"

Source: Henry Sweet, _The Student's Dictionary of Anglo-Saxon_, 1896

Other naughty words first appear in Middle English, but their history
before being written down is unknown. They may be OE words that
weren't previously recorded, borrowings from other languages or new
coinages.

Chaucer's spelling of the C word as "quaint" (pronounced "kaynt")
suggests a French or Norman origin, but OTOH the spelling may be
deliberately euphemistic.

The important thing to remember is that the meaning of words depends
on usage, not etymology.

-- 
PJR :-)

Peter J Ross wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 13:42:38 GMT, zpk
>  wrote in
> uk.net.news.config:
>
>> "John Briggs"  wrote:
>>
>>> It's no good just giving those as references - they don't give
>>> detailed etymologies. To cut to the chase, most of the words are
>>> Middle English or later.
>>
>> i dont know any different ...but obviously somebody does or those two
>> websites would exist.
>
> These three are definitely Old English, since they appear in OE texts:
>
> ears / ærs (noun, pronounced "ars") : "arse"
> beallucas (plural noun, prononounced "BAL-lu-kas): "ballocks"
> scitan (verb, pronounced "SHEE-tan"): "to shit"
>
> Source: Henry Sweet, _The Student's Dictionary of Anglo-Saxon_, 1896

Yes, obviously.

> Other naughty words first appear in Middle English, but their history
> before being written down is unknown. They may be OE words that
> weren't previously recorded, borrowings from other languages or new
> coinages.

 They are late - often very late.

> Chaucer's spelling of the C word as "quaint" (pronounced "kaynt")
> suggests a French or Norman origin, but OTOH the spelling may be
> deliberately euphemistic.

That's fairly obviously Old French.

> The important thing to remember is that the meaning of words depends
> on usage, not etymology.

An interesting philosophical position, but one that would take some 
justifying!  I think you are only trying to say that dictionaries are 
descriptive, rather than prescriptive.
-- 
John Briggs

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:04:22 GMT, John Briggs
 wrote in uk.net.news.config:

> Peter J Ross wrote:

<...>

>> The important thing to remember is that the meaning of words depends
>> on usage, not etymology.
>
> An interesting philosophical position, but one that would take some 
> justifying!  I think you are only trying to say that dictionaries are 
> descriptive, rather than prescriptive.

No. To give an example taken from your post, one can be descriptive or
prescriptive without writing anything down, despite the derivation
from /scribere/, "to write".

To give an example from current usage, the word "crude" in "crude
language" and "crude oil" has two unrelated meanings, even though the
etymology is identical. In fact, "crude language" is more likely to be
described as "ripe" than "unripe".

Many dictionaries, especially smaller ones, are still prescriptive to
some extent, and even the least prescriptive dictionary is likely to
be used by many readers as a guide to how to write, not a guide to how
other people have written.

Anyway, if you want to move the discussion to AUE or AEU, I'll
probably follow it there.

-- 
PJR :-)

On 15 Apr 2007 18:13:56 GMT, Peter J Ross <pjr@example.invalid> wrote:

>To give an example from current usage, the word "crude" in "crude
>language" and "crude oil" has two unrelated meanings, even though the
>etymology is identical. 

On the contrary, both meanings are precisely related.  In both cases,
the word means "unrefined".

-- 
Walt Davidson                               Email: g3nyy @despammed.com

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:27:15 +0100, Walt Davidson
 wrote in uk.net.news.config:

> On 15 Apr 2007 18:13:56 GMT, Peter J Ross <pjr@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>>To give an example from current usage, the word "crude" in "crude
>>language" and "crude oil" has two unrelated meanings, even though the
>>etymology is identical. 
>
> On the contrary, both meanings are precisely related.  In both cases,
> the word means "unrefined".

That's too clever by half. I doff my hat to you, sir.


-- 
PJR :-)

In MsgID on 15 Apr 2007 14:09:05 GMT,
in uk.net.news.config, 'Peter J Ross' wrote:

>The important thing to remember is that the meaning of words depends
>on usage, not etymology.

I wouldn't go along with that, usage (as in average usage) tends to only
rely on the more superficial meanings of a word, so as more people learn
only those superficial meanings, and teach them to yet more people, the
original depth and subtlety of a word is lost.

IMHO one of the beauties of the English language stems directly from its
mongrel nature. There are so many words which at some level describe any
given concept that when linked together (and where the 'original' meanings
are understood by both communicator and listener), there is a common
subset of those meanings to be found. The resulting 'compression ratio' of
words:meanigs, this multitude of different angles of description, is part
of what gives English its strength as a medium of communication. To work
against that is to take the American route, toward the LCD.

CPs retained, with apologies. All I can say in defence is that it's at
least equally off topic in each group.

Dave J.
-- 
Support a referendum on UK ID cards before they are 
inflicted at stupendous cost for negligible reward.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/IDreferendum/