Goodbye
Mark Hickey
to help with the effects of my bike accident in 2003. The nice young
woman was leaning heavily toward me to better drive the point of her
elbow into the very sore muscles of my neck. I thought "I'm paying
her to hurt me this much - I don't really have to put up with the
pain". Of course, I didn't stop her because I benefit from the
process, however painful.
Which brings me to the current state of the rec.bicycles newsgroups.
I've been frequenting them for over 15 years, and (particularly in the
early years) have learned much, and tried to share what I know through
those years. But it struck me as I was enduring the pain of that
massage that participation in the newsgroups gets more painful by the
year, but no longer holds any particular benefit for me. Technical
discussions break down into pointless bluster as often as not (ala
"jim beam") and discussions about social issues have long since ceased
to hold any promise of civil discourse.
And it only gets more and more shrill as time goes by.
Character assassination has become the chief tool for those who prefer
to avoid facts that run contrary to their world view, and I've
increasingly been the target of these attacks.
It strikes me that most of the "high-content contributors" have also
left these newsgroups over the years, and it's easy to see why. I
suspect that the content to noise ratio is only going to get worse as
time goes by.
JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
farewell. I've got the same kind of feeling that you get when you're
finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.
Happy trails,
Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
Just A User
Sorry to see you go. But enjoy your rides anyway.
Ken
Sandy
Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
Ciao ! Wear out some tires.
--
Bonne route !
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
Callistus Valerius
> part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.
>
> Happy trails,
>
> Mark Hickey
who the blazes is jt?
Roger Zoul
:: So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
:: farewell.
I hate to see you go.
Tosspot
<snip>
> Happy trails,
Hey Mark, pop back and see us inmates from time to time. We may be
howling at the moon and throwing out own faeces at each other, but we'd
love a visit now and again.
Bill Sornson
The illustrious John Forrest Tomlinson -- AKA "Flogittodeathlinson" and "The
Disingenuous Snipper" -- long ago plonked by your truly.
Figures he'd be the one to run a regular /contributor/ out of here.
Pity.
Bill Sornson
Will you at least stick around in AM-B?!? PLEEEEEEEZE?!?
Hate to see you go, Mark. I had similar feelings a year or so ago (after
Katrina and helm&t threads, of all things). Decided to plonk abusive
posters (including HWNMNBU) and it's been at least tolerable ever since.
Bill "words to live by: don't let the a-holes get you down" S.
PS: WTH will you do with all that extra time?!? LOL
jed...@sbcglobal.net
your perspective. Sorry to see you go but can undrstand.
"Mark Hickey" <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote in message
news:4rju23918kbglfvf5...@4ax.com...
Gary Young
<snip>
> So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
> farewell.
I hope you'll reconsider at some point. I don't agree with your politics,
but I think you've been a voice of reason on matters of bicycle
technology, which this list is purportedly about. The reign of the yippy
dogs seems once step closer with your departure.
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
>they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
>longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
>have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
>granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
You're a coward. All you have to do is not talk about politics and I
wont bring up your more disgusting political views. Or even killfile
me.
Actually you've been a coward and a bully (threatening to sue me for
libel!).
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Sandy
John Forrest Tomlinson <usenet...@jt10000.com> a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com>
> wrote:
>
>> JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
>> they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
>> longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time.
>> I have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
>> granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
>
> You're a coward. All you have to do is not talk about politics and I
> wont bring up your more disgusting political views. Or even killfile
> me.
>
> Actually you've been a coward and a bully (threatening to sue me for
> libel!).
There are more gracious ways of having the last word.
_
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com>
> wrote:
>
>>JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
>>they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
>>longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
>>have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
>>granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
>
> You're a coward. All you have to do is not talk about politics and I
> wont bring up your more disgusting political views. Or even killfile
> me.
>
> Actually you've been a coward and a bully (threatening to sue me for
> libel!).
Do let us know how this progresses - if at all.
John Forrest Tomlinson
Indeed.
Bill Sornson
Just look at Mark's "Floyd Thread". He posts an opinionated narrative about
attending a presentation /relevant to cycling/. He's then personally
attacked /because he's a conservative/. Then Flogger chimes in with lies
and misrepresentations about what he's said in the past. (For example, how
does one answer an angry, baseless charge of, say, racism? One is
automatically put on the defensive, and can either ignore it -- tacitly
accept? -- or "protest too much" and be drawn into a senseless flame war.
Totally no-win.)
I hope Mark will reconsider because SHUTTING OUT OPPOSING VOICES is an
obvious tactic of a certain political movement nowadays, and by his bowing
out it's playing right into their pocket-picking hands.
One suggestion I wish he'd try: plonk those abusive, personal attackers and
see what happens. If they don't provoke responses, maybe (MAYBE) they'll
stop the baiting. (And he won't see it, anyway.)
Worth a shot, Mark?!?
Bill Sornson
> Dans le message de news:8r4v23lg27p3a2838...@4ax.com,
> John Forrest Tomlinson <usenet...@jt10000.com> a réfléchi, et puis
> a déclaré :
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series,
>>> but they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this
>>> is no longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my
>>> time. I have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four
>>> new granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
>>
>> You're a coward. All you have to do is not talk about politics and I
>> wont bring up your more disgusting political views. Or even killfile
>> me.
And there you have it: Mark can't contribute to a political
thread/discussion because Flogger doesn't like (and completely
misrepresents) his views.
>> Actually you've been a coward and a bully (threatening to sue me for
>> libel!).
He should. Too bad Flogger's not worth it.
> There are more gracious ways of having the last word.
What is the Left so afraid of? Why does it want to SILENCE opposing
opinions? ("The debate is over." "There is Consensus." Its talking heads
name-call all the time, but let someone on the Right answer in kind and it's
"hate speech" and the "politics of personal destruction". Hypocrisy is what
it is.) Instead of debating issues, the left goes personal almost
immediately; then it has a conniption fit if someone calls it.
And again, by Mark bowing out it gives them exactly what they're trying to
achieve.
Another year or so and this might as well be a blog...
BS
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>Just look at Mark's "Floyd Thread". He posts an opinionated narrative about
>attending a presentation /relevant to cycling/. He's then personally
>attacked /because he's a conservative/.
Ahh, let's fill in the blanks.
The discussion was only about cycling until *you* brought up Scooter
Libby.
I said something equally non-cycling in response to your post. Then
Mark Hickey said something non-cycling in response to mine. Then I
went back at him.
So *you* were the first person who brought non-cycling stuff/political
stuff into that thread.
And *Mark* was the first person (between Mark and me) to talk about
politics.
I was the last -- at least as far as Hickey is concerned.
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>Mark can't contribute to a political
>thread/discussion because Flogger doesn't like (and completely
>misrepresents) his views.
Mark can contribute all he wants. But if he can't take other people
pointing out the evil nature of his political views, he might want to
avoid it. Just a suggestion.
BCDrums
Mark, I have always enjoyed your posts, and have gleaned bicycle content
from them! I hope you will reconsider.
BC
Tom Nakashima
"BCDrums" <bcd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:KYqdnQCPU43FObLb...@comcast.com...
Hey Mark,
sometimes these painful deep massages can have a happy ending.
Good Luck and I enjoyed reading your contributions to the group.
-tom
Guy F. Anderson Sr.
wrote:
>
>So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
>farewell.
I too am sorry to see you exit this ng, but agree with your assessment
of the degraded quality of much of the content.
Adios--hope to see ya on the road, Mark!
PS My 4 yr old Habanero ti road bike/Chorus is a wonderful
machine--thanks for making an affordable, top-notch bicycle .
Paul O
> But it struck me as I was enduring the pain of that
> massage that participation in the newsgroups gets more painful by the
> year, but no longer holds any particular benefit for me. Technical
> discussions break down into pointless bluster as often as not (ala
> "jim beam") and discussions about social issues have long since ceased
> to hold any promise of civil discourse.
>
> And it only gets more and more shrill as time goes by.
>
<snip>
As a long time reader (and a very infrequent contributor) I'm also
finding that participating in this newsgroup is becoming less and less
enjoyable. I don't mind an occasional, spirited political or technical
discussion. But the venom that some people pour into their posts is
totally uncalled for.
What is sad is that the wit and humor has slowly drained out of this
news group as the temperature of the political debate has risen. I used
to count on rec.bicycles.misc to provide me with a few good chuckles
every day. Now those funny posts are few and far between.
I know that we live in a f---ed up world and it is hard to shut the
problems of the world out. And I certainly don't advocate that anyone
ignore the problems our world is facing. But, come on people; RBM is a
bicycle discussion group. Bicycling is supposed to be fun! RBM is
supposed to be centered around the joy and fun of riding bicycles.
Mark, all the best to you. We are going to miss you here. Hopefully you
and I can get together sometime and go for a bike ride. A bet it would
be fun.
--
Paul D Oosterhout
I work for SAIC (but I don't speak for SAIC)
David L. Johnson
> So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
> farewell.
Take care, Mark.
Hell, we all know that usenet is dead anyway, and we are just sifting
through the ashes. Between the "forums" diverting a lot of more
specialized discussions and energy, and "angry young men" determined to
turn any topic into their particular soapbox, the signal/noise level is
not looking good.
Hey, at least that's one less conservative..... No, I didn't mean that.
Some of my best friends are conservatives. Not many, but some.
--
David L. Johnson
Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig...
You soon find out the pig likes it!
David L. Johnson
>> I hope you'll reconsider at some point. I don't agree with your
>> politics, but I think you've been a voice of reason on matters of
>> bicycle technology, which this list is purportedly about. The reign
>> of the yippy dogs seems once step closer with your departure.
I second that.
> I hope Mark will reconsider because SHUTTING OUT OPPOSING VOICES is an
> obvious tactic of a certain political movement nowadays, and by his bowing
> out it's playing right into their pocket-picking hands.
I would suggest that it is a tactic of _many_ political movements
nowadays, but I don't want this, too, to become a political rant.
There comes a time, though, when there is no point in trying to remain
involved. Many newsgroups have long since died completely because of
this. I used to find significant religious discussions on my particular
religious-stripe group (soc.religion.quaker), I used to find significant
advise and problems on sci.math.symbolic, and helpful advice on the
comp.os.linux groups. Now, none of these are worth the trouble, even
with bozofilters. Others are just dead. Hell, these rec.bicycles.*
groups are probably the best left aside from moderated groups, and even
those are losing ground quickly.
David L. Johnson
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com>
> wrote:
>
>> JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
>> they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
>> longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
>> have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
>> granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
>
> You're a coward. All you have to do is not talk about politics and I
> wont bring up your more disgusting political views. Or even killfile
> me.
>
> Actually you've been a coward and a bully (threatening to sue me for
> libel!).
Well, you just made Mark's point.
catzz66
>
>
> I would suggest that it is a tactic of _many_ political movements
> nowadays, but I don't want this, too, to become a political rant.
>
>
I don't care to read anybody else's political views here, even if I
agree with them. It is not easy, but I filter all those topics (and
people who can't help replying) so that the post is deleted and I never
see it again.
These are bike newsgroups, not political pages. If it gets to where
there are not many posts on topic, there are plenty of other good things
to do with my time. I would not beg anyone to stay if they can't keep
from getting into it with other posters. Delete the newgroups for a
while. If you don't miss them, you made a wise choice.
Antti Salonen
> Hell, we all know that usenet is dead anyway, and we are just sifting
> through the ashes. Between the "forums" diverting a lot of more
> specialized discussions and energy, and "angry young men" determined to
> turn any topic into their particular soapbox, the signal/noise level is
> not looking good.
Indeed. The Usenet is dying simply because it isn't moderated. I guess
it worked better 10 to 15 years ago when the standard of Internet users
was higher, but now most newsgroups are playgrounds of small number of
anti-social idiots who successfully drive everybody else to moderated
web forums and mailing lists.
Antti
Phil Holman
Phil H
"Mark Hickey" <ma...@habcycles.com> wrote in message
news:4rju23918kbglfvf5...@4ax.com...
>I had an epiphany. Last night, I was getting a painful deep massage
> to help with the effects of my bike accident in 2003. The nice young
> woman was leaning heavily toward me to better drive the point of her
> elbow into the very sore muscles of my neck. I thought "I'm paying
> her to hurt me this much - I don't really have to put up with the
> pain". Of course, I didn't stop her because I benefit from the
> process, however painful.
>
> Which brings me to the current state of the rec.bicycles newsgroups.
> I've been frequenting them for over 15 years, and (particularly in the
> early years) have learned much, and tried to share what I know through
> those years. But it struck me as I was enduring the pain of that
> massage that participation in the newsgroups gets more painful by the
> year, but no longer holds any particular benefit for me. Technical
> discussions break down into pointless bluster as often as not (ala
> "jim beam") and discussions about social issues have long since ceased
> to hold any promise of civil discourse.
>
> And it only gets more and more shrill as time goes by.
>
> Character assassination has become the chief tool for those who prefer
> to avoid facts that run contrary to their world view, and I've
> increasingly been the target of these attacks.
>
> It strikes me that most of the "high-content contributors" have also
> left these newsgroups over the years, and it's easy to see why. I
> suspect that the content to noise ratio is only going to get worse as
> time goes by.
>
> JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
> they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
> longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
> have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
> granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
>
> So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Hayfever Edition
"Antti Salonen" <antti....@helsinki.if.invalid> wrote in message
news:f0om1h$6kr$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi...
Yep. From trolls to rampant spam, it's becoming the wasteland. Having said
that, RBT is still better than most. Have you been to alt.mountain-bike?
Talk about a soapbox for cooler-than-thou sophomorism.
Bill Sornson
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>
>>> I hope you'll reconsider at some point. I don't agree with your
>>> politics, but I think you've been a voice of reason on matters of
>>> bicycle technology, which this list is purportedly about. The reign
>>> of the yippy dogs seems once step closer with your departure.
Please watch your attributions; I did not write the above.
John Forrest Tomlinson
<david....@lehigh.edu> wrote:
>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey <ma...@habcycles.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
>>> they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
>>> longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
>>> have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
>>> granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
>>
>> You're a coward. All you have to do is not talk about politics and I
>> wont bring up your more disgusting political views. Or even killfile
>> me.
>>
>> Actually you've been a coward and a bully (threatening to sue me for
>> libel!).
>
>Well, you just made Mark's point.
It's not just Mark's point -- it's mine as well. I'm harsh.That pales
in significance to promoting torture and supporting the current
attacks on the rule of the law in the US.
I can't have a "civil"discussion about these things. So if Mark can't
deal, he shouldn't start. He shouldn't have started with me.
Bill Sornson
> The Usenet is dying simply because it isn't moderated.
I'm confused about something. Rec.Bicycles.Offroad completely DIED because
it was moderated -- I thought to keep Vandedrivel {tm} out? Weirdly enough,
spam got thru fairly regularly, but on-topic posts took forever to show
up...
How is it he (MV) doesn't post in these two rec groups? Is their some
"master filter" that blocks his stuff?
Maybe I'll go look for an ALT cycling group besides AM-B...
_
Of course you didn't - it's obvious from the number of quote characters
that preceed the quoted part.
Jay
I dunno Mark,
People who are thoughtful and considerate enough to post a Usenet newsgroup
goodbye msg, don't stay gone. They might lurk for awhile, and then gradually
come back to post. I think helping people is in their genes - J.
DI
"John Forrest Tomlinson" <usenet...@jt10000.com> wrote in message
news:jlnv235c4evtt5oi1...@4ax.com...
Careful, you may break your arm trying to pat yourself on the back.
Backoff, you're not the hot shit you think you are, nor as informed you
would like to us to think you are.
AndyMorris
Have fun, get some miles in.
I was always fascinated how someone who talked such sense about bikes, could
seem so wacko about politics. Which was kind of fun and thought provoking.
Take care.
--
Andy Morris
AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
Jay
news:f0om1h$6kr$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi...
Au contraire, IMHO unmoderated Usenet is not dying. It has always appealed
to a select audience. Some people just love the thought of their opinion
being broadcast to Usenet users around the world, WITHOUT a moderator. It is
text-based, no frills, no fancy graphics. Just a free exchange of ideas,
with no one telling them what they can or cannot say. Classic - J.
John Forrest Tomlinson
>Backoff, you're not the hot shit you think you are, nor as informed you
>would like to us to think you are.
I don't think I'm hot shit. Who do you think you are?
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> I hope Mark will reconsider because SHUTTING OUT OPPOSING VOICES is
> an obvious tactic of a certain political movement nowadays, and by
> his bowing out it's playing right into their pocket-picking hands.
> One suggestion I wish he'd try: plonk those abusive, personal
> attackers and see what happens. If they don't provoke responses,
> maybe (MAYBE) they'll stop the baiting. (And he won't see it,
> anyway.)
> Worth a shot, Mark?!?
A little self control does as well. Just don't respond to such posts.
I believe it is better to see what they contain and not respond, than
to not see them at all. I often choose to not respond when I believe
no response is appropriate, at least from me.
Jobst Brandt
David L. Johnson
Nor did I indicate such. Notice the layers of quotes.
Jay
"still me" <wheel...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:npsv239nauslu68tk...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:03:35 -0500, "Jay" <jbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Au contraire, IMHO unmoderated Usenet is not dying. It has always appealed
>>to a select audience. Some people just love the thought of their opinion
>>being broadcast to Usenet users around the world, WITHOUT a moderator. It
>>is
>>text-based, no frills, no fancy graphics. Just a free exchange of ideas,
>>with no one telling them what they can or cannot say. Classic - J.
>
> bit of a comeback lately. There was a lull a couple years ago, but
> things seem to have rebounded. As for moderators, there are few that
> are good. Many turn into censors, which kills groups. Not to mention,
> a lot of posters take the USEnet way too personally and seriously.
>
Usenet requires a thick skin. It is like walking through an alley; do you
focus on the graffiti painted on the walls? The essence of being out in
public, is that some stuff you see will not appeal to you. Get over it, or
ignore it.
Within moderated Usenet groups, there are endless debates on what should and
should not be allowed. And whatever is objectionable is not seen in that
newsgroup, since it is deleted by the moderator. I don't want someone else
deciding what I should read or write - J.
Mike Kruger
>
> What is the Left so afraid of? Why does it want to SILENCE opposing
> opinions? ...Instead of debating issues,
> the left goes personal almost immediately; then it has a conniption
> fit if someone calls it.
Because you are generally on the "right", you see this happening from the
"left".
Because I am generally on the "left", I see this happening from the "right".
I think the level of political discussion is generally at a low level.
Maybe you agree ... if not you are a stupid nazi asshole [that's a joke,
Bill]
--
Mike Kruger
An opinion should be the result of a thought, not a substitute for it.
[Jef Mallet]
Mike Kruger
Well, there's alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/topics?hl=en
At this moment, the link above shows the newest thread as "Dear Diary: I
didn't poo in my pants today."
The fourth thread on the list begins with "I joined this group a couple of
weeks ago because I am interested in
recumbent bicycles. All I have seen so far is tons of drivel from an idiot
named" [E.D. -- not going to name him]
Bill Sornson
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> David L. Johnson wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>>> I hope you'll reconsider at some point. I don't agree with your
>>>>> politics, but I think you've been a voice of reason on matters of
>>>>> bicycle technology, which this list is purportedly about. The
>>>>> reign of the yippy dogs seems once step closer with your
>>>>> departure.
>> Please watch your attributions; I did not write the above.
> Nor did I indicate such. Notice the layers of quotes.
You deleted Gary Young's attribution line, leaving your post to read: "Bill
Sornson wrote" followed by text not authored by me. (You can go look at it
if you like.)
Please be more careful. Sorry if this makes you defensive.
BS
Bill Sornson
I suppose you're right, but I got so upset at dishonest tactics like
snipping things to remove relevant context (completely changing or hiding
meaning) and blatant hypocrisy that I had to speak up.
Then it dawned on me that it just wasn't worth it. Life's too freaking
short.
Tim McNamara
Antti Salonen <antti....@helsinki.if.invalid> wrote:
I don't want to wear rose colored glasses- Usenet has always had this.
It's always been unpleasant. It does seem that the s/n ratio has
dropped in many newsgroups- r.b.racing for example having imploded years
ago under the weight of idiocy. But that said, there is much gold among
the dross and it's worth sifting for.
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>I suppose you're right, but I got so upset at dishonest tactics like
>snipping things to remove relevant context (completely changing or hiding
>meaning) and blatant hypocrisy that I had to speak up.
You're a hypocrite.
This very day you tried to explain that Mark Hickey was just minding
his own business talking about drugs in sport and was attacked for
being politically conservative. You left out that you brought politics
into the discussion, and that Mark Hickey attacked the guy who went
back at him (me) first. So what you said was true, but left out two
key facts.
If that's not "removing relevant context" I don't know what is.
Bill Sornson
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>
>> What is the Left so afraid of? Why does it want to SILENCE opposing
>> opinions? ...Instead of debating issues,
>> the left goes personal almost immediately; then it has a conniption
>> fit if someone calls it.
> Because you are generally on the "right", you see this happening from
> the "left".
> Because I am generally on the "left", I see this happening from the
> "right".
> I think the level of political discussion is generally at a low level.
>
> Maybe you agree ... if not you are a stupid nazi asshole [that's a
> joke, Bill]
I get the differing viewpoints, Mike, but just look at issues like Global
Warming or Illegal Immigration. Try going to a college campus like Columbia
with a "conservative presentation" and see what happens. Instead of
respectful or even heated debate, the /right/ side (more ways than one :) )
is shouted down, disrupted, prevented from speaking.
It really isn't rare or isolated, either.
If Chris Horner (author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global
Warming and Environmentalism") appeared to give a talk, he'd be heckled and
/threatened/ so much he'd have to leave. (And, of course, Al Gore
absolutely REFUSES to debate him or any accredited scientist with differing
views.)
I honestly don't see right wing groups stopping Cindy Sheehan or George
Soros or whomever from appearing/talking anywhere. Ever.
YMMV.
Bill Sornson
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Antti Salonen wrote:
>>
>>> The Usenet is dying simply because it isn't moderated.
>>
>> I'm confused about something. Rec.Bicycles.Offroad completely DIED
>> because it was moderated -- I thought to keep Vandedrivel {tm} out?
>> Weirdly enough, spam got thru fairly regularly, but on-topic posts
>> took forever to show up...
>>
>> How is it he (MV) doesn't post in these two rec groups? Is their
>> some "master filter" that blocks his stuff?
>>
>> Maybe I'll go look for an ALT cycling group besides AM-B...
>
> Well, there's alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent.
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent/topics?hl=en
Good one!
> At this moment, the link above shows the newest thread as "Dear
> Diary: I didn't poo in my pants today."
LOL (literally)
> The fourth thread on the list begins with "I joined this group a
> couple of weeks ago because I am interested in
> recumbent bicycles. All I have seen so far is tons of drivel from an
> idiot named" [E.D. -- not going to name him]
Guess I'll pass on that one.
Seriously, what keeps Vandespammer out of here? He cross-posts to a whole
bunch of newsgroups; why not these?
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>I honestly don't see right wing groups stopping Cindy Sheehan or George
>Soros or whomever from appearing/talking anywhere. Ever.
Baloney.
It's called "swiftboating" and it's about discrediting anyone who
attacks the current government. It's one thing to try to discredit
someone like me, who has always been liberal and never voted
republican. But it's quite another to attack people who may not have
been particularly political or partisan in the past as partisans
simply because of conclusions they have recently reached about
politics or reality.
Look at the current attacks on Pat Tillman's brother and on Jessica
Lynch. These are former soldiers who, when they *begin* talking in
ways critical of the US government, are made out to be partisans.
The same is true of attacks on the scientists who have demonstrated
the dangers of global warming. In fact, there are conscious efforts
within the US government to shut up *scientists.* These are not
ncessarily liberals, but they are people whose conclusions are aligned
with liberals, and they are being stifled by our own government for
what they want to say.
Moreover, the right wing has more systemic control of mass media about
politics in the US than people of any other political persuasion.
This is evident in coverage of the Iraq war, with most major news
organizations being very uncritical of the US government. It is still
the case on coverage of the war's impact on American and Iraqi
families. It is true too in business reporting -- with busines
reporting systemically biased in favor of major corporations and
investors. Unlike the swiftboating, this is not a conscious effort but
rather a systemic problem.
Finally, right wing pundits love avowed liberals like George Soros.
They dont' want to shut him up. Rather they want to distort his
messages and use those distortions to sow fear and angst among the
public, and most especially to energize their base. It's the very
definition of reactionary.
I'm sure you've seen Bill O'Reilly go off on Soros.
Which reminds me: where do you get your news, Sorni? Where *do* you
get your news?
Bill Sornson
"Promoting Torture". I'd like to know when Mark /promoted/ torture. It's
exactly like the helm*t threads, where the AHZs accuse pro-lidders of being
for MHLs even though they've expressly stated opposition to them.
I guess since Floglinson hasn't condemned that 12-year-old Taliban /child/
beheading a helpless hostage on camera, that means he's PRO CHOPPING OFF
HEADS. It's just ridiculous.
Bill Sornson
> Have fun, get some miles in.
>
> I was always fascinated how someone who talked such sense about
> bikes, could seem so wacko about politics. Which was kind of fun and
> thought provoking.
Is everyone who disagrees with you or has a different viewpoint from yours
"wacko"?
Just wondering.
DI
I bet he doesn't get his news from the New York Times, CBS, or CNN, if he
does he's a fool.
"Moreover, the right wing has more systemic control of mass media about
politics in the US than people of any other political persuasion." there
goes all your credibility.
Patrick Lamb
wrote:
>
>JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
>they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
>longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
>have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
>granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
>
>farewell. I've got the same kind of feeling that you get when you're
>finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
>vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
>part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.
Take the rest of the spring off, enjoy your family, and drop back in
towards the middle of the summer. Bicycle-oriented and technical
content is rare enough that I'd hate to lose a source of it.
OT now; how do some posters manage to post such large volumes of
material? I've wondered on occasion if real people spontaneously
generate the quantity posted under a given name, or if there's just
large files sitting around on some number of hard disks, out of which
random paragraphs are posted. (It's often hard to tell by reading the
posts, too.)
Pat
Email address works as is.
Bill Sornson
Floglinson apparently doesn't glean the distinction between /denouncing/
someone (fair game) and /denying/ them the right to speak (as un-American as
it gets). Minutemen get physically thrown off stage. Code Pinkettes have
the run of the ballroom.
It's like Harry Reid. Cheney criticizes his /positions/ without a single
personal attack, and Reid says he won't engage in name-calling with an
"attack dog" with a 9% approval rating (all ad hominem and zero issue).
It's just too classic.
Bill Sornson
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:40:23 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me>
> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Careful, you may break your arm trying to pat yourself on the back.
>>> Backoff, you're not the hot shit you think you are, nor as informed
>>> you would like to us to think you are.
>>
>> "Promoting Torture". I'd like to know when Mark /promoted/ torture.
>> It's exactly like the helm*t threads, where the AHZs accuse
>> pro-lidders of being for MHLs even though they've expressly stated
>> opposition to them.
>>
>> I guess since Floglinson hasn't condemned that 12-year-old Taliban
>> /child/ beheading a helpless hostage on camera, that means he's PRO
>> CHOPPING OFF HEADS. It's just ridiculous.
>
>
> Otherwise you two guys are demonstrating exactly what the OP
> complained about.
>
> If its for real, I suggest you take the advice of those here with cool
> heads and "let it go". Left and right will never meet, neither of you
> will ever "win" the argument, you will never agree on anything - even
> the time of day.
Who let THIS guy in here?!? :-P
Bill "too dark to see my keyboard now (yes, there's a light switch nearby)"
S.
jim beam
<snip sob story and spam>
eh? fling your teddy out of the stroller in the middle of the
supermarket because you can't figure out how to killfile??? what a
childish melodrama. i predict the spam addiction will bring you back
though.
Bill
> JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
> they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
> longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
> have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
> granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
At some point you have to devote your life to yourself and your family.
>
> So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
> farewell. I've got the same kind of feeling that you get when you're
> finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
> vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
> part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.
>
> Happy trails,
>
> Mark Hickey
> Habanero Cycles
> http://www.habcycles.com
> Home of the $795 ti frame
May the wind always be at you're back.
Like that's really gonna happen.
Have a good life, Mark.
Bill Baka
Bill Sornson
> OT now; how do some posters manage to post such large volumes of
> material? I've wondered on occasion if real people spontaneously
> generate the quantity posted under a given name, or if there's just
> large files sitting around on some number of hard disks, out of which
> random paragraphs are posted. (It's often hard to tell by reading the
> posts, too.)
I wonder, too. I keep my posts really short usually (much to some people's
chagrin, apparently!); who has the time to write /volumes/ on Usenet each
and every day?!?
The kicker is that those folks probably also frequent blogs and mailing
lists, which are also time consuming.
I need to get out and /ride/, man.
Tosspot
>>>Backoff, you're not the hot shit you think you are, nor as informed
>>>you would like to us to think you are.
>>
>>"Promoting Torture". I'd like to know when Mark /promoted/ torture. It's
>>exactly like the helm*t threads, where the AHZs accuse pro-lidders of being
>>for MHLs even though they've expressly stated opposition to them.
>>
>>I guess since Floglinson hasn't condemned that 12-year-old Taliban /child/
>>beheading a helpless hostage on camera, that means he's PRO CHOPPING OFF
>>HEADS. It's just ridiculous.
>
>
>
> Otherwise you two guys are demonstrating exactly what the OP
> complained about.
I don't think its a comedy act, I think they're serious and I think they
are very both sad individuals. But that's what killfiles are for.
_
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> David L. Johnson wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I hope you'll reconsider at some point. I don't agree with your
>>>>> politics, but I think you've been a voice of reason on matters of
>>>>> bicycle technology, which this list is purportedly about. The reign
>>>>> of the yippy dogs seems once step closer with your departure.
>>
>> Please watch your attributions; I did not write the above.
>
> Nor did I indicate such. Notice the layers of quotes.
David, this ain't the first time he has made unwarrented complaints about
attributions. Bill seems to have trouble with either
a) the usenet quoting convention; or
b) numbers larger than 2.
Larry
wrote:
>So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
>farewell. I've got the same kind of feeling that you get when you're
>finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
>vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
>part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.
>
>Happy trails,
>
>Mark Hickey
>Habanero Cycles
>http://www.habcycles.com
>Home of the $795 ti frame
Mark,
I was reading the thread in rbm and it quickly degenerated into
political attacks. I don't blame you for leaving, but you will be
missed. I always regarded you as an authority on the industry and your
remarks about running a shop are priceless.
I used to contribute more to the group also, but stopped when it
became so political. I prefer to keep those views to myself since
there seems to be so much polarization going on in the country in
recent years.
Larry
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>"Promoting Torture". I'd like to know when Mark /promoted/ torture. It's
>exactly like the helm*t threads, where the AHZs accuse pro-lidders of being
>for MHLs even though they've expressly stated opposition to them.
>
>I guess since Floglinson hasn't condemned that 12-year-old Taliban /child/
>beheading a helpless hostage on camera, that means he's PRO CHOPPING OFF
>HEADS. It's just ridiculous.
Not analogous. Mark said that waterboarding could be appropriate
against very dangerous prisoners held by the US to get information out
of them. Waterboarding it torture.
I've never said beheading helpless people is a good thing.
You know I am robotic - I won't stand for repetition of
misinformation from you. <sarcasm>So if you are in some ways friends
with Mark, I'm sure he'd appreciate your keeping bringing this up in
such a simplistic manner.</sarcasm>
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>I hope this is an intentional comedy act just for this thread.
>Otherwise you two guys are demonstrating exactly what the OP
>complained about.
The OP complained about non-stop back-and-forth, and I'm surely as
guilty of that as anyone.
But here's the thing. I'm actually *right* in this exchange.
Waterboarding is torture. Hickey supports waterboarding of prisoners
in the US.
And Sorni is *wrong* in saying that because I don't condemn something
explicity I'm in favor of it. Or that I'm using that sort of
rhetorical trick on Hickey.
That's the difference.
So while there may not be differences in behaviour of the two sides
in this group, there are differences in content.
We can each decide which differences matter.
> If its for real, I suggest you take the advice
> of those here with cool
> heads and "let it go".
I doubt I will let it go -- each time someone posts something
inaccurate about me or very wrong about politics, I'll respond.
SocSecTr...@earthlink.net
> I hope Mark will reconsider because SHUTTING OUT OPPOSING VOICES is an
> obvious tactic of a certain political movement nowadays
Not just nowadays. It's been an obvious tactic of the right since at
least 9/11. But fortunately, as a strong majority of Americans have
come to recognize the corruption of the Bush administration and the
horror of sending thousands of American troops to their death or
maiming in an illegal, pointless war sold to the American public
through lies that were amplified through the megaphone of "liberal"
media sources such as the New York Times, well, maybe, to some degree,
the mainstream media is letting some of the truth seep out. The truth
hurts, but that doesn't mean that the media have to publish
Administration lies to give it balance. Not anymore. We've had 6+
years of almost nothing but cheerleading out of the media; now it's
time for the truth.
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
>It's like Harry Reid. Cheney criticizes his /positions/ without a single
>personal attack,
LOL you're totally deluded. What are your sources of information?
John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
> I think they're serious and I think they
>are very both sad individuals.
If you're talking about me you're quite mistaken.
John Forrest Tomlinson
>I bet he doesn't get his news from the New York Times, CBS, or CNN, if he
>does he's a fool.
Where do you get your news?
Considering how weak those those sources were in the run-up to the
Iraq war, I'd hope it's even broader than that but for the
time-challenged those wouldn't be the worse possiblities. Those are
among the best the US has in terms of scope and power in broad
investigative reporting, but places like Reuters and the BBC are
important too.
And even left-wing (and sometimes right wing) blogs that pull out
original documents. www.crooksandliars.com and talkingpointsmemo.com
is awesome not so much for the opinion (which I almost always agree
with) but for the links to documents from government officials
themselves, or statements by the officials themselves.
Drudge can be good in the same way, but with the blogs you have to
focus on what are facts and what are opinions.
Googlenews is a good first stop and gets in lots of non-US reporting
also.
Hadron
> In article <f0om1h$6kr$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi>,
> Antti Salonen <antti....@helsinki.if.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In rec.bicycles.misc David L. Johnson <david....@lehigh.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hell, we all know that usenet is dead anyway, and we are just
>> > sifting through the ashes. Between the "forums" diverting a lot of
>> > more specialized discussions and energy, and "angry young men"
>> > determined to turn any topic into their particular soapbox, the
>> > signal/noise level is not looking good.
>>
>> Indeed. The Usenet is dying simply because it isn't moderated. I
>> guess it worked better 10 to 15 years ago when the standard of
>> Internet users was higher, but now most newsgroups are playgrounds of
>> small number of anti-social idiots who successfully drive everybody
>> else to moderated web forums and mailing lists.
>
> I don't want to wear rose colored glasses- Usenet has always had
> this.
Yup.
> It's always been unpleasant. It does seem that the s/n ratio has
> dropped in many newsgroups- r.b.racing for example having imploded years
> ago under the weight of idiocy. But that said, there is much gold among
> the dross and it's worth sifting for.
And people do have killfiles. Use them.
John Forrest Tomlinson
<usenet...@jt10000.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:51:35 -0500, "DI" <di9...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>I bet he doesn't get his news from the New York Times, CBS, or CNN, if he
>>does he's a fool.
>
>Where do you get your news?
I think this thread would be a good one for people to learn to filter
if they want to limit their reading to on-topic material.
To Di: here's a good example of news getting for me. I have a
homepage that I use for webbrowsing, at http://www.jt10000.com/links/
I was looking through the news via Drudge http://www.drudgereport.com/
and followed a couple of links, including to
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/26/washington/26gitmo.html?ei=5065&en=461fb6682e1b795b&ex=1178164800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
Where do you get your news?
bookieb
Shhh! No really... Shhh!
Don't tempt fate Bill.
I don't know if such a filter exists, or what it could be, and I don't
care.
Just let it lie... ;-)
bookieb
Qui si parla Campagnolo
> I had an epiphany. Last night, I was getting a painful deep massage
> to help with the effects of my bike accident in 2003. The nice young
> woman was leaning heavily toward me to better drive the point of her
> elbow into the very sore muscles of my neck. I thought "I'm paying
> her to hurt me this much - I don't really have to put up with the
> pain". Of course, I didn't stop her because I benefit from the
> process, however painful.
>
> Which brings me to the current state of the rec.bicycles newsgroups.
> I've been frequenting them for over 15 years, and (particularly in the
> early years) have learned much, and tried to share what I know through
> those years. But it struck me as I was enduring the pain of that
> massage that participation in the newsgroups gets more painful by the
> year, but no longer holds any particular benefit for me. Technical
> discussions break down into pointless bluster as often as not (ala
> "jim beam") and discussions about social issues have long since ceased
> to hold any promise of civil discourse.
>
> And it only gets more and more shrill as time goes by.
>
> Character assassination has become the chief tool for those who prefer
> to avoid facts that run contrary to their world view, and I've
> increasingly been the target of these attacks.
>
> It strikes me that most of the "high-content contributors" have also
> left these newsgroups over the years, and it's easy to see why. I
> suspect that the content to noise ratio is only going to get worse as
> time goes by.
>
> JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
> they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
> longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
> have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
> granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.
>
> farewell. I've got the same kind of feeling that you get when you're
> finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
> vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
> part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.
>
> Happy trails,
>
> Mark Hickey
> Home of the $795 ti frame
I know how you feel Mark and I have taken a 'vacation' from these
silly NGs as well. Hopefully yours will be a vacation, not permanent
and you'll be back bcause you DO have something worthwhile to offer.
But if you don't come back certainly understand.
_
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:51:35 -0500, "DI" <di9...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>I bet he doesn't get his news from the New York Times, CBS, or CNN, if he
>>does he's a fool.
>
> Where do you get your news?
>
John, you are either asking a rhetorical question, or have forgotten with
whom you are arguing.
Bill Sornson is the guy who is on record as preferring to ignore the facts
when they conflict with his opinion; c.f. the MFH threads of a few months
ago.
D'ohBoy
> > On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> >> So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
> >> farewell.
>
> > politics, but I think you've been a voice of reason on matters of
> > bicycle technology, which this list is purportedly about. The reign
> > of the yippy dogs seems once step closer with your departure.
>
> attending a presentation /relevant to cycling/. He's then personally
> attacked /because he's a conservative/. Then Flogger chimes in with lies
> and misrepresentations about what he's said in the past. (For example, how
> does one answer an angry, baseless charge of, say, racism? One is
> automatically put on the defensive, and can either ignore it -- tacitly
> accept? -- or "protest too much" and be drawn into a senseless flame war.
> Totally no-win.)
>
> I hope Mark will reconsider because SHUTTING OUT OPPOSING VOICES is an
> out it's playing right into their pocket-picking hands.
>
> One suggestion I wish he'd try: plonk those abusive, personal attackers and
> see what happens. If they don't provoke responses, maybe (MAYBE) they'll
> stop the baiting. (And he won't see it, anyway.)
>
> Worth a shot, Mark?!?
You're such a fucking joke Sornson.
D'ohBoy
Bill
listening for how many kids got killed on a day by day. That one was
ramped up by Johnson (dem) and maintained by Nixon (repug), although I
give some credit to Nixon for pulling out. Johnson was a fool who fell
for the peace talk stuff while China and Russia poured men and supplies
to the north.
Any politician can screw up anything given enough time.
Bill Baka
Bill
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:08:46 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me>
> wrote:
>
>> It's like Harry Reid. Cheney criticizes his /positions/ without a single
>> personal attack,
>
> LOL you're totally deluded. What are your sources of information?
Give Cheney a mirror and he could argue with himself all day.
He's the reason I hope 'Weed' stays healthy.
Bill Baka
Tim McNamara
wrote:
Exactly. There are a few irredeemable idiots in my killfiles, plus a
few utterly annoying threads that I killfiled too. There are people I
argue with regularly, who have enough content in their posts to make it
worth not killfiling them.
Scott Gordo
> > finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
> > vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
> > part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.
>
> > Happy trails,
>
> > Mark Hickey
> > Habanero Cycles
> >http://www.habcycles.com
> > Home of the $795 ti frame
>
>
> Hate to see you go, Mark. I had similar feelings a year or so ago (after
> Katrina and helm&t threads, of all things). Decided to plonk abusive
> posters (including HWNMNBU) and it's been at least tolerable ever since.
>
> Bill "words to live by: don't let the a-holes get you down" S.
>
> PS: WTH will you do with all that extra time?!? LOL- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Is AM-B still a newsgroup? That place is having it's bones picked dry.
I still check it and post, but it has succumbed to the 5 bungholes who
drown everyone else out. AND the seemingly limitless number of people
who can't see past the bait.
Mark, if this was a way to get the rest of the group to reflect on
what it means to lose a valued contributor, kudos. If you're for real,
thanks for the tech info and the informed opinion.
/s
Tim McNamara
wrote:
> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <usenet...@jt10000.com> wrote in message
> news:1k2033loc7fm14l9u...@4ax.com...
> > Which reminds me: where do you get your news, Sorni? Where *do* you
> > get your news? -- JT
>
> I bet he doesn't get his news from the New York Times, CBS, or CNN,
> if he does he's a fool.
Yes, those media sources do tend to be conservatively biased.
> "Moreover, the right wing has more systemic control of mass media
> about politics in the US than people of any other political
> persuasion." there goes all your credibility.
If you were paying attention to who owns the mass media companies, you'd
know that what JT says is correct.
What you're not understanding is that bias is in the eye of the
beholder. If your personal bent is to the right, the media looks like
it's skewed to the left. If your personal bent is to the left, it looks
like the media is skewed to the right.
Tim McNamara
"Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
> Seriously, what keeps Vandespammer out of here? He cross-posts to a
> whole bunch of newsgroups; why not these?
Well, (1) don't give him ideas and (2) these newsgroups are generally
perceived as being about road biking, Vandeman is obsessed with
mountain biking as an all encompassing evil destroying the wilderness
(or at least that was his focus years back, I haven't read a post by him
in years), but probably sees road biking as neutral or even positive.
Tim McNamara
"Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
> "Promoting Torture". I'd like to know when Mark /promoted/ torture.
IIRC Mark wrote a post condoning the use of waterboarding prisoners
suspected of links to terrorism. Since JT and many others include
waterboarding as a form of torture, the conclusion is that Mark condoned
torture. Whether that is "promoting" torture can become a rehash of the
definition of "is."
Of course the really stupid thing is that torture does not result in
gaining reliable information. This has been shown over and over and
over again. It's only in fantasy worlds like "24" where torture is
effective. Mainly torture is an excuse for people to exercise their
sadistic impulses and do things with impunity that would get them tossed
in jail in the civilian world.
And as frosting on the cake, we're even torturing people who have no
connection to terrorism but who were "turned in" by people with a
revenge agenda for one reason or another (clan squabbles and the like).
> It's exactly like the helm*t threads, where the AHZs accuse
> pro-lidders of being for MHLs even though they've expressly stated
> opposition to them.
Not exactly. The latter is just a straw man. In Mark's case, if I
recall his posts correctly, he went on record supporting the use of
waterboarding. (It's possible that I am not recalling his posts
correctly, however).
Tim McNamara
D'ohBoy <pete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You're such a fucking joke Sornson.
Bill manages to be funny fairly often. IMHO, YMMV of course.
Doug Taylor
wrote:
>>
>> I was always fascinated how someone who talked such sense about
>> bikes, could seem so wacko about politics. Which was kind of fun and
>> thought provoking.
>
>Is everyone who disagrees with you or has a different viewpoint from yours
>"wacko"?
>
>Just wondering.
I doubt it. He was probably just checking a few polls
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
and figured that if 60% +/- of the population disapproves of G.W. Bush
generally, then people like you and Hickey, who drink the cool aid by
the gallon, are so far over the right edge of the bell curve as to
qualify as bone fide "wackos."
bcro...@excite.com
with. They don't even realize that they come across as malignantly
dogmatic! If you're not willing to read opposing viewpoints, then
don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out! And Mark, I
direct this statement at you, even though I often agree with your
political opinions, but I always wonder why you have to take a
bicycling-oriented thread and turn it into a political rant. Hey,
guess what! If you plonk everybody else on the list, then all you'll
ever have to read is your own opinions! Wouldn't that be WONDERFUL!?
Doug Taylor
<spamv...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>Mark Hickey wrote:
><snip sob story and spam>
>
>eh? fling your teddy out of the stroller in the middle of the
>supermarket because you can't figure out how to killfile??? what a
>childish melodrama.
Agreed.
Most of us regulars,who like Mark have been on usenet for 15 +/-
years, completely know the drill. We are all bullshitters, the vast
majority having an overabundance of testosterone, and love to get up
on our soapboxes and preach. Sometimes we are completely on topic;
sometimes not. Sometimes we are the flamer; sometimes we are the
flamee. It's all really fun and games, though. Even using real
names, it's anonymous. For every venomous flame I've ever given in a
half dozen different groups (from biking, to skiing, to
cancer-support) for 15+ years, I've never had anybody really hunt me
down. I'm sure there are "real" psychopaths out there, but I'm not
truly concerned. I think most of us who dish it out are ready to take
being dumped on. If not, then that's their problem.
In the beginning, many of us were naive and self-righteous enough to
insist upon relevance. We soon learned that usenet is a swamp of
Darwinian free speech, and that killfiles trump moderation and
censorship. And we post and/or lurk, depending on the amount of our
free time.
I can't remember how many times in how many groups I have read a
"Farewell Speech" but in all cases, how puerile and self-important can
you get?
Mark: Get over yourself. This is usenet; not real life.
Doug Taylor
<tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>Exactly. There are a few irredeemable idiots in my killfiles, plus a
>few utterly annoying threads that I killfiled too. There are people I
>argue with regularly, who have enough content in their posts to make it
>worth not killfiling them.
Thanks, Tim. I'm so vain that I think this is about me :-)
Cyber-epistemology 101:
If everybody on usenet killfiled your account, would you exist?
Doug Taylor
plonk
:-)
Bill Sornson
>> Will you at least stick around in AM-B?!? PLEEEEEEEZE?!?
> Is AM-B still a newsgroup? That place is having it's bones picked dry.
> I still check it and post, but it has succumbed to the 5 bungholes who
> drown everyone else out. AND the seemingly limitless number of people
> who can't see past the bait.
I still read it, but you're right there's not much real /content/ any more.
(I plonked Vandemoron and all his regular bait-takers who never contribute
anything else.)
Good aspect is it takes very little time nowadays.
> Mark, if this was a way to get the rest of the group to reflect on
> what it means to lose a valued contributor, kudos. If you're for real,
> thanks for the tech info and the informed opinion.
It's for real. He's a free man! LOL
Bill Sornson
Gee, I'm so sorry I plonked Doughie Dick and missed his insightful
commentary! LOL
Bill "and the Train Wreck must have changed his user name but he's
re-plonked, too" S.
Bill Sornson
Read the Floyd thread and see who turned it from cycling to political. (In
fact, find even one example of Mark /starting/ a political thread, or
introducing political content into a cycling thread. He simply had the
NERVE to reply or respond when others did. How dare he?!?)
As for reading opposing opinions, I'm all for that (do so daily and I *know*
Mark does); but personal attacks, blatant hypocrisy and outright lies and
distortions are different. After a while, they're just not worth answering
or engaging. (Plus, of course, they can name-call all day long, but when
someone issues a pointed reply they totally lose their collective bowel
control. Would be funny but for the willing media playing along to warp
public opinion.)
You're blind and in denial if you can't see the double standards in effect
these days.
BS (not)
A Muzi
>> I hope Mark will reconsider because SHUTTING OUT OPPOSING VOICES is an
>> obvious tactic of a certain political movement nowadays
SocSecTr...@earthlink.net wrote:
> Not just nowadays. It's been an obvious tactic of the right since at
> least 9/11. But fortunately, as a strong majority of Americans have
> come to recognize the corruption of the Bush administration and the
> horror of sending thousands of American troops to their death or
> maiming in an illegal, pointless war sold to the American public
> through lies that were amplified through the megaphone of "liberal"
> media sources such as the New York Times, well, maybe, to some degree,
> the mainstream media is letting some of the truth seep out. The truth
> hurts, but that doesn't mean that the media have to publish
> Administration lies to give it balance. Not anymore. We've had 6+
> years of almost nothing but cheerleading out of the media; now it's
> time for the truth.
>
'cheerleading'???
Headline: "Bush awoke this morning"
Subhead: "Precious oxygen wasted; Armageddon imminent"
On what planet are your morning papers printed?
Jeez I've been reading about impending doom in every area of life in
every section of the papers (save WSJ) for six years - which hasn't
happened AFAIK. Do keep me updated though.
p.s. if you meant television, I wouldn't know.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Bill Sornson
Read what Cheney /actually said/ about Reid the other day -- it was pointed,
yes, but totally about his positions on Iraq Funding (three widely different
ones in five months). Now you might disagree, but it was NOT a "personal
attack" (except, of course, that ANY criticism of a Democrat is considered
personal).
Then Reid replies by calling him an "attack dog" -- right after saying he
wouldn't engage in name-calling LOL -- and cited his alleged "approval
rating" (understandable, as Reid cares more about political advantage than
what's best for the country).
My "source" for this information was watching video tapes of the exchange --
no commentary by anyone needed. That IS what happened. Period.
Bill Sornson
> What you're not understanding is that bias is in the eye of the
> beholder. If your personal bent is to the right, the media looks like
> it's skewed to the left. If your personal bent is to the left, it
> looks like the media is skewed to the right.
And little things like 82% of the WH press corps voting Democrat is
just...imaginary.
Right.
Bill Sornson
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 06:24:33 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
> <usenet...@jt10000.com> wrote:
>
>>> If its for real, I suggest you take the advice
>>> of those here with cool
>>> heads and "let it go".
>>
>> I doubt I will let it go -- each time someone posts something
>> inaccurate about me or very wrong about politics, I'll respond.
>
> [Please note that below is general advice to everyone, not specific
> advice to you and I am not supporting any particular view on anything
> in this post].
>
> I understand your point. I used to get highly cranked at some of the
> nonsense I'd see from the "other side". I see some serious issues in
> the USA: I see some clever people taking advantage of the masses, I
> see outright lies and careful-half statements by politicians, I see
> some real ignorance of true facts. I see the very fabric and basis of
> our country being threatened by those who exploit it for their own
> benefit.
>
> I _could_ get aggravated, but I don't anymore. Why? Because it doesn't
> change anything, and it just gets you aggravated and wastes your time.
> The ol' " teach a pig to sing" issue. If I want to make a difference
> in that arena, I need a different forum.
>
> I suggest that you "correct and move on". If you bring correct
> information to someone and they say "Oh, I didn't know that", then
> you've enlightened someone. If they immediately retreat to the fixed
> position of the "other side" and spout what you "know" to be
> incorrect, you know where it's going. Right or wrong, you won't change
> their mind and they won't change yours. It's the USEnet equivalent of
> a diode to ground - a one way ticket for electrons to head to nowhere.
Thread ender! Excellent.
Ozark Bicycle
> > wrote:
>
> >> It's like Harry Reid. Cheney criticizes his /positions/ without a single
> >> personal attack,
>
> > LOL you're totally deluded. What are your sources of information?
>
> Give Cheney a mirror and he could argue with himself all day.
The mirror would crack (shatter?), IMO.
> He's the reason I hope 'Weed' stays healthy.
OTOH, if the Head Dick's ticker gave out from the stress, we'd have
Pelosi 'til January 2009. That would be a huge improvement over the
current situation.
Bill Sornson
> In article <4630112f$0$8988$4c36...@roadrunner.com>,
> "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>
>> "Promoting Torture". I'd like to know when Mark /promoted/ torture.
>
> IIRC Mark wrote a post condoning the use of waterboarding prisoners
> suspected of links to terrorism. Since JT and many others include
> waterboarding as a form of torture, the conclusion is that Mark
> condoned torture. Whether that is "promoting" torture can become a
> rehash of the definition of "is."
Bullshit. Words have meaning. Words matter. Promotion is not the same as
selective approval or support given a certain set of circumstances. (And
I'll bet you lunch that Mark did not START A DISCUSSION about the matter,
but rather had the gall to express his /opinion/ in a discussion. Again,
that's apparently not allowable these days (to wit, global warming).)
> Of course the really stupid thing is that torture does not result in
> gaining reliable information. This has been shown over and over and
> over again. It's only in fantasy worlds like "24" where torture is
> effective. Mainly torture is an excuse for people to exercise their
> sadistic impulses and do things with impunity that would get them
> tossed in jail in the civilian world.
Agree about torture. However, the "Shiek" gave up volumes of information
that saved countless lives after about 90 seconds of (unconfirmed)
water-boarding. I doubt the US would subject its own personnel to "torture"
as a routine part of their training. Mark did NOT "promote torture" and to
say he did is a blatant lie worthy of Rosie.
> And as frosting on the cake, we're even torturing people who have no
> connection to terrorism but who were "turned in" by people with a
> revenge agenda for one reason or another (clan squabbles and the
> like).
"We're" "torturing" people? Proof?
>> It's exactly like the helm*t threads, where the AHZs accuse
>> pro-lidders of being for MHLs even though they've expressly stated
>> opposition to them.
> Not exactly. The latter is just a straw man. In Mark's case, if I
> recall his posts correctly, he went on record supporting the use of
> waterboarding. (It's possible that I am not recalling his posts
> correctly, however).
It probably evolved from a hypothetical (ISTR something like that) -- say
you've got a terrorist in custody who absolutely knows where a nuclear bomb
in NYC or LA or DC or Chicago is located and how to disarm it before it goes
off in 45 minutes, what do you do? Save millions of lives or...??? Seems
to me that's how that particular topic began....but I too could be mistaken.
One thing is for sure: he did not "promote torture".
Words matter. Words have meaning.
Bill S.