I've followed the threads concerning James Follett where you have 
generally shown yourselves to be fucking idiots who have done pretty 
much sod all with your lives yet feel in a position to attack James 
Follettt, who, as he says, has always replied intelligently and with 
equanimity. Are you all playing a special uk.misc game or are you just 
poor saps as I suspect? I think the latter. You have thoroughly 
disgusted me. I've never seen so much teenage crap appear on uk.misc. 
You may be educated but this is far from showing intelligence. Sorry 
people but almost all those who have replied to JF have shown themselves 
to be sad litlle jealous sods who are so insecure they have to flame 
rather than discuss.

Get you act togetther for fuck's sake.

(Don't bother replying Firth, you're killfiled because, like much of 
Usenet, and JF himself, you've been sussed as the bitter litrtle prat 
that you are).

Sweet dreams everyone. I hope you'll be better in the morning.

And "John of Aix"  was like:

> Sorry people but almost all those who have replied to JF have shown
> themselves to be sad litlle jealous sods who are so insecure they
> have to flame rather than discuss.

It's uncanny. We've never met, and yet - it's like my photograph, in
words.

-- 
| Patrick Hardlentil -  patrick@dogslobber.demon.co.uk
| Do not touch happy fun gnooby

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:48:47 +0200, John of Aix wrote:

> Follettt, who, as he says, has always replied intelligently and with 
> equanimity. 

The fuck.

-- 
One way ticket from Mornington Crescent to Tannhauser Gate please.

John of Aix  wrote:

> (Don't bother replying Firth, you're killfiled because, like much of 
> Usenet, and JF himself, you've been sussed as the bitter litrtle prat
> that you are).

Really? Now there was me thinking it was because you were upset at the
butt-kicking I gave you. Oh hang on, it was.

In article <48680338$0$865$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>, 
j.murphy@libertysurf.fr says...
> I've followed the threads concerning James Follett where you have 
> generally shown yourselves to be fucking idiots who have done pretty 
> much sod all with your lives yet feel in a position to attack James 
> Follettt, who, as he says, has always replied intelligently and with 
> equanimity. Are you all playing a special uk.misc game or are you just 
> poor saps as I suspect? I think the latter. You have thoroughly 
> disgusted me. I've never seen so much teenage crap appear on uk.misc. 

Good grief, how long have you been here? Have you just been posting and 
not reading or what?

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:48:47 +0200, "John of Aix" 
wrote:

> has always replied intelligently and with 
>equanimity.

In exactly the same way as Mark Antony's 'I come to bury Caesar' speech, as
written by Willy Spokeshave.
Methinks you've been speaking forrin too long to detect nuance in English.
-- 
JAF anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
     Sapere Aude

Amethyst Deceiver wrote:
> In article <48680338$0$865$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>,
> j.murphy@libertysurf.fr says...
>> I've followed the threads concerning James Follett where you have
>> generally shown yourselves to be fucking idiots who have done pretty
>> much sod all with your lives yet feel in a position to attack James
>> Follettt, who, as he says, has always replied intelligently and with
>> equanimity. Are you all playing a special uk.misc game or are you
>> just poor saps as I suspect? I think the latter. You have thoroughly
>> disgusted me. I've never seen so much teenage crap appear on uk.misc.
>
> Good grief, how long have you been here? Have you just been posting
> and not reading or what?

What you mean vis-à-vis the 'teenage crap?'. No, on that score uk.misc 
is relatively clean, though it does happen sometimes, as it did in this 
case.

In this case, as I say, I was rather disgusted. It might be just a game, 
let's kick someone other than JoA, but I found it incredibly childish 
and as I know that the intellectual level here is pretty high (and long 
may it reign) my disappointement was all the greater.

JAF wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:48:47 +0200, "John of Aix"
>  wrote:
>
>> has always replied intelligently and with
>> equanimity.
>
> In exactly the same way as Mark Antony's 'I come to bury Caesar'
> speech, as written by Willy Spokeshave.
> Methinks you've been speaking forrin too long to detect nuance in
> English.

On the contrary. having done a great deal of translation in my life I 
suspect that my understanding of the varieties of English is probably 
better than yours. "To translate means to read it twice" as they say 
more or less (3 times though IMO).

Let's be honest here JAF there were attacks on JF which were attacks on 
the messenger not the message and about silly points that you'd expect 
on alt.talk.bollocks but not here.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:33:49 +0200, "John of Aix" 
wrote:

> I 
>suspect that my understanding of the varieties of English is probably 
>better than yours.

I find that remark somewhat offensive.

>Let's be honest here JAF

And that implication slightly more so.

> there were attacks on JF which were attacks on 
>the messenger not the message and about silly points that you'd expect 
>on alt.talk.bollocks but not here. 

Someone lies, is caught out, and still carries on the same lie.
What would you expect to happen to them in uk.misc?  A presentation of a
gold cup and a medal?  Or the judicious application of Clue?
 
-- 
JAF anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
     Sapere Aude

JAF  wrote:

> > there were attacks on JF which were attacks on 
> >the messenger not the message and about silly points that you'd expect
> >on alt.talk.bollocks but not here. 
> 
> Someone lies, is caught out, and still carries on the same lie.
> What would you expect to happen to them in uk.misc?  A presentation of a
> gold cup and a medal?  Or the judicious application of Clue?

Saint James of Follett caught out being economical with the truth?
Heavens above surely that cannot be. Someone must have made a mistake
about the Great Man.

I'm not quite sure why FrogBoy is climbing up Follett's rectum. Or
indeed why he thinks that calling the majority of newsgroup users
"twats" makes him anything other than a big garlic smelling hypocrite.

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

> I'm not quite sure why FrogBoy is climbing up Follett's rectum. Or
> indeed why he thinks that calling the majority of newsgroup users
> "twats" makes him anything other than a big garlic smelling hypocrite.

I was more amused by his accusation that we have, all of us, made
nothing of our lives, compared to the Great Follett, politeness be upon
him.

-- 
UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of
 this IMPORTANT information is ENCOURAGED

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:50:35 +0100, August West wrote:

> I was more amused by his accusation that we have, all of us, made
> nothing of our lives

Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
modified banjo very badly. What more does he want?


-- 
Changing blossoms into piss
and taking bites from every kiss

"John of Aix"  wrote

[snip]

Fuck off.

"Number Two"  writes:

> "John of Aix"  wrote
>
> [snip]
>
> Fuck off.

How rude! You should take a lesson from that clever Follet chap; he's
always pleasant and polite. And he never, ever, indulges in personal
insults. He's got lots of money, too, you know.

-- 
who?

Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:50:35 +0100, August West wrote:
> 
>> I was more amused by his accusation that we have, all of us, made
>> nothing of our lives
> 
> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
> modified banjo very badly. What more does he want?

And I'm 45 (tomorrer) and can spit plum stones right out of the kitchen 
window at least once in every three attempts.

August West  wrote:

> %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) writes:
> 
> > I'm not quite sure why FrogBoy is climbing up Follett's rectum. Or
> > indeed why he thinks that calling the majority of newsgroup users
> > "twats" makes him anything other than a big garlic smelling hypocrite.
> 
> I was more amused by his accusation that we have, all of us, made
> nothing of our lives, compared to the Great Follett, politeness be upon
> him.

Yes that does cause a wrinkle of amusement as well, but with so much
cant and hypocrisy flying around it's difficult to know which particular
bit to smirk at first. The one thing I'm not sure of is Mr F.'s
intention in all of this. It looks like recreational grade trolling, but
doesn't have the appropriate lightness of touch that would make it
amusing. Indeed it's not very far off the fukts approach of standing
still shouting while weeing down the inside of one's trousers.

If OTOH he's trying to genuinely impress the poor souls of uk.m with his
greatness then standing there shouting "I'm great I am and you're all
witless peasants" doesn't seem to be a winner either. I don't know much
about the majority of folk here but the ones I have met in RL have
impressed me by the quiet exercise of their competence and their tongue
buried in cheek nature, not so say a great deal of light hiding under
bushels.

Follett who Used to be mildly amusing at times seems to be descending
into parody. As I mentioned before he reminds me of the character in Ed
Reardon's Week at present. Next thing he'll be writing his builder and
the local off licence into scripts in order to get £500 off the price of
his building renovation and to get a couple of bottles of free Chilean
Merlot.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:51:04 +0100, Willy Eckerslyke wrote:

<snip>

> And I'm 45 (tomorrer) and can spit plum stones right out of the kitchen 
> window at least once in every three attempts.

Reminds me of Uni. There was an extractor fan in our tiny kitchen (for 12
people). When making a cup of tea we would use the teaspoon to try and fire
the wet tea bag into the extractor fan, so that it would disintegrate,
making a very satisfying noise. I'm not sure if the cleaner ever worked out
why the extractor fan was surrounded by stains created by inaccurate tea
bags.


-- 
Due to a lack of trained trumpeters, the end of 
the world has been postponed indefinitely.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:49:00 +0100, August West wrote:

> "Number Two"  writes:
> 
>> "John of Aix"  wrote
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> Fuck off.
> 
> How rude! You should take a lesson from that clever Follet chap; he's
> always pleasant and polite. And he never, ever, indulges in personal
> insults. He's got lots of money, too, you know.

His name is an anagram of "Jet Of Mallets". I think that says it all.


-- 
Too many parents make life hard for their children by trying, 
too zealously, to make it easy for them.

Hot Badger Deluxe  writes:

> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:51:04 +0100, Willy Eckerslyke wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> And I'm 45 (tomorrer) and can spit plum stones right out of the kitchen 
>> window at least once in every three attempts.
>
> Reminds me of Uni. There was an extractor fan in our tiny kitchen (for 12
> people). When making a cup of tea we would use the teaspoon to try and fire
> the wet tea bag into the extractor fan, so that it would disintegrate,
> making a very satisfying noise. I'm not sure if the cleaner ever worked out
> why the extractor fan was surrounded by stains created by inaccurate tea
> bags.

We played a similar game. Well, related in that it took place in a
kitchen, and involved throwing things. Anyway, take a number of squash,
or tennis, balls in hand, stand at the door of the kitchen, turn the
lights off for a few minutes. Turn them on, and the person to flatten
the most cockraches wins. The usual winner was a PhD in entomology, whio
spend his working hours irradiating fruit flies, and wko also kept ants
and stick insects in his room. He did a great lecture on crocodile
locomotion.

-- 
dazzle us with heaven or they damn us into hell

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:51:42 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:

<snip>

> Follett who Used to be mildly amusing at times seems to be descending
> into parody.

<AOL>.


-- 
The beauty of humour is that it pleases the people who have 
a sense of humour and it annoys the curmudgeons who don't.

In uk.misc,  (Willy Eckerslyke) wrote in
::

>Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:50:35 +0100, August West wrote:
>> 
>>> I was more amused by his accusation that we have, all of us, made
>>> nothing of our lives
>> 
>> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
>> modified banjo very badly. What more does he want?
>
>And I'm 45 (tomorrer) and can spit plum stones right out of the kitchen 
>window at least once in every three attempts.

I'm 50, and can make a popping noise with my tongue (no fingers needed).
AFAIK, only about four people can do this (one being my daughter).
-- 
Marc

Nature Is Better At Biology Than You Are -  Aqua

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:15:37 +0100, Marc Wilson wrote:

> I'm 50, and can make a popping noise with my tongue (no fingers needed).

Whilst doing what, exactly?


-- 
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:14:54 +0100, August West wrote:

<snip>

> crocodile locomotion

Aha!

Steve Irwin (Australian) was into crocodiles.

Kylie Minogue (Australian) did a cover version of Locomotion.

Suddenly it all starts to make sense...


-- 
I am the evening DJ
on W.O.L.D.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:15:37 +0100, Marc Wilson 
wrote the following to uk.misc:

> In uk.misc,  (Willy Eckerslyke) wrote in
>::
>
>>Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
>>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:50:35 +0100, August West wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I was more amused by his accusation that we have, all of us, made
>>>> nothing of our lives
>>> 
>>> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
>>> modified banjo very badly. What more does he want?
>>
>>And I'm 45 (tomorrer) and can spit plum stones right out of the kitchen 
>>window at least once in every three attempts.
>
> I'm 50, and can make a popping noise with my tongue (no fingers needed).
> AFAIK, only about four people can do this (one being my daughter).

I'm 29 and I've got my 4th Thai boxing match 2 weeks on Sunday.

mh.
-- 
http://www.nukesoft.co.uk
http://personal.nukesoft.co.uk

From address is a blackhole. Reply-to address is valid.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:51:04 +0100, Willy Eckerslyke wrote:

> Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:50:35 +0100, August West wrote:
>> 
>>> I was more amused by his accusation that we have, all of us, made
>>> nothing of our lives
>> 
>> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
>> modified banjo very badly. What more does he want?
> 
> And I'm 45 (tomorrer) and can spit plum stones right out of the kitchen 
> window at least once in every three attempts.

Reply part 2 - talking of aging:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l0fH0dRUow

Harry Chapin - W.O.L.D.


-- 
Smelling like a brewery
Looking like a tramp

Willy Eckerslyke  writes:

> Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:50:35 +0100, August West wrote:
>>
>>> I was more amused by his accusation that we have, all of us, made
>>> nothing of our lives
>>
>> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
>> modified banjo very badly. What more does he want?
>
> And I'm 45 (tomorrer) and can spit plum stones right out of the
> kitchen window at least once in every three attempts.

I'm 6 and two thirds, and I can drink 6 bottles of blue Panda Pop,
the I jump up and down, and show you my lunch!!

-- 
I like Monster Munch sandwiches

Hot Badger Deluxe  wrote:

> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
> modified banjo very badly.

ObDiversion:

Following Radio 4's item last week, I'm tempted to buy a bunch of iTunes
tracks of the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain. Even if the only track
I get is "Miss Dy-na-me-tee."

They don't play banjeleles, but they do cover "Leaning on a Lampost" and
the Ennio Morricone tracks are sublime. Sadly iTunes doesn't have "The
Good the Bad and the Ugly".

On 30 Jun 2008 16:02:12 GMT, Marcus Houlden wrote:

<snip>

> I'm 29 and I've got my 4th Thai boxing match 2 weeks on Sunday.

Strangely I've been remembering a lot of Kung Fu stuff recently. The
various hand shapes (my favourite being the left hand as a tiger's claw,
for deflection, and the right as a dragon's head, for focusing the strength
of the blow - a combination of the circular and the straight line), the
points to hit, etc. I have no idea why this has started to come back to me,
but it seems to be staying around. Maybe I should get back into it... I'm
tempted to get a DVD, or somesuch (I'm to physically unfit at the moment to
join a class)... time for a browse on Amazon...


-- 
As the failing light illuminates
the mercenaries creed.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:59:20 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:

> Hot Badger Deluxe  wrote:
> 
>> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
>> modified banjo very badly.
> 
> ObDiversion:
> 
> Following Radio 4's item last week, I'm tempted to buy a bunch of iTunes
> tracks of the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain. Even if the only track
> I get is "Miss Dy-na-me-tee."

What you want is the Temple City Kazoo Orchestra - their version of Also
sprach Zarathustra is great(1).

> "Leaning on a Lampost"

At least he got the trains to run on time.


(1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T75MC69N2IU


-- 
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.

Hot Badger Deluxe  writes:

> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:59:20 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:
>
>> Hot Badger Deluxe  wrote:
>> 
>>> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
>>> modified banjo very badly.
>> 
>> ObDiversion:
>> 
>> Following Radio 4's item last week, I'm tempted to buy a bunch of iTunes
>> tracks of the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain. Even if the only track
>> I get is "Miss Dy-na-me-tee."
>
> What you want is the Temple City Kazoo Orchestra - their version of
> Also sprach Zarathustra is great(1).

I've got acopy of the Stanford University Marching Band playing the
Grateful Dead tune "Uncle John's Band", should anyone wish to hear such
a thing...

-- 
Nevermore

Hot Badger Deluxe  writes:

> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:59:20 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:
>
>> Hot Badger Deluxe  wrote:
>> 
>>> Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
>>> modified banjo very badly.
>> 
>> ObDiversion:
>> 
>> Following Radio 4's item last week, I'm tempted to buy a bunch of iTunes
>> tracks of the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain. Even if the only track
>> I get is "Miss Dy-na-me-tee."
>
> What you want is the Temple City Kazoo Orchestra - their version of
> Also sprach Zarathustra is great(1).

And I've still got Rufus Harley doing serious damage to "Swing Low" with
his jazz bagpipes[0]: uggc://xbebenn.pbz/zc3/ontcvcrf.zc3

0] The really, really should be a euphemism for something filthy.
-- 
playing clean and looking for the pretty notes

Ba Zba, 30 Wha 2008 17:40:36 +0100, Nhthfg Jrfg 
jebgr guvf:

> uggc://xbebenn.pbz/zc3/ontcvcrf.zc3

GUVRS.






(Gn.)


-- 
Tex.
Erprag yvffava': Jva, 'Hu! Grnef Onol (N Genfu Vpba)'

On 30 Jun 2008 16:02:12 GMT, Marcus Houlden 
wrote this:

>I'm 29 and I've got my 4th Thai boxing match 2 weeks on Sunday.

I'm 22 going on 23.





-- 
Grk.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:15:09 +0100, Hot Badger Deluxe 
wrote the following to uk.misc:

> On 30 Jun 2008 16:02:12 GMT, Marcus Houlden wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> I'm 29 and I've got my 4th Thai boxing match 2 weeks on Sunday.
>
> Strangely I've been remembering a lot of Kung Fu stuff recently. The
> various hand shapes (my favourite being the left hand as a tiger's claw,
> for deflection, and the right as a dragon's head, for focusing the strength
> of the blow - a combination of the circular and the straight line), the
> points to hit, etc. I have no idea why this has started to come back to me,
> but it seems to be staying around. Maybe I should get back into it... I'm
> tempted to get a DVD, or somesuch (I'm to physically unfit at the moment to
> join a class)... time for a browse on Amazon...

Might be worth finding out about private sessions if you do want to get back
into it without joining up with a full class. Tonight's Brazilian Jiu Jitsu
for me so I'll be disappearing shortly......

Incidentally, preparing for my fight means I'm going to be off booze for the
next 3 weeks. If anyone wants to join me on the wagon even for just a day
they're quite welcome.

mh.
-- 
http://www.nukesoft.co.uk
http://personal.nukesoft.co.uk

From address is a blackhole. Reply-to address is valid.

JAF wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:33:49 +0200, "John of Aix"
>  wrote:
>
>> I
>> suspect that my understanding of the varieties of English is probably
>> better than yours.
>
> I find that remark somewhat offensive.

Tough.

>> Let's be honest here JAF
>
> And that implication slightly more so.

>>> there were attacks on JF which were attacks on
>> the messenger not the message and about silly points that you'd
>> expect on alt.talk.bollocks but not here.
>
> Someone lies, is caught out, and still carries on the same lie.
> What would you expect to happen to them in uk.misc?  A presentation
> of a gold cup and a medal?  Or the judicious application of Clue?

You were attacking him when there was no need whatsoever to attack him,
venting your (generally not particualrly) spleen. It was like a cabal
and to my eyes utterly ridiculous and utterly childish. Take that as you
will, I don't give a flying fuck, I just tell it the way I see it.

"John of Aix"  wrote

> I don't give a flying fuck, I just tell it the way I see it.

Yet your feathers get ruffled when others do similar, you grade A prick.

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:48:47 +0200, John of Aix wrote:

<snip>

Now this is curious... why should JoA suddenly launch this broadside? A
quick scan suggests that he has played little part in the tussle with JF.
This would suggest that he is not interested in the poster that he claims
is being "attacked, but in the attack itself... It's the way that the group
bond together to attack someone whose posts stench of self-imposed
superiority.

There are two options:

1) JoA is afraid that JF is taking his place in this froup, or

2) JoA is defending a kindred spirit.

"there's a thin line between love and hate".

Please only post on one side of the screen...


-- 
Have nothing in your house that you do not know 
to be useful or believe to be beautiful.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:05:57 +0200, "John of Aix" 
wrote:

>Take that as you
>will, I don't give a flying fuck, I just tell it the way I see it.

Don't let the door smack your arse on your way out.
-- 
JAF anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
     Sapere Aude

In uk.misc,  (Hot Badger Deluxe) wrote in
<qircw1kzfo08$.v7qn6ojllj8v$.dlg@40tude.net>::

>On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:15:37 +0100, Marc Wilson wrote:
>
>> I'm 50, and can make a popping noise with my tongue (no fingers needed).
>
>Whilst doing what, exactly?

You know how people pop by tugging a finger across one side of their
mouths?  Well, I can do that without the finger.

I never claimed it was especially useful.
-- 
Marc

Invalid thought detected. Close all mental processes and restart body.

In article , 
grk@ku.gro.assednacni says...
> On 30 Jun 2008 16:02:12 GMT, Marcus Houlden 
> wrote this:
> 
> >I'm 29 and I've got my 4th Thai boxing match 2 weeks on Sunday.
> 
> I'm 22 going on 23.
> 

I'm 51 going on regardless.

-- 
eric
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"

Number Two wrote:
> "John of Aix"  wrote
>
>> I don't give a flying fuck, I just tell it the way I see it.
>
> Yet your feathers get ruffled when others do similar, you grade A
> prick.

I tell it like it is, sort yourself out old son, it isn't my problem.

JAF wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:05:57 +0200, "John of Aix"
>  wrote:
>
>> Take that as you
>> will, I don't give a flying fuck, I just tell it the way I see it.
>
> Don't let the door smack your arse on your way out.

Whart a brilliant reply. Grow up laddie.

Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:48:47 +0200, John of Aix wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Now this is curious... why should JoA suddenly launch this broadside?
> A quick scan suggests that he has played little part in the tussle
> with JF. This would suggest that he is not interested in the poster
> that he claims is being "attacked, but in the attack itself... It's
> the way that the group bond together to attack someone whose posts
> stench of self-imposed superiority.

I followed the thread(s) from beginning to end but as I didn't see the 
slightest need to criticise JF I didn't intervene. I just watched one 
after the other write childish, and bitter, bollocks which, as I said, 
thoroughly disgusted me. Uk.misc can be better that that.

> There are two options:

> 1) JoA is afraid that JF is taking his place in this froup, or

Well if you mean being the object of your silly flames you may be right.

> 2) JoA is defending a kindred spirit.

Perhaps.

Hypodeemic Nerdle wrote:

Whoopee. I've become plurial.

"John of Aix"  writes:

> Number Two wrote:
>> "John of Aix"  wrote
>>
>>> I don't give a flying fuck, I just tell it the way I see it.
>>
>> Yet your feathers get ruffled when others do similar, you grade A
>> prick.
>
> I tell it like it is, sort yourself out old son, it isn't my problem. 

You tell it like you see it; not quite the same thing, old bean.

-- 
so hard to find my way

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:25:21 +0200, John of Aix wrote:

> Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
>> 
>> A quick scan suggests that he has played little part in the tussle
>> with JF. This would suggest that he is not interested in the poster
>> that he claims is being "attacked, but in the attack itself... It's
>> the way that the group bond together to attack someone whose posts
>> stench of self-imposed superiority.
> 
> I followed the thread(s) from beginning to end but as I didn't see the 
> slightest need to criticise JF I didn't intervene. 

Indeed, it was being taken care of by others, as you have noted.

I don't think there's much evidence of "group bonding".  The miscreants
are a singularly diverse bunch: left-wing, right-wing, young, old, 
unemployed, self-employed, PAYE, atheist, agnostic, believer, etc.:
about the only thing in common that I can discern is a certain 
individualism, and a belief in one's own ability to make one's own
mind up about things.  So if a large number of these individuals 
simultaneously get pissed off with a poster, it's not because of
some hive mind at work - it's because the poster is being an arse.

It doesn't matter who it is - if someone refuses to budge from 
an untenable position, they will get flamed all the way to alt.hell
and back.

-- 
One way ticket from Mornington Crescent to Tannhauser Gate please.

August West wrote:
> "John of Aix"  writes:
>
>> Number Two wrote:
>>> "John of Aix"  wrote
>>>
>>>> I don't give a flying fuck, I just tell it the way I see it.
>>>
>>> Yet your feathers get ruffled when others do similar, you grade A
>>> prick.
>>
>> I tell it like it is, sort yourself out old son, it isn't my problem.
>
> You tell it like you see it; not quite the same thing, old bean.

Agreed. But it doesn't change anything from my point of view nor my 
recommendation to JAF

Fevric J Glandules wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:25:21 +0200, John of Aix wrote:
>
>> Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
>>>
>>> A quick scan suggests that he has played little part in the tussle
>>> with JF. This would suggest that he is not interested in the poster
>>> that he claims is being "attacked, but in the attack itself... It's
>>> the way that the group bond together to attack someone whose posts
>>> stench of self-imposed superiority.
>>
>> I followed the thread(s) from beginning to end but as I didn't see
>> the slightest need to criticise JF I didn't intervene.
>
> Indeed, it was being taken care of by others, as you have noted.
>
> I don't think there's much evidence of "group bonding".  The
> miscreants are a singularly diverse bunch: left-wing, right-wing,
> young, old, unemployed, self-employed, PAYE, atheist, agnostic,
> believer, etc.: about the only thing in common that I can discern is
> a certain individualism, and a belief in one's own ability to make
> one's own mind up about things.  So if a large number of these
> individuals simultaneously get pissed off with a poster, it's not
> because of
> some hive mind at work - it's because the poster is being an arse.
>
> It doesn't matter who it is - if someone refuses to budge from
> an untenable position, they will get flamed all the way to alt.hell
> and back.

I agree with most of it but nevertheless there is a certain group 
mentality whether conscious or not.Why no smileys here for instance, is 
that not a collective decision. Why are cross posts avoided? Is that not 
the same? Nothing wrong with either of these things IMO, on the 
contrary, but it nevertheless shows a certain 'group mentality'.

As for JF "je persiste et je signe", you were unjust.

John of Aix  wrote:

> JAF wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:33:49 +0200, "John of Aix"
> >  wrote:
> >
> >> I suspect that my understanding of the varieties of English is probably
> >> better than yours.
> >
> > I find that remark somewhat offensive.
> 
> Tough.

Hypocrite.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:31:39 +0200, John of Aix wrote:

> I agree with most of it but nevertheless there is a certain group 
> mentality whether conscious or not.Why no smileys here for instance, is 
> that not a collective decision. 

Is it?  People are free to use smileys - it's just that if they 
do then other people are likely to point and sneer and make 
baboon noises.  Personally I've pretty much abandoned smileys
all together, except when writing to people who need JOKE writ
large in order to get it.

> Why are cross posts avoided? Is that not
> the same? Nothing wrong with either of these things IMO, on the
> contrary, but it nevertheless shows a certain 'group mentality'.

I'll cross-post when appropriate: I rarely find it appropriate.

> As for JF "je persiste et je signe", you were unjust.

Persistently mings?

-- 
One way ticket from Mornington Crescent to Tannhauser Gate please.

Fevric J Glandules <fevric@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> > As for JF "je persiste et je signe", you were unjust.
> 
> Persistently mings?

"Clings like monkey shit to a blanket" Innit?

On Jun 30, 11:10 pm, Fevric J Glandules <fev...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

> It doesn't matter who it is - if someone refuses to budge from
> an untenable position, they will get flamed all the way to alt.hell
> and back.

I've been looking through the posts of the last year. What exactly is
an untenable position? The steady rain of posts from Jim Follett in
which he describes himself as a terrible writer and an 'unspeakable
cad'? There have been at least 10 posts from in this year with that
theme. Some poser!

Perhaps an tenable position is that adopted by those who've
persistently demonstated their corrosive hatred by calling him a liar
and have never produced a single fact to support such a claim. I've
seen plenty of spurous messing about with what people think are facts
and aren't. Old Josef would've been proud of the cerebral gymnastics
I've seen.

Perhaps an untenable position has been assumed by those who've called
him a liar for saying that he doesn't do personal insults and have
they've never produced a shred of evidence to support their
accusations to the contrary. Not one! I've read a lot of hogwash about
people feeling offended. It's self-evident that a personal insult has
to be directed at a person to be considered a personal insult.

Perhaps an untenable position is that assumed by those who've
persistently fired childish insults at Follet without in any regard
for truth? VIs-a-vis the embittered poster who called him a hypocrit
for voicing reasoned criticism of the BBC -- who pay him. Unless I
missed a reply, the accuser was too ashamed to answer Follett's
dismissal of his wild accusation.

Richard Christoper RNIB







Perhaps an unt.

In uk.misc,  (Fevric J Glandules) wrote in
<lRcak.18614$E41.12779@text.news.virginmedia.com>::

>On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:25:21 +0200, John of Aix wrote:
>
>> Hot Badger Deluxe wrote:
>>> 
>>> A quick scan suggests that he has played little part in the tussle
>>> with JF. This would suggest that he is not interested in the poster
>>> that he claims is being "attacked, but in the attack itself... It's
>>> the way that the group bond together to attack someone whose posts
>>> stench of self-imposed superiority.
>> 
>> I followed the thread(s) from beginning to end but as I didn't see the 
>> slightest need to criticise JF I didn't intervene. 
>
>Indeed, it was being taken care of by others, as you have noted.
>
>I don't think there's much evidence of "group bonding".  The miscreants
>are a singularly diverse bunch: left-wing, right-wing, young, old, 
>unemployed, self-employed, PAYE, atheist, agnostic, believer, etc.:
>about the only thing in common that I can discern is a certain 
>individualism, and a belief in one's own ability to make one's own
>mind up about things.  

And a certain, erm, robustness of expression combined with healthy
scepticism.  It's the antidote to taking yourself (or anything, really)
too seriously.

>So if a large number of these individuals 
>simultaneously get pissed off with a poster, it's not because of
>some hive mind at work - it's because the poster is being an arse.
>
>It doesn't matter who it is - if someone refuses to budge from 
>an untenable position, they will get flamed all the way to alt.hell
>and back.
-- 
Marc

It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive  and probing when every twelve 
minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper."  (Rod Serling)

In uk.misc,  (richardrnib@googlemail.com) wrote in
::

>On Jun 30, 11:10 pm, Fevric J Glandules <fev...@invalid.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>> It doesn't matter who it is - if someone refuses to budge from
>> an untenable position, they will get flamed all the way to alt.hell
>> and back.
>
>I've been looking through the posts of the last year. What exactly is
>an untenable position? The steady rain of posts from Jim Follett in
>which he describes himself as a terrible writer and an 'unspeakable
>cad'? There have been at least 10 posts from in this year with that
>theme. Some poser!

A little fake humility doesn't disguise the fact that he thinks he's
better than everyone else.
>
>Perhaps an tenable position is that adopted by those who've
>persistently demonstated their corrosive hatred by calling him a liar
>and have never produced a single fact to support such a claim. 

Fact: JF's wiki entry has been edited, several times, by someone at his
IP address.  It's a Demon account, so the IP is fixed.

Fact: He's persistently claimed that the changes were made by "The
owners" of Wikipedia.

He's not come straight out and said: "I didn't do it", but he's
certainly dodged around the issue.


>I've
>seen plenty of spurous messing about with what people think are facts
>and aren't. Old Josef would've been proud of the cerebral gymnastics
>I've seen.

JF doesn't merit "corrosive hatred".  Mild irritation is all he's worth.
He's a pompous arse.  Pompous arses are to be punctured.
>
>Perhaps an untenable position has been assumed by those who've called
>him a liar for saying that he doesn't do personal insults and have
>they've never produced a shred of evidence to support their
>accusations to the contrary. Not one! I've read a lot of hogwash about
>people feeling offended. It's self-evident that a personal insult has
>to be directed at a person to be considered a personal insult.

Nonsense.  He makes comments about people and claims they're not
insults, on some technicality.  This is about as valid as saying: "No
offense" after making an offensive statement.

>Perhaps an untenable position is that assumed by those who've
>persistently fired childish insults at Follet without in any regard
>for truth? VIs-a-vis the embittered poster who called him a hypocrit
>for voicing reasoned criticism of the BBC -- who pay him. Unless I
>missed a reply, the accuser was too ashamed to answer Follett's
>dismissal of his wild accusation.
>
>Richard Christoper RNIB

>
>Perhaps an unt.

Perhaps a sock-puppet?
-- 
Marc

I suppose you can prevent all sorts of appallingly anti-social behaviors
by hiding the means of engaging in them,  but I'd rather prevent them
by way of guest-list management, I think.  - Laura E. Back

"richardrnib@googlemail.com"  writes:

> Richard Christoper RNIB

"RNIB"? Since when has that been a post nominal? 

-- 
something of the night

In article <1ijcuqv.1m2ab5h1p6o4u2N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>, %steve%
@malloc.co.uk says...
> Hot Badger Deluxe  wrote:
> 
> > Good grief. In a mere 47 years (next month) I've learned to play the
> > modified banjo very badly.
> 
> ObDiversion:
> 
> Following Radio 4's item last week, I'm tempted to buy a bunch of iTunes
> tracks of the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain. Even if the only track
> I get is "Miss Dy-na-me-tee."

I also want that. Partly because I think they're fab and partly because 
YoungBloke needs inspiration to play his lovely red "nookerlaylee".

This seems to be the ideal thread to ask: discussion elsewhere has 
covered two orchestras somewhere Down South: one wherein the players are 
professional musicians but do not play their usual instrument; one 
wherein the players are enthusiastic but untrained. One is the 
Portsmouth sinfonia. Can anyone tell me which is which and what the name 
of the other is?

In article <4868d34d$0$916$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>, 
j.murphy@libertysurf.fr says...
> Amethyst Deceiver wrote:
> > In article <48680338$0$865$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>,
> > j.murphy@libertysurf.fr says...
> >> I've followed the threads concerning James Follett where you have
> >> generally shown yourselves to be fucking idiots who have done pretty
> >> much sod all with your lives yet feel in a position to attack James
> >> Follettt, who, as he says, has always replied intelligently and with
> >> equanimity. Are you all playing a special uk.misc game or are you
> >> just poor saps as I suspect? I think the latter. You have thoroughly
> >> disgusted me. I've never seen so much teenage crap appear on uk.misc.
> >
> > Good grief, how long have you been here? Have you just been posting
> > and not reading or what?
> 
> What you mean vis-à-vis the 'teenage crap?'. No, on that score uk.misc 
> is relatively clean, though it does happen sometimes, as it did in this 
> case.
> 
> In this case, as I say, I was rather disgusted. It might be just a game, 
> let's kick someone other than JoA, but I found it incredibly childish 
> and as I know that the intellectual level here is pretty high (and long 
> may it reign) my disappointement was all the greater. 

Oh woe. JoA is disappointed.

Tough. This is ukm. This is what we do.

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:42:54 +0100, Amethyst Deceiver wrote:

<snip>

> This is ukm. This is what we do.

May I add this to my sigfile? Is JAF still making T-shirts?


-- 
What a strange machine man is! You fill him with bread, wine, fish,
and radishes, and out comes sighs, laughter, and dreams.

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:03:28 -0700 (PDT), "richardrnib@googlemail.com"
 wrote:

>VIs-a-vis the embittered poster who called him a hypocrit
>for voicing reasoned criticism of the BBC -- who pay him.

I stand by what I said there, if you are referring to me.
Follet *is* a hypocrite.

 Unless I
>missed a reply, the accuser was too ashamed to answer Follett's
>dismissal of his wild accusation.

Dismissing it doesn't make it untrue.
In fact, as far as I am aware, he agreed.

Now fuck off.
-- 
JAF anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
     Sapere Aude

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:41:33 +0100, Amethyst Deceiver wrote:

<snip>

> I also want that. Partly because I think they're fab and partly because 
> YoungBloke needs inspiration to play his lovely red "nookerlaylee".
> 
> This seems to be the ideal thread to ask: discussion elsewhere has 
> covered two orchestras somewhere Down South: one wherein the players are 
> professional musicians but do not play their usual instrument; one 
> wherein the players are enthusiastic but untrained. One is the 
> Portsmouth sinfonia. Can anyone tell me which is which and what the name 
> of the other is?

Portsmouth Sinfonia fitted both categories:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsmouth_Sinfonia

And here's their Classical Muddley - a sort of megamix:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgKDKyl-EKE

It was rumoured that their records were going to be reissued on CD a while
back, but nothing seems to have happened.


-- 
To know when you have enough, is truly to be rich.

"John of Aix"  wrote

>>> I don't give a flying fuck, I just tell it the way I see it.
>>
>> Yet your feathers get ruffled when others do similar, you grade A
>> prick.
>
> I tell it like it is, sort yourself out old son, it isn't my problem.

Damn well ain't mine, fuckwit.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:12:30 +0100, Marc Wilson wrote:

> In uk.misc,  (Fevric J Glandules) wrote in
> <lRcak.18614$E41.12779@text.news.virginmedia.com>::
> 
>>about the only thing in common that I can discern is a certain 
>>individualism, and a belief in one's own ability to make one's own
>>mind up about things.  
> 
> And a certain, erm, robustness of expression combined with healthy
> scepticism.  

The fuck^W^W IAWTP.

-- 
One way ticket from Mornington Crescent to Tannhauser Gate please.

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:54:46 +0100, Hot Badger Deluxe
 wrote:

>On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:42:54 +0100, Amethyst Deceiver wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> This is ukm. This is what we do.
>
>May I add this to my sigfile? Is JAF still making T-shirts?

I'll start cutting the stencil later today . . .
-- 
JAF anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
     Sapere Aude

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:46:43 +0100, JAF wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:54:46 +0100, Hot Badger Deluxe
>  wrote:
> 
>>On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:42:54 +0100, Amethyst Deceiver wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>> This is ukm. This is what we do.
>>
>>May I add this to my sigfile? Is JAF still making T-shirts?
> 
> I'll start cutting the stencil later today . . .

May I humbly suggest the extension of ukm to uk.misc (brief pause to bow to
the four points of the compass (667), spatchcock a baby (where is Giles?),
and have a drink).

(667) Shirley a compass only has one point - to indicate the location of
the magnetic North Pole...


-- 
The morals of a rutting sea elephant
and the intelligence of lint

Hot Badger Deluxe  writes:
>
> (667) Shirley a compass only has one point - to indicate the location
> of the magnetic North Pole...

It has one North, but four Cardinal points.

-- 
don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:03:28 -0700, richardrnib@googlemail.com wrote:

> I've been looking through the posts of the last year. What exactly is
> an untenable position? The steady rain of posts from Jim Follett in
> which he describes himself as a terrible writer and an 'unspeakable
> cad'? There have been at least 10 posts from in this year with that
> theme. Some poser!

I don't know which is more wearisome - the posts full of false modesty,
or the ones where he reminds the world yet again where he ranks on
the library borrowing scale, etc., etc.

> accusations to the contrary. Not one! I've read a lot of hogwash about
> people feeling offended. It's self-evident that a personal insult has
> to be directed at a person to be considered a personal insult.

It is self-evident that JF's insults are directed at a person - even 
he admits that the intention is to offend:

"It's quite common for folks to feel stung by my tavvie taps -- 
  that's the whole idea." 

Anyway, don't bother yourself with such niceties.

-- 
One way ticket from Mornington Crescent to Tannhauser Gate please.

John of Aix  wrote:

> It might be just a game, let's kick someone other than JoA

Oh indeed, it's hard to see what pompous poseur James "Greatest Author
in the World" Follett could have in common with pompous poseur John
"Fuck Me I Even Bore Myself, Even My Pseudonym is Dull" Aix.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:04:37 +0100, August West wrote:

> four Cardinal points.

Ah, the old Two Ronnies sketch.


-- 
Global warming is just a theory: this is Intelligent Defrosting.

And "richardrnib@googlemail.com"  was like:

> Perhaps an tenable position is that adopted by those who've
> persistently demonstated their corrosive hatred by calling him a
> liar and have never produced a single fact to support such a
> claim. I've seen plenty of spurous messing about with what people
> think are facts and aren't.

Did "he" make a claim about the number of languages a person would
need to know in order to make the famous Wikipedia edits? If so, how
accurate do "you" consider that claim to be? If not, what is the
meaning of the word 'regarding'?

-- 
| Patrick Hardlentil -  patrick@dogslobber.demon.co.uk
| C'mon woman, take off those dark sunglasses
| C'mon mother, we all know its you

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:54:45 +0100, Patrick Hardlentil wrote:

> what is the
> meaning of the word 'regarding'?

You've been inside my head recently, haven't you?
</humour - I'm not that far gone yet>

I'm still struggling with Buckminster Fuller's "God is a verb".


-- 
No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted.

richardrnib@googlemail.com  wrote:

> Perhaps an tenable position is that adopted by those who've
> persistently demonstated their corrosive hatred by calling him a liar
> and have never produced a single fact to support such a claim.

August produced a list of facts to support such a claim. Did you miss
them.

P.S. on Usenet, no one knows you're blind, or deaf or a monopode or
indeed anything else. And since, on Usenet, none of these facts are
relevant or confer a disadvantage one wonders why someone would make
mention of the RNIB in their from address and sig.

Not playing the cripple card are we? Because there are people around
here who can probably out-cripple blind or partially sighted.

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:09:14 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:

> RNIB 

I thought he was a lifeboatman.

> Not playing the cripple card are we? Because there are people around
> here who can probably out-cripple blind or partially sighted.

<waves>

or possibly

<drowns>

The level of pain that I am in currently (alcoholic neuropathy) is
curiously good at focusing the mind. One has to think intensely enough to
get through the pain. Drinking calms the savage wossname, and then I just
become an irrational twat. 

Things that I post in the evenings should largely be ignored.

Ooh - sentient sig generator...

(It's from House)


-- 
I'm not sad, I'm complicated. Chicks dig that.

Hot Badger Deluxe  wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:09:14 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:
> 
> > RNIB 
> 
> I thought he was a lifeboatman.

Avast behind!

Sorry to hear the rest of the news.

On Jul 1, 9:55 am, JAF  wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:03:28 -0700 (PDT), "richardr...@googlemail.com"
>
>  wrote:
> >VIs-a-vis the embittered poster who called him a hypocrit
> >for voicing reasoned criticism of the BBC -- who pay him.
>
> I stand by what I said there, if you are referring to me.
> Follet *is* a hypocrite.

Of course you stand by what you said! Lying comes naturally to you!
You said that Follet was a hypocrite and you failed to substantiate
it. You just shot from the hip without thinking.merely because Follett
voiced reasonable criticism of the BBC. So, by your warped lights, no
OAP can criticise the state because the state pays their pensions.
What a vicious little poison dwarf you are. You've missed the Third
Reich boat which is a shame because you would've been so happy there,
but you're not too late to jump on a flight to Zimbabwe. Uncle Robert
would just love to have someone with such such an aversion to truth
and reason at his side. He might even let you murder a few pension
protesters complaining about hyperinflation. Won't that be fun?

I've just noticed your lie about Follett having a fan base of one.
Another lie. Jesus -- you're so eaten up with hated you've lost all
sense of truth and reason and can't help yourself. Press JAF's button
and out come the lies.No reasoned argument -- just a great gush of
hatred and lies.

Cheers

Richard Christopher

"richardrnib@googlemail.com"  writes:

> On Jul 1, 9:55 am, JAF  wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:03:28 -0700 (PDT), "richardr...@googlemail.com"
>>
>>  wrote:
>> >VIs-a-vis the embittered poster who called him a hypocrit
>> >for voicing reasoned criticism of the BBC -- who pay him.
>>
>> I stand by what I said there, if you are referring to me.
>> Follet *is* a hypocrite.
>
> Of course you stand by what you said! Lying comes naturally to you!

Goodness. Now, whose writing style does this remind me of?

> What a vicious little poison dwarf you are.

No, it can't be The Great White Follet, as that's unmistakably a
personal insult.

-- 
I'll get up and fly away

In uk.misc,  (richardrnib@googlemail.com) wrote in
::

>On Jul 1, 9:55 am, JAF  wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:03:28 -0700 (PDT), "richardr...@googlemail.com"
>>
>>  wrote:
>> >VIs-a-vis the embittered poster who called him a hypocrit
>> >for voicing reasoned criticism of the BBC -- who pay him.
>>
>> I stand by what I said there, if you are referring to me.
>> Follet *is* a hypocrite.
>
>Of course you stand by what you said! Lying comes naturally to you!
>You said that Follet was a hypocrite and you failed to substantiate
>it. You just shot from the hip without thinking.merely because Follett
>voiced reasonable criticism of the BBC. So, by your warped lights, no
>OAP can criticise the state because the state pays their pensions.
>What a vicious little poison dwarf you are. You've missed the Third
>Reich boat which is a shame because you would've been so happy there,

Bzzzt!  I call Godwin!

Any prospect of rational debate in this thread is now over.
-- 
Marc

"The first cup of coffee recapitulates phylogeny." (Andy Hickmott)

"Fail"

-- 
A man has to live with himself, and he should see 
to it that he always has good company.

Hot Badger Deluxe  writes:

> "Fail"

Hey, at least he's dropped the stupid "RNIB" post-nominal.


August West CAMRA

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:57:33 -0700 (PDT), "richardrnib@googlemail.com"
 wrote this:

>I've just noticed your lie about Follett having a fan base of one.
>Another lie.

I T ' S

A

J O K E





-- 
Grk.

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:57:33 -0700 (PDT), "richardrnib@googlemail.com"
 wrote:

>Cheers
>
>Richard Christopher

PotW.

Did you type that in green? 
-- 
JAF anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
     Sapere Aude

And Hot Badger Deluxe  was like:

> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:54:45 +0100, Patrick Hardlentil wrote:
>
>> what is the meaning of the word 'regarding'?
>
> You've been inside my head recently, haven't you?

Yes. It's fascinating, but have you considered hiring a cleaner?

> I'm still struggling with Buckminster Fuller's "God is a verb".

I wouldn't take theological advice from someone who thinks plonk
should come in geodesic bottles.

Hang on. Isn't there something in philosophy about using verbs to
avoid problems associated with talking about non-existent things, so
"the foo" becomes "that which foos"? Was it good old Pam Ayer?

-- 
| Patrick Hardlentil -  patrick@dogslobber.demon.co.uk

On Jul 1, 9:18 am, Marc Wilson 
wrote:

> A little fake humility doesn't disguise the fact that he thinks he's
> better than everyone else.

Where has he said that he thinks that? Produce one post from him in
which he's made that claim. You can't and the reason you can't is
because it's a lie.

Your ludicrous comment about a 'little fake humility' is just more
evidence of how your corrosive hatred of Jim Follet has poisoned your
hold on reality. Ten leg-pulling posts from him about what a dreadful
person he is is not a little of anything. It's a huge dollop of
steaming irony. He's twisted your lying head off and crapped it down
your uncomprehending neck!

> Fact: JF's wiki entry has been edited, several times, by someone at his
> IP address.  It's a Demon account, so the IP is fixed.

Lies! And more lies. They come thick and fast! JF has said several
times that he wrote to the Wiki publishers drawing attention to errors
in his entry. Off course he used his Demon account! He didn't use
smoke signals, or tribal drums, or send  photographs of goat's
entrails. Jesus Christ -- if you can't see that then not only are you
a liar of the first order, but you're a stupid liar too.
>
> Fact: He's persistently claimed that the changes were made by "The
> owners" of Wikipedia.

Of course they are! They are the publishers of the Wikipedia! They
have ultimate control over what they accept from their editors and
they have ultimate responsibility for their enclyclopedea's content.
They are the owners - the webmasters. Not JF, or Mickey Mouse, not
Billy Liar or any of your strutting heros. Nothing in law or their own
terms and conditions negates that. That they allow a cut and paste
system for convenienance doesn't change anything.

JF said he drew their attention to errors and they, not him, published
the revisions. Not only do you need lessons in honesty, but a little
primer in publishing and  ownership wouldn't go amiss either!

> He's not come straight out and said: "I didn't do it", but he's
> certainly dodged around the issue.

More lies. He's not dodged around any issue. Read his posts!  In
response to a comment by Steve Firth he said that he did not write the
original Wiki entry although he did say that it might have been copied
from his credit list. If JF was lying you would have produced evidence
showing that he wrote the original entry, but you haven't. Not a
shred. And if he had, do you think he would've riddled his own entry
with spelling mistakes about his place of birth, his name and that he
would've even entered rumours about his death in December 2006?
Fucking stroll on. If you think that, as you seem to, then not only
are you a LIAR but a stupid one as well.

Cheers

Richard Christopher

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:25:48 -0700 (PDT), "richardrnib@googlemail.com"
 wrote:

>Cheers
>
>Richard Christopher

There's just one thing I need clarifying, please -

Just whose arse are you farthest up, your own, or JF's?

-- 
JAF anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
     Sapere Aude

"richardrnib@googlemail.com"  writes:

<snip ravings>

> Richard Christopher

Wow, that was impressively spittle flecked.

Tell me, exactly why do you care so much about The Great White Follett?
So much that almost all your posting to Usenet seem to be about him.

-- 
but it seems that I've given all that I can give

richardrnib@googlemail.com  wrote:

> In response to a comment by Steve Firth he said that he did not write the
> original Wiki entry

I comment that Follett has edited his Wiki entry.
Follett responds that he did not write the original entry.

I comment that Follett filled his car with petrol.
Follett says he did not build the petrol station.

Get the idea?

richardrnib@googlemail.com  wrote:

> You said that Follet was a hypocrite and you failed to substantiate
> it.

It was substantiated, clearly, unambiguously in a manner that even a
child could understand. And was substantiated *before* seeing evasion
and denial by Follett. Only after Follett had done the fuckwit shimmy
did JAF comment on Follett's hypocrisy.

The fact that Follett or someone who has used Folletts computer
connected at his home, has edited the Wikipedia entry for Follett is
recorded by Wikipedia. Hence tales about mailing the powers that be at
Wiki to get them to make the change are, umm bollocks. And claims that
Follett did not edit the entry are similarly unlikely.

You may want to try to keep some resemblance between the sequence of
claim and counter-claim here and reality. Otherwise you just end up
looking like a Follett sock puppet. And Follett claims he doesn't do
them.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:06:26 +0100, Marc Wilson wrote:

> Any prospect of rational debate in this thread is now over.

As if there ever was.

-- 
One way ticket from Mornington Crescent to Tannhauser Gate please.

richardrnib@googlemail.com  wrote:

[...]
> What a vicious little poison dwarf you are. You've missed the Third
> Reich boat which is a shame because you would've been so happy there,
[...]

Trying to sneak a Godwin past us there? Tsk, for shame.

-- 
^Ï^                            Sn!pe  

   <:>----------[  1 Togrog (tugrik) = 100 mongos   ]----------<:>

August West  wrote:

> "richardrnib@googlemail.com"  writes:
> 
> <snip ravings>
> 
> > Richard Christopher
> 
> Wow, that was impressively spittle flecked.
> 
> Tell me, exactly why do you care so much about The Great White Follett?
> So much that almost all your posting to Usenet seem to be about him.

And the ranting "Richard Christopher" has made barely any outings to
Usenet, having started in April with the claim that he had been posting
to Usenet for "two years". At which point the demon.loco crowd responded
"you are James Follett AICMFP"

Fucking inept and witless.

Costing the net hundreds if not thousands of dollars, 
richardrnib@googlemail.com said:
> hold on reality. Ten leg-pulling posts from him 

Here is your problem: it's not 10 posts.
He's been here for some time, the post count is in 3 figures now: quite 
enough for us to form a pretty accurate judgement of his character.
And, as well as being a twat, he outright lied. 
 

-- 
teh internets is populated by eggshells armed with hammers

> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:06:26 +0100, Marc Wilson wrote:
> 
> > Any prospect of rational debate in this thread is now over.

Good job Juggzy's way, she can't do irration