Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
OT (more or less): For those who might be interested...
70 views
Skip to first unread message
Alan Baker
May 28, 2013, 8:30:58 PM5/28/13
to
...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
It was... ...fantastic.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
;-)
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
It was... ...fantastic.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
;-)
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Flint
May 28, 2013, 9:38:59 PM5/28/13
to
On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
>
Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip. I
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
>
never understood some weenies amateurish fascination with racing.
Cars are *boring*, and so self-indulgent. "But you need to feel the
speed to understand!" they cry...
Personally, I prefer to see the effect a great live audio mix has on a
concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a
subharmonic synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through
18" - 21" subwoofers. *That's* 'fantastic'... ... none of this "look
at me" self indulgence of wannabe race car drivers.
--
MFB
Dutch
May 28, 2013, 10:13:56 PM5/28/13
to
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-8A41F...@news.shawcable.net...
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
Wouldn't be my cup of tea, but I thought the video conveyed the feeling of
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
driving in a race like that really well, simultaneously monotonous and
scary..
Alan Baker
May 28, 2013, 10:34:53 PM5/28/13
to
In article <ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me>,
Different strokes...
Racing is a very intense activity. And it's something YOU do, not
something that is done to you.
Racing is a very intense activity. And it's something YOU do, not
something that is done to you.
Alan Baker
May 28, 2013, 10:37:26 PM5/28/13
to
In article <txdpt.1478$OA5...@newsfe12.iad>, "Dutch" <n...@email.com>
wrote:
It doesn't feel either, really.
Yes: there are moments when you exceed the limit (you can see a couple
of times when too much rear brake bias made the car start to slew around
under braking) and there is some fear there... ...I guess.
But it's really more a mental challenge: to focus, to find your braking
point, turn-in point; to adjust as conditions change.
But I've liked speed all my life, so I may be biased.
:-)
wrote:
Yes: there are moments when you exceed the limit (you can see a couple
of times when too much rear brake bias made the car start to slew around
under braking) and there is some fear there... ...I guess.
But it's really more a mental challenge: to focus, to find your braking
point, turn-in point; to adjust as conditions change.
But I've liked speed all my life, so I may be biased.
:-)
a425couple
May 28, 2013, 10:46:02 PM5/28/13
to
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message...
Meanwhile, in case anyone wishes to view this,
it is just 3 laps (4:30) of a local race at Pacific Raceways,
recorded by someone Alan and I both know.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=650577924956535
Alan's is here
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> It was... ...fantastic.
I'm very glad to hear you say that my friend.
> It was... ...fantastic.
Meanwhile, in case anyone wishes to view this,
it is just 3 laps (4:30) of a local race at Pacific Raceways,
recorded by someone Alan and I both know.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=650577924956535
Alan's is here
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
Horva...@net.net
May 29, 2013, 1:36:49 AM5/29/13
to
On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:38:59 -0400, Flint <agen...@section-31.net>
wrote this crap:
It looks boring to me too. I prefer racing sailboats. There's more
work and it's much more difficult to learn. Not to mention that
driving in circles is not very bright. In a sailboat, everyone knows
where the next mark is but going there in a straight line is not
always the fastest. And the best part is that you can drink a beer
during the race.
But hey! everyone needs a hobby. You can't golf 18 hours a day. The
other say I read that several planets were going to be lined up in the
evening sky so I dug out my old telescope. It's a piece of junk and I
had to repair it so I've decided to buy a new one. They make some
nice ones that have camera mounts. I will be able to post some nice
pics on the net. Sure beats driving in circles.
This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe
wrote this crap:
work and it's much more difficult to learn. Not to mention that
driving in circles is not very bright. In a sailboat, everyone knows
where the next mark is but going there in a straight line is not
always the fastest. And the best part is that you can drink a beer
during the race.
But hey! everyone needs a hobby. You can't golf 18 hours a day. The
other say I read that several planets were going to be lined up in the
evening sky so I dug out my old telescope. It's a piece of junk and I
had to repair it so I've decided to buy a new one. They make some
nice ones that have camera mounts. I will be able to post some nice
pics on the net. Sure beats driving in circles.
This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe
Bobster
May 29, 2013, 1:40:36 AM5/29/13
to
On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
where this actually might have been on topic.
This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
forums for celebrating ourselves.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 2:44:39 AM5/29/13
to
In article
<e1f43d27-205e-472a...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
the final arbiter of these things.
Perhaps if you had the self control necessary to simply not read a post
tagged "OT"...
...or is it that you're simply not able to figure out what "OT" might
mean?
<e1f43d27-205e-472a...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
the final arbiter of these things.
Perhaps if you had the self control necessary to simply not read a post
tagged "OT"...
...or is it that you're simply not able to figure out what "OT" might
mean?
Bobster
May 29, 2013, 3:12:03 AM5/29/13
to
On May 29, 8:44 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article
> <e1f43d27-205e-472a-8326-c6fc8cbb7...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
> In article
> <e1f43d27-205e-472a-8326-c6fc8cbb7...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > where this actually might have been on topic.
>
> > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > forums for celebrating ourselves.
>
> Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> the final arbiter of these things.
It comes as no shock to me at all. I'm just having my say. As a
> Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > where this actually might have been on topic.
>
> > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > forums for celebrating ourselves.
>
> Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> the final arbiter of these things.
general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
>
> Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
I think it's your self control that is at issue here. Nobody put a gun
> Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
Stephen Thomas Cole
May 29, 2013, 3:10:13 AM5/29/13
to
Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
I've always wanted to have a go at something like this, I've done some
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
karting and that was phenomenal even though I probably didn't breach 30mph.
Good work that man!
--
Stephen Thomas Cole - Sent from my iPhone so please forgive any spelling
mistakes or botched snipping.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 3:16:58 AM5/29/13
to
In article <d64bq8drsr9ag85a0...@4ax.com>,
Championships.
And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
course.
Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:38:59 -0400, Flint <agen...@section-31.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
> >On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >>
> >> It was... ...fantastic.
> >>
> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >>
> >
> >Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip. I
> >never understood some weenies amateurish fascination with racing.
> >Cars are *boring*, and so self-indulgent. "But you need to feel the
> >speed to understand!" they cry...
> >
> >Personally, I prefer to see the effect a great live audio mix has on a
> >concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a
> >subharmonic synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through
> >18" - 21" subwoofers. *That's* 'fantastic'... ... none of this "look
> >at me" self indulgence of wannabe race car drivers.
>
> It looks boring to me too. I prefer racing sailboats. There's more
> work and it's much more difficult to learn. Not to mention that
> driving in circles is not very bright. In a sailboat, everyone knows
> where the next mark is but going there in a straight line is not
> always the fastest. And the best part is that you can drink a beer
> during the race.
And I've raced sailboats as well, including at the 1998 Soling World
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:38:59 -0400, Flint <agen...@section-31.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
> >On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >>
> >> It was... ...fantastic.
> >>
> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >>
> >
> >Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip. I
> >never understood some weenies amateurish fascination with racing.
> >Cars are *boring*, and so self-indulgent. "But you need to feel the
> >speed to understand!" they cry...
> >
> >Personally, I prefer to see the effect a great live audio mix has on a
> >concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a
> >subharmonic synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through
> >18" - 21" subwoofers. *That's* 'fantastic'... ... none of this "look
> >at me" self indulgence of wannabe race car drivers.
>
> It looks boring to me too. I prefer racing sailboats. There's more
> work and it's much more difficult to learn. Not to mention that
> driving in circles is not very bright. In a sailboat, everyone knows
> where the next mark is but going there in a straight line is not
> always the fastest. And the best part is that you can drink a beer
> during the race.
Championships.
And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
course.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 3:17:53 AM5/29/13
to
In article
<407292450391502898.825332REMO...@news.eterna
l-september.org>,
I caution you that if you really like it: it can be a very expensive
addiction.
:-)
<407292450391502898.825332REMO...@news.eterna
l-september.org>,
Stephen Thomas Cole <REMOVEste...@REMOVEgmail.com> wrote:
> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
> > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > It was... ...fantastic.
> >
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >
> > ;-)
>
> I've always wanted to have a go at something like this, I've done some
> karting and that was phenomenal even though I probably didn't breach 30mph.
>
>
> Good work that man!
If you've always wanted to... ...do it.
> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
> > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > It was... ...fantastic.
> >
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >
> > ;-)
>
> I've always wanted to have a go at something like this, I've done some
> karting and that was phenomenal even though I probably didn't breach 30mph.
>
>
> Good work that man!
I caution you that if you really like it: it can be a very expensive
addiction.
:-)
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 3:18:37 AM5/29/13
to
In article
<92467e5d-75e1-42bb...@w15g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
> I think it's your self control that is at issue here. Nobody put a gun
> to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
Really, how does that follow?
<92467e5d-75e1-42bb...@w15g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
Bobster <mega...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 29, 8:44 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <e1f43d27-205e-472a-8326-c6fc8cbb7...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > > where this actually might have been on topic.
> >
> > > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > > forums for celebrating ourselves.
> >
> > Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> > the final arbiter of these things.
> It comes as no shock to me at all. I'm just having my say. As a
> general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
> is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
> it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
I have no problem with comment, "Bobster".
> On May 29, 8:44 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <e1f43d27-205e-472a-8326-c6fc8cbb7...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > > where this actually might have been on topic.
> >
> > > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > > forums for celebrating ourselves.
> >
> > Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> > the final arbiter of these things.
> It comes as no shock to me at all. I'm just having my say. As a
> general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
> is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
> it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
> >
> > Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
> I think it's your self control that is at issue here. Nobody put a gun
> to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
geoff
May 29, 2013, 3:30:19 AM5/29/13
to
"Flint" <agen...@section-31.net> wrote in message
news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
Nobody ever made their own candle burn brighter by blowing out somebody
else's....
geoff
geoff
May 29, 2013, 3:32:06 AM5/29/13
to
"Bobster" <mega...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e1f43d27-205e-472a...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
Um, it IS on Youtube.
geoff
Bobster
May 29, 2013, 3:38:08 AM5/29/13
to
On May 29, 9:32 am, "geoff" <ge...@nospampaf.co.nz> wrote:
> "Bobster" <megap...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Yes, but not confined to youtube.
> "Bobster" <megap...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Horva...@net.net
May 29, 2013, 4:32:56 AM5/29/13
to
On Wed, 29 May 2013 00:16:58 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:
>> It looks boring to me too. I prefer racing sailboats. There's more
>> work and it's much more difficult to learn. Not to mention that
>> driving in circles is not very bright. In a sailboat, everyone knows
>> where the next mark is but going there in a straight line is not
>> always the fastest. And the best part is that you can drink a beer
>> during the race.
>
>And I've raced sailboats as well, including at the 1998 Soling World
>Championships.
I see you like the small boats.
>And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
>course.
If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
triangles.
wrote this crap:
>> It looks boring to me too. I prefer racing sailboats. There's more
>> work and it's much more difficult to learn. Not to mention that
>> driving in circles is not very bright. In a sailboat, everyone knows
>> where the next mark is but going there in a straight line is not
>> always the fastest. And the best part is that you can drink a beer
>> during the race.
>
>And I've raced sailboats as well, including at the 1998 Soling World
>Championships.
>And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
>course.
sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
triangles.
Bigbird
May 29, 2013, 5:16:23 AM5/29/13
to
Alan Baker wrote:
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
Would you mind not crossposting your shit. It quite clear that you are
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
simply trolling (why the fuck would anybody but an idiot or a troll
post this in a hockey, golf or computer group, YFI) and nobody in this
group likes you so fuck off.
Bigbird
May 29, 2013, 5:22:10 AM5/29/13
to
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article
> <e1f43d27-205e-472a...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> Bobster <mega...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > where this actually might have been on topic.
> >
> > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > forums for celebrating ourselves.
>
> Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> the final arbiter of these things.
>
> Perhaps if you had the self control necessary to simply not read a
> post tagged "OT"...
>
> ...or is it that you're simply not able to figure out what "OT" might
> mean?
The tag OT is not an excuse to post any shit to any group. Your act is
> In article
> <e1f43d27-205e-472a...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> Bobster <mega...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > where this actually might have been on topic.
> >
> > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > forums for celebrating ourselves.
>
> Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> the final arbiter of these things.
>
> Perhaps if you had the self control necessary to simply not read a
> post tagged "OT"...
>
> ...or is it that you're simply not able to figure out what "OT" might
> mean?
pureless selfish and lazy.
Posting OT to a group that may give a shit is one thing. Crossposting
it to several group where most people will not is the act of a troll,
an idiot and/or a self publicising egoist.
If all were to be as stupid as you the groups would soon become
worthless.
AC
May 29, 2013, 7:31:44 AM5/29/13
to
Alan Baker wrote:
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
>
You bastard.
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
>
Don't you know that usenet is for people who sit on their fat diabetic
arses and do nothing but slag off people who actually do things? I mean,
to actually own a racing car, with out a thumping stereo and Halfords
bolt on diffuser? Then have the sheer cheek to actually use it in a race?
All very well if this was just a boast in text, we could have then just
dismissed you are a fantasist liar. But oh no, you damn well video it as
conclusive proof. How the hell can any one knock that down as a lie?
Come one man, leave some room for losers to knock you. Fairs fair.
All you have done here is highlight how sad and terrible their lives
are. Think of all the impotence you have now caused. Quite a few porn
sites are going to miss a lot of click through tonight.
--
AC
Sir Tim
May 29, 2013, 8:12:24 AM5/29/13
to
Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
> Personally, I prefer to see the effect a great live audio mix has on a
> concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a subharmonic
> synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through 18" - 21"
> subwoofers. *That's* 'fantastic'...
I find it the nearest thing I can imagine to pure Hell!
> Personally, I prefer to see the effect a great live audio mix has on a
> concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a subharmonic
> synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through 18" - 21"
> subwoofers. *That's* 'fantastic'...
Each to his own I guess ...
--
Henry Birkin, Bt.
jay birdsong
May 29, 2013, 8:44:22 AM5/29/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
news:alangbaker-EF2E0...@news.shawcable.net...
In article
<407292450391502898.825332REMO...@news.eterna
l-september.org>,
Stephen Thomas Cole <REMOVEste...@REMOVEgmail.com> wrote:
> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
> > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > It was... ...fantastic.
> >
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >
> > ;-)
>
> I've always wanted to have a go at something like this, I've done
> some
> karting and that was phenomenal even though I probably didn't breach
> 30mph.
>
>
> Good work that man!
>If you've always wanted to... ...do it.
>I caution you that if you really like it: it can be a very expensive
>addiction.
snip dumb cunt sig.
jay birdsong
May 29, 2013, 9:09:23 AM5/29/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
>And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a
>sailing
>course.
snip dumb cunt sig.
jay birdsong
May 29, 2013, 9:24:58 AM5/29/13
to
"Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
>
>Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would piss
all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
his "race car".
Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is never
consummated.
Why would he post his crap on all these groups anyway if not to feed
his insecurities?
From the Baker List of Defects:
Exaggerating own importance, achievements, and talents
Imagining unrealistic fantasies of success, beauty, power,
intelligence, or romance
Requiring constant attention and positive reinforcement from others
-hh
May 29, 2013, 9:57:47 AM5/29/13
to
On May 29, 3:12 am, Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 29, 8:44 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> > > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > > where this actually might have been on topic.
>
> > > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > > forums for celebrating ourselves.
>
> > Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> > the final arbiter of these things.
>
> It comes as no shock to me at all. I'm just having my say. As a
> general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
> is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
> it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
A reasonable enough comment, but hardly a new sentiment...which is why
> On May 29, 8:44 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> > > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > > where this actually might have been on topic.
>
> > > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > > forums for celebrating ourselves.
>
> > Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> > the final arbiter of these things.
>
> It comes as no shock to me at all. I'm just having my say. As a
> general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
> is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
> it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
the "OT" subjectline tag had became an accepted convention by
the1990s.
> > Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
>
> I think it's your self control that is at issue here. Nobody put a gun
> to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
For better & worse, tangential discussions as well as generalized
socializing of regular participants has been part of the USENET
culture in unmoderated groups for *decades*.
As a general rule of thumb, the lightweight fluff disappears as soon
as there's any significant on-topic matters for discussion and
engagement...which also means you now know how to fix what you see as
a 'problem'.
-hh
golfbum18
May 29, 2013, 10:24:15 AM5/29/13
to
On May 29, 1:36 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:38:59 -0400, Flint <agent...@section-31.net>
And you have all the wind you need to do it too....and actually, you
usually return to where you began so you are in fact, still "going in
circles." But not to worry. No chance of drowning for we all know,
shit floats.
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:38:59 -0400, Flint <agent...@section-31.net>
usually return to where you began so you are in fact, still "going in
circles." But not to worry. No chance of drowning for we all know,
shit floats.
brafield
May 29, 2013, 11:02:00 AM5/29/13
to
On 29 May, 05:12, Sir Tim <bent...@brooklands.co.uk> wrote:
re: the music scene. When the Beatles played their first London
Palladium show, their amp was 30 watts.
re: club music. The late great and queenly Quentin Crisp wrote of the
birth of "disco clubs" in sixties London where gentlemen might
usefully mingle. But he said "Disco music was a terrible price to pay
for one's sexual orientation."
I think Alan Baker is getting an unfair kicking here. We are on rasf1
because we love cars and racing, and it's impossible to take scissors
and separate pure F1 topics from the rest. Someone can be both an
enthusiast and perhaps irritating to some, but heck, if they're high
on their experience, good for them. I could readily tell you about my
laps last year in a 125 race kart, absolutely terrifying and
adrenaline rich. I could add that I quit after 19 of 20 paid-for laps
because my 18th took everything out of me. The my buddy went out and
within a few laps took FIVE, that's five seconds off me. "You
braked?" he asked, "why did you brake?"
Leave Alan alone.
Palladium show, their amp was 30 watts.
re: club music. The late great and queenly Quentin Crisp wrote of the
birth of "disco clubs" in sixties London where gentlemen might
usefully mingle. But he said "Disco music was a terrible price to pay
for one's sexual orientation."
I think Alan Baker is getting an unfair kicking here. We are on rasf1
because we love cars and racing, and it's impossible to take scissors
and separate pure F1 topics from the rest. Someone can be both an
enthusiast and perhaps irritating to some, but heck, if they're high
on their experience, good for them. I could readily tell you about my
laps last year in a 125 race kart, absolutely terrifying and
adrenaline rich. I could add that I quit after 19 of 20 paid-for laps
because my 18th took everything out of me. The my buddy went out and
within a few laps took FIVE, that's five seconds off me. "You
braked?" he asked, "why did you brake?"
Leave Alan alone.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 11:47:39 AM5/29/13
to
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 12:04:23 PM5/29/13
to
In article <ko4vb5$6qj$1...@dont-email.me>,
faster than Formula Fords, but that just makes them real racing vehicles
just like the FF class. Formula Ford has been the starting open wheel
class for many of the very best racing drivers in the world.
>
> Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is never
> consummated.
Nope. I will note in passing that no one has ever seen your "street
toy"...
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > It was... ...fantastic.
> >
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >
> > ;-)
> >
>
> >Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
>
>
> I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would piss
> all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> his "race car".
Of course you watched it. And yes, there are some go-karts that are
> "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > It was... ...fantastic.
> >
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >
> > ;-)
> >
>
> >Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
>
>
> I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would piss
> all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> his "race car".
faster than Formula Fords, but that just makes them real racing vehicles
just like the FF class. Formula Ford has been the starting open wheel
class for many of the very best racing drivers in the world.
>
> Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is never
> consummated.
toy"...
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 12:05:03 PM5/29/13
to
In article
<a81f9bbb-52cb-469e...@gb2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Nor should it be, Bobster.
If you don't want to read it, don't read it.
<a81f9bbb-52cb-469e...@gb2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
If you don't want to read it, don't read it.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 12:10:27 PM5/29/13
to
<sob>
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 12:11:20 PM5/29/13
to
In article <c1fbq8hipk1gd3e2i...@4ax.com>,
>
> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
> >course.
>
> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
> triangles.
Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
to discuss?
Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2013 00:16:58 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
> >> It looks boring to me too. I prefer racing sailboats. There's more
> >> work and it's much more difficult to learn. Not to mention that
> >> driving in circles is not very bright. In a sailboat, everyone knows
> >> where the next mark is but going there in a straight line is not
> >> always the fastest. And the best part is that you can drink a beer
> >> during the race.
> >
> >And I've raced sailboats as well, including at the 1998 Soling World
> >Championships.
>
> I see you like the small boats.
I've mostly raced small boats.
> On Wed, 29 May 2013 00:16:58 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
> >> It looks boring to me too. I prefer racing sailboats. There's more
> >> work and it's much more difficult to learn. Not to mention that
> >> driving in circles is not very bright. In a sailboat, everyone knows
> >> where the next mark is but going there in a straight line is not
> >> always the fastest. And the best part is that you can drink a beer
> >> during the race.
> >
> >And I've raced sailboats as well, including at the 1998 Soling World
> >Championships.
>
> I see you like the small boats.
>
> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
> >course.
>
> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
> triangles.
to discuss?
Kenji
May 29, 2013, 12:49:14 PM5/29/13
to
On May 28, 7:34 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> Racing is a very intense activity. And it's something YOU do, not
> something that is done to you.
I don't ever drive fast on the road in traffic. On a track, sure. I
liked the dirt bikes. Pretty hard on the body, those. My cousin went
in for karts. I find those even harder on the body in a way because
you're trapped in a shell and also going much, much faster. Terrifying
really. So, yeah, have fun, be safe!
> Racing is a very intense activity. And it's something YOU do, not
> something that is done to you.
I don't ever drive fast on the road in traffic. On a track, sure. I
liked the dirt bikes. Pretty hard on the body, those. My cousin went
in for karts. I find those even harder on the body in a way because
you're trapped in a shell and also going much, much faster. Terrifying
really. So, yeah, have fun, be safe!
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 12:58:28 PM5/29/13
to
In article
<b997b68b-52b5-4e27...@c7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
I think that it pays to remember that regardless of how much metal is
surrounding you (or in the case of a kart, NOT surrounding you), no
crash at speed is ever going to be a good thing.
So I'll keep trying to do both the have fun and the be safe.
;-)
<b997b68b-52b5-4e27...@c7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
surrounding you (or in the case of a kart, NOT surrounding you), no
crash at speed is ever going to be a good thing.
So I'll keep trying to do both the have fun and the be safe.
;-)
Horva...@net.net
May 29, 2013, 1:20:48 PM5/29/13
to
On Wed, 29 May 2013 09:11:20 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:
>>
wrote this crap:
>>
>> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
>> >course.
>>
>> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
>> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
>> triangles.
>
>Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
>to discuss?
Lying about what?
>> >course.
>>
>> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
>> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
>> triangles.
>
>Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
>to discuss?
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 1:22:26 PM5/29/13
to
In article <71ecq8dg1q92dr7r7...@4ax.com>,
Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2013 09:11:20 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
> >>
> >> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
> >> >course.
> >>
> >> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
> >> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
> >> triangles.
> >
> >Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
> >to discuss?
>
> Lying about what?
That one is going in circles on a track for auto racing.
> On Wed, 29 May 2013 09:11:20 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
> >>
> >> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
> >> >course.
> >>
> >> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
> >> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
> >> triangles.
> >
> >Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
> >to discuss?
>
> Lying about what?
Horva...@net.net
May 29, 2013, 1:27:24 PM5/29/13
to
On Wed, 29 May 2013 09:49:14 -0700 (PDT), Kenji
<taleso...@gmail.com> wrote this crap:
>On May 28, 7:34 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>> Racing is a very intense activity. And it's something YOU do, not
>> something that is done to you.
>
>I don't ever drive fast on the road in traffic.
Dittos here. Especially when you realize that everyone over 50 is
probably on prescription medication and everyone under 30 is yakking
on a cell phone or texting, or both. Everyone between 30 and 50 is
both on drugs and texting. And everyone of any age is in a hurry.
<taleso...@gmail.com> wrote this crap:
>On May 28, 7:34 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>> Racing is a very intense activity. And it's something YOU do, not
>> something that is done to you.
>
>I don't ever drive fast on the road in traffic.
probably on prescription medication and everyone under 30 is yakking
on a cell phone or texting, or both. Everyone between 30 and 50 is
both on drugs and texting. And everyone of any age is in a hurry.
Horva...@net.net
May 29, 2013, 1:37:59 PM5/29/13
to
On Wed, 29 May 2013 10:22:26 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:
>In article <71ecq8dg1q92dr7r7...@4ax.com>,
> Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 29 May 2013 09:11:20 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>> >>
>> >> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
>> >> >course.
>> >>
>> >> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
>> >> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
>> >> triangles.
>> >
>> >Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
>> >to discuss?
>>
>> Lying about what?
>
>That one is going in circles on a track for auto racing.
OK. Some tracks are ovals.
>In article <71ecq8dg1q92dr7r7...@4ax.com>,
> Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 29 May 2013 09:11:20 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>> >>
>> >> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
>> >> >course.
>> >>
>> >> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
>> >> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
>> >> triangles.
>> >
>> >Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
>> >to discuss?
>>
>> Lying about what?
>
>That one is going in circles on a track for auto racing.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 1:45:13 PM5/29/13
to
In article <72fcq890fhf9cr1am...@4ax.com>,
racing circuit; left and right turns of varying sizes with straights of
varying lengths:
<http://www.sccbc.net/fan-info/track-map/>
You exit bumpy turn 9 doing about 65-75mph with a concrete wall to your
right. If you're at the limit, your car is going to come very close to
that wall.
You can call that a lot of things...
...but not boring.
Horva...@net.net wrote:
> >> >> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
> >> >> >course.
> >> >>
> >> >> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
> >> >> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
> >> >> triangles.
> >> >
> >> >Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
> >> >to discuss?
> >>
> >> Lying about what?
> >
> >That one is going in circles on a track for auto racing.
>
> OK. Some tracks are ovals.
Yup. Some are. But I'm not racing on an oval. I'm racing on a road
> >> >> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
> >> >> >course.
> >> >>
> >> >> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
> >> >> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
> >> >> triangles.
> >> >
> >> >Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
> >> >to discuss?
> >>
> >> Lying about what?
> >
> >That one is going in circles on a track for auto racing.
>
> OK. Some tracks are ovals.
racing circuit; left and right turns of varying sizes with straights of
varying lengths:
<http://www.sccbc.net/fan-info/track-map/>
You exit bumpy turn 9 doing about 65-75mph with a concrete wall to your
right. If you're at the limit, your car is going to come very close to
that wall.
You can call that a lot of things...
...but not boring.
Horva...@net.net
May 29, 2013, 2:07:05 PM5/29/13
to
On Wed, 29 May 2013 10:45:13 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:
>In article <72fcq890fhf9cr1am...@4ax.com>,
> Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
>> >> >> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
>> >> >> >course.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
>> >> >> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
>> >> >> triangles.
>> >> >
>> >> >Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
>> >> >to discuss?
>> >>
>> >> Lying about what?
>> >
>> >That one is going in circles on a track for auto racing.
>>
>> OK. Some tracks are ovals.
>
>Yup. Some are. But I'm not racing on an oval. I'm racing on a road
>racing circuit; left and right turns of varying sizes with straights of
>varying lengths:
>
><http://www.sccbc.net/fan-info/track-map/>
>
>You exit bumpy turn 9 doing about 65-75mph with a concrete wall to your
>right. If you're at the limit, your car is going to come very close to
>that wall.
>
>You can call that a lot of things...
>
>...but not boring.
Well, good for you. I see that you always wanted your own car and
wanted to race it on a real course. You've accomplished your goal.
Don't let these people put you down. Some people have a goal and
never see it through. The two most important things in leadership
are, 1. Accomplish the mission, 2. Welfare of the men. I'm always
teaching leadership.
wrote this crap:
>In article <72fcq890fhf9cr1am...@4ax.com>,
> Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
>> >> >> >And in road racing, you no more go in circles than you do on a sailing
>> >> >> >course.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If you're on a track for auto racing you are going in circles. In
>> >> >> sailing, there's no way to go in circles. The closest you get is
>> >> >> triangles.
>> >> >
>> >> >Is lying really all you can do? Is this the sum total of your capacity
>> >> >to discuss?
>> >>
>> >> Lying about what?
>> >
>> >That one is going in circles on a track for auto racing.
>>
>> OK. Some tracks are ovals.
>
>Yup. Some are. But I'm not racing on an oval. I'm racing on a road
>racing circuit; left and right turns of varying sizes with straights of
>varying lengths:
>
><http://www.sccbc.net/fan-info/track-map/>
>
>You exit bumpy turn 9 doing about 65-75mph with a concrete wall to your
>right. If you're at the limit, your car is going to come very close to
>that wall.
>
>You can call that a lot of things...
>
>...but not boring.
wanted to race it on a real course. You've accomplished your goal.
Don't let these people put you down. Some people have a goal and
never see it through. The two most important things in leadership
are, 1. Accomplish the mission, 2. Welfare of the men. I'm always
teaching leadership.
jay birdsong
May 29, 2013, 4:16:15 PM5/29/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
In article <ko4vb5$6qj$1...@dont-email.me>,
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >
> > It was... ...fantastic.
> >
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >
> > ;-)
> >
>
> >Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
>
>
> I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would
> piss
> all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> his "race car".
>Of course you watched it.
me!
I watched your first boring fiasco, and the second where you claimed
it was a, hehehe "professional driver" driving off the road and
corners in your place. In truth, watching paint dry was more
exciting.
If you live or die loser, it would mean less than nothing to me.
Like if a roach lived or died.
> And yes, there are some go-karts that are
>faster than Formula Fords, but that just makes them real racing
>vehicles
>just like the FF class. Formula Ford has been the starting open wheel
>class for many of the very best racing drivers in the world.
>
> Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is never
> consummated.
>Nope. I will note in passing that no one has ever seen your "street
>toy"...
not an insecure, masochistic narcissist loser like you. It must truly
suck to be a nothing like you. But know this; the wheels on my toy,
cost more than all your cars combined. And I doubt they hit 15K
combined.
And your shabby, roach infested shitbox apartment would fit in my
garage with room to spare.
Why doesn't a wealthy, creepy asshole like you, buy some decent
everyday wheels, Dick? My guess, the Kiddies love little red Miatas.
Do you put them on your lap and let them steer?
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 4:22:45 PM5/29/13
to
In article <ko5ne9$rov$1...@dont-email.me>,
>
> I watched your first boring fiasco, and the second where you claimed
> it was a, hehehe "professional driver" driving off the road and
> corners in your place. In truth, watching paint dry was more
> exciting.
I claimed it... ...because it was true...
...and then I proved it.
You got played.
>
> If you live or die loser, it would mean less than nothing to me.
> Like if a roach lived or died.
Uh-huh...
...that's why you spend all the time replying to me: because it means
"less than nothing to [you]".
:-)
>
>
> > And yes, there are some go-karts that are
> >faster than Formula Fords, but that just makes them real racing
> >vehicles
> >just like the FF class. Formula Ford has been the starting open wheel
> >class for many of the very best racing drivers in the world.
>
> Ummm......blah, blah, blah.
Ayrton Senna: heard of him?
Emerson Fittipaldi: how about him?
I could go on for a long time.
>
> >
> > Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is never
> > consummated.
>
> >Nope. I will note in passing that no one has ever seen your "street
> >toy"...
>
> There is no reason for me to showcase any of my toys to anyone. I'm
> not an insecure, masochistic narcissist loser like you. It must truly
> suck to be a nothing like you. But know this; the wheels on my toy,
> cost more than all your cars combined. And I doubt they hit 15K
> combined.
But it is necessary for you to brag about how much they cost...
>
> And your shabby, roach infested shitbox apartment would fit in my
> garage with room to spare.
...and how big your garage is...
It must really gall you that I don't have to make up what I'm actually
doing.
:-)
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Alan Baker" wrote in message
> news:alangbaker-E409B...@news.shawcable.net...
>
> In article <ko4vb5$6qj$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
> >
> > On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> > >
> > > It was... ...fantastic.
> > >
> > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> > >
> > > ;-)
> > >
> >
> > >Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
> >
> >
> > I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> > the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> > crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> > great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> > car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would
> > piss
> > all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> > his "race car".
>
> >Of course you watched it.
>
> My goodness, you really think your tawdry little life is important to
> me!
You make it quite obvious that it is...
> "Alan Baker" wrote in message
> news:alangbaker-E409B...@news.shawcable.net...
>
> In article <ko4vb5$6qj$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
> >
> > On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> > >
> > > It was... ...fantastic.
> > >
> > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> > >
> > > ;-)
> > >
> >
> > >Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
> >
> >
> > I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> > the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> > crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> > great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> > car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would
> > piss
> > all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> > his "race car".
>
> >Of course you watched it.
>
> My goodness, you really think your tawdry little life is important to
> me!
>
> I watched your first boring fiasco, and the second where you claimed
> it was a, hehehe "professional driver" driving off the road and
> corners in your place. In truth, watching paint dry was more
> exciting.
...and then I proved it.
You got played.
>
> If you live or die loser, it would mean less than nothing to me.
> Like if a roach lived or died.
...that's why you spend all the time replying to me: because it means
"less than nothing to [you]".
:-)
>
>
> > And yes, there are some go-karts that are
> >faster than Formula Fords, but that just makes them real racing
> >vehicles
> >just like the FF class. Formula Ford has been the starting open wheel
> >class for many of the very best racing drivers in the world.
>
> Ummm......blah, blah, blah.
Emerson Fittipaldi: how about him?
I could go on for a long time.
>
> >
> > Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is never
> > consummated.
>
> >Nope. I will note in passing that no one has ever seen your "street
> >toy"...
>
> There is no reason for me to showcase any of my toys to anyone. I'm
> not an insecure, masochistic narcissist loser like you. It must truly
> suck to be a nothing like you. But know this; the wheels on my toy,
> cost more than all your cars combined. And I doubt they hit 15K
> combined.
>
> And your shabby, roach infested shitbox apartment would fit in my
> garage with room to spare.
It must really gall you that I don't have to make up what I'm actually
doing.
:-)
golfbum18
May 29, 2013, 4:26:35 PM5/29/13
to
On May 28, 8:30 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
>
> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> It was... ...fantastic.
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> ;-)
>
> --
> Alan Baker
> Vancouver, British Columbia
> "If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
> to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
> sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Did you expect anything else from this post and your you tubing? Might
> Alan Baker
> Vancouver, British Columbia
> "If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
> to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
> sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
as well have come into the group this morning with a big bull's eye t-
shirt on.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 4:29:17 PM5/29/13
to
In article
<7e247b73-05fc-4807...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
I expected to let some folks who are friends of mine know how something
I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
I simply don't care about the trolls. They amuse me.
:-)
<7e247b73-05fc-4807...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
I simply don't care about the trolls. They amuse me.
:-)
jay birdsong
May 29, 2013, 4:39:23 PM5/29/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
>
> I watched your first boring fiasco, and the second where you claimed
> it was a, hehehe "professional driver" driving off the road and
> corners in your place. In truth, watching paint dry was more
> exciting.
>I claimed it... ...because it was true...
>...and then I proved it.
>You got played.
BWAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAHARHARHARHAR - yer killin me.
>
> If you live or die loser, it would mean less than nothing to me.
> Like if a roach lived or died.
>Uh-huh...
>...that's why you spend all the time replying to me: because it means
>"less than nothing to [you]".
>:-)
>
>
> > And yes, there are some go-karts that are
> >faster than Formula Fords, but that just makes them real racing
> >vehicles
> >just like the FF class. Formula Ford has been the starting open
> >wheel
> >class for many of the very best racing drivers in the world.
>
> Ummm......blah, blah, blah.
>Ayrton Senna: heard of him?
>Emerson Fittipaldi: how about him?
>I could go on for a long time.
>
> >
> > Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is
> > never
> > consummated.
>
> >Nope. I will note in passing that no one has ever seen your "street
> >toy"...
>
> There is no reason for me to showcase any of my toys to anyone. I'm
> not an insecure, masochistic narcissist loser like you. It must
> truly
> suck to be a nothing like you. But know this; the wheels on my
> toy,
> cost more than all your cars combined. And I doubt they hit 15K
> combined.
>But it is necessary for you to brag about how much they cost...
Wired magazine.
And you posted on this thread "I caution you that if you really like
it: it can be a very expensive
addiction."
Yeah - your mother has lots of cash for little Alwin to burn through.
addiction."
>
> And your shabby, roach infested shitbox apartment would fit in my
> garage with room to spare.
>...and how big your garage is...
>It must really gall you that I don't have to make up what I'm
>actually
>doing.
gun.
>:-)
LOL!!!
BTW: END. Now run along and FO like a good little parasite. Your
done.
snip dumb cunt sig.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 5:12:12 PM5/29/13
to
In article <ko5opm$3uk$1...@dont-email.me>,
This is about the seriousness of the CLASS, Michael. Not about me.
>
> >I could go on for a long time.
>
> Yeah - we know. HOOT!!!!
>
> >
> > >
> > > Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is
> > > never
> > > consummated.
> >
> > >Nope. I will note in passing that no one has ever seen your "street
> > >toy"...
> >
> > There is no reason for me to showcase any of my toys to anyone. I'm
> > not an insecure, masochistic narcissist loser like you. It must
> > truly
> > suck to be a nothing like you. But know this; the wheels on my
> > toy,
> > cost more than all your cars combined. And I doubt they hit 15K
> > combined.
>
> >But it is necessary for you to brag about how much they cost...
>
>
> You were the one who claimed that I can't afford a subscription to
> Wired magazine.
And?
>
> And you posted on this thread "I caution you that if you really like
> it: it can be a very expensive
> addiction."
Yup. And?
>
> Yeah - your mother has lots of cash for little Alwin to burn through.
Nope. I've never taken a dime from her.
>
>
> >
> > And your shabby, roach infested shitbox apartment would fit in my
> > garage with room to spare.
>
> >...and how big your garage is...
>
> Bigger than your 450 sq. ft. shitbox apartment. Substantially bigger.
Riiiiiiight.
>
> >It must really gall you that I don't have to make up what I'm
> >actually
> >doing.
>
> If I were forced to trade places with a POS like you, I would eat a
> gun.
LOL
>
> >:-)
>
> LOL!!!
>
> BTW: END. Now run along and FO like a good little parasite. Your
> done.
Let's see if you can stick with that.
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > And yes, there are some go-karts that are
> > >faster than Formula Fords, but that just makes them real racing
> > >vehicles
> > >just like the FF class. Formula Ford has been the starting open
> > >wheel
> > >class for many of the very best racing drivers in the world.
> >
> > Ummm......blah, blah, blah.
>
> >Ayrton Senna: heard of him?
>
> >Emerson Fittipaldi: how about him?
>
> OHH!!! Now you're as good as them!!!!
Where did I claim that?
> > > And yes, there are some go-karts that are
> > >faster than Formula Fords, but that just makes them real racing
> > >vehicles
> > >just like the FF class. Formula Ford has been the starting open
> > >wheel
> > >class for many of the very best racing drivers in the world.
> >
> > Ummm......blah, blah, blah.
>
> >Ayrton Senna: heard of him?
>
> >Emerson Fittipaldi: how about him?
>
> OHH!!! Now you're as good as them!!!!
This is about the seriousness of the CLASS, Michael. Not about me.
>
> >I could go on for a long time.
>
> Yeah - we know. HOOT!!!!
>
> >
> > >
> > > Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is
> > > never
> > > consummated.
> >
> > >Nope. I will note in passing that no one has ever seen your "street
> > >toy"...
> >
> > There is no reason for me to showcase any of my toys to anyone. I'm
> > not an insecure, masochistic narcissist loser like you. It must
> > truly
> > suck to be a nothing like you. But know this; the wheels on my
> > toy,
> > cost more than all your cars combined. And I doubt they hit 15K
> > combined.
>
> >But it is necessary for you to brag about how much they cost...
>
>
> You were the one who claimed that I can't afford a subscription to
> Wired magazine.
>
> And you posted on this thread "I caution you that if you really like
> it: it can be a very expensive
> addiction."
>
> Yeah - your mother has lots of cash for little Alwin to burn through.
>
>
> >
> > And your shabby, roach infested shitbox apartment would fit in my
> > garage with room to spare.
>
> >...and how big your garage is...
>
> Bigger than your 450 sq. ft. shitbox apartment. Substantially bigger.
>
> >It must really gall you that I don't have to make up what I'm
> >actually
> >doing.
>
> If I were forced to trade places with a POS like you, I would eat a
> gun.
>
> >:-)
>
> LOL!!!
>
> BTW: END. Now run along and FO like a good little parasite. Your
> done.
jay birdsong
May 29, 2013, 6:38:03 PM5/29/13
to
"golfbum18" wrote in message
news:7e247b73-05fc-4807...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
From the Baker list of defects:
Exaggerating own importance, achievements, and talents.
Imagining unrealistic fantasies of success, beauty, power,
Requiring constant attention and positive reinforcement from others.
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 9:20:15 PM5/29/13
to
In article <ko3q5...@news6.newsguy.com>,
"a425couple" <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message...
>
> Meanwhile, in case anyone wishes to view this,
> it is just 3 laps (4:30) of a local race at Pacific Raceways,
> recorded by someone Alan and I both know.
>
> https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=650577924956535
Yeah! Richard's getting better out there, isn't he?
>
> Alan's is here
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
"a425couple" <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message...
> > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> > It was... ...fantastic.
>
> I'm very glad to hear you say that my friend.
> > It was... ...fantastic.
>
>
> Meanwhile, in case anyone wishes to view this,
> it is just 3 laps (4:30) of a local race at Pacific Raceways,
> recorded by someone Alan and I both know.
>
> https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=650577924956535
Yeah! Richard's getting better out there, isn't he?
>
> Alan's is here
> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 9:20:42 PM5/29/13
to
In article <l4Kdncz9OrEJMzjM...@giganews.com>,
"geoff" <ge...@nospampaf.co.nz> wrote:
> "Flint" <agen...@section-31.net> wrote in message
> > MFB
>
> MFB = Mother-F'n-Bastard ?
>
> Nobody ever made their own candle burn brighter by blowing out somebody
> else's....
>
>
> geoff
It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness...
"geoff" <ge...@nospampaf.co.nz> wrote:
> "Flint" <agen...@section-31.net> wrote in message
> news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
> > On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> > On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >>
> >> It was... ...fantastic.
> >>
> >>
> >> It was... ...fantastic.
> >>
> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >>
> >
> > Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip. I
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >>
> >
> > Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip. I
> > never understood some weenies amateurish fascination with racing. Cars are
> > *boring*, and so self-indulgent. "But you need to feel the speed to
> > understand!" they cry...
> >
> > Personally, I prefer to see the effect a great live audio mix has on a
> > concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a subharmonic
> > synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through 18" - 21"
> > subwoofers. *That's* 'fantastic'... ... none of this "look at me" self
> > indulgence of wannabe race car drivers.
> >
> > --
> > *boring*, and so self-indulgent. "But you need to feel the speed to
> > understand!" they cry...
> >
> > Personally, I prefer to see the effect a great live audio mix has on a
> > concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a subharmonic
> > synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through 18" - 21"
> > subwoofers. *That's* 'fantastic'... ... none of this "look at me" self
> > indulgence of wannabe race car drivers.
> >
> > MFB
>
> MFB = Mother-F'n-Bastard ?
>
> Nobody ever made their own candle burn brighter by blowing out somebody
> else's....
>
>
> geoff
It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness...
Alan Baker
May 29, 2013, 9:21:22 PM5/29/13
to
Bobster
May 30, 2013, 1:34:22 AM5/30/13
to
On May 29, 3:57 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> On May 29, 3:12 am, Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 29, 8:44 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > the final arbiter of these things.
>
> > It comes as no shock to me at all. I'm just having my say. As a
> > general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
> > is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
> > it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
>
> A reasonable enough comment, but hardly a new sentiment...which is why
> the "OT" subjectline tag had became an accepted convention by
> the1990s.
>
> > > Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
>
> > I think it's your self control that is at issue here. Nobody put a gun
> > to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
>
> Was this the same non-gun that forced you to comment too? ;-)
That line of argument doesn't really work if you start applying it a
little more generally.
EG I'm your neighbour and I have a loud party and at 2am you shout out
to me to STFU. Sure, nobody held a gun to your head, but that doesn't
let me off. The first incidence of lack of restraint provoked another.
> For better & worse, tangential discussions as well as generalized
> socializing of regular participants has been part of the USENET
> culture in unmoderated groups for *decades*.
I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
the last few years.
I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> As a general rule of thumb, the lightweight fluff disappears as soon
> as there's any significant on-topic matters for discussion and
> engagement...which also means you now know how to fix what you see as
> a 'problem'.
> On May 29, 3:12 am, Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 29, 8:44 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On May 29, 2:30 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> > > > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> > > > Well done. Even more impressively you managed to post to one group
> > > > where this actually might have been on topic.
>
> > > > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > > > forums for celebrating ourselves.
>
> > > Amazingly--and I'm sure this will come as a shock to you, you are not
> > > > where this actually might have been on topic.
>
> > > > This stuff should go on youtube or facebook - those are appropriate
> > > > forums for celebrating ourselves.
>
> > > the final arbiter of these things.
>
> > It comes as no shock to me at all. I'm just having my say. As a
> > general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
> > is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
> > it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
>
> A reasonable enough comment, but hardly a new sentiment...which is why
> the "OT" subjectline tag had became an accepted convention by
> the1990s.
>
> > > Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
>
> > I think it's your self control that is at issue here. Nobody put a gun
> > to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
>
> Was this the same non-gun that forced you to comment too? ;-)
That line of argument doesn't really work if you start applying it a
little more generally.
EG I'm your neighbour and I have a loud party and at 2am you shout out
to me to STFU. Sure, nobody held a gun to your head, but that doesn't
let me off. The first incidence of lack of restraint provoked another.
> For better & worse, tangential discussions as well as generalized
> socializing of regular participants has been part of the USENET
> culture in unmoderated groups for *decades*.
I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
the last few years.
I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> As a general rule of thumb, the lightweight fluff disappears as soon
> as there's any significant on-topic matters for discussion and
> engagement...which also means you now know how to fix what you see as
> a 'problem'.
Dene
May 30, 2013, 1:52:15 AM5/30/13
to
On May 29, 1:29 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article
> <7e247b73-05fc-4807-991e-881ae3cc8...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> In article
> <7e247b73-05fc-4807-991e-881ae3cc8...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> golfbum18 <golfbu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 28, 8:30 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> > > It was... ...fantastic.
>
> > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> > > ;-)
>
> > > --
> > > Alan Baker
> > > Vancouver, British Columbia
> > > "If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
> > > to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
> > > sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
>
> > Did you expect anything else from this post and your you tubing? Might
> > as well have come into the group this morning with a big bull's eye t-
> > shirt on.
>
> I expected to let some folks who are friends of mine know how something
> I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
>
Friends? Name two.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> golfbum18 <golfbu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 28, 8:30 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>
> > > It was... ...fantastic.
>
> > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>
> > > ;-)
>
> > > --
> > > Alan Baker
> > > Vancouver, British Columbia
> > > "If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
> > > to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
> > > sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
>
> > Did you expect anything else from this post and your you tubing? Might
> > as well have come into the group this morning with a big bull's eye t-
> > shirt on.
>
> I expected to let some folks who are friends of mine know how something
> I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
>
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 3:34:57 AM5/30/13
to
In article
<d111928f-cfa0-4cd8...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
The analogy utterly fails.
A single subject line marked "OT" is hardly a loud party whose noise you
can't help but hear.
>
> > For better & worse, tangential discussions as well as generalized
> > socializing of regular participants has been part of the USENET
> > culture in unmoderated groups for *decades*.
>
> I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> the last few years.
>
> I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
> a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
> becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> >
> > As a general rule of thumb, the lightweight fluff disappears as soon
> > as there's any significant on-topic matters for discussion and
> > engagement...which also means you now know how to fix what you see as
> > a 'problem'.
<d111928f-cfa0-4cd8...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
A single subject line marked "OT" is hardly a loud party whose noise you
can't help but hear.
>
> > For better & worse, tangential discussions as well as generalized
> > socializing of regular participants has been part of the USENET
> > culture in unmoderated groups for *decades*.
>
> I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> the last few years.
>
> I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
> a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
> becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> >
> > As a general rule of thumb, the lightweight fluff disappears as soon
> > as there's any significant on-topic matters for discussion and
> > engagement...which also means you now know how to fix what you see as
> > a 'problem'.
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 3:35:57 AM5/30/13
to
In article
<c606c657-e81c-4294...@ua8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
In RSG alone:
Scott Newell
Bob Cotter
Tex
<c606c657-e81c-4294...@ua8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
Scott Newell
Bob Cotter
Tex
Bobster
May 30, 2013, 4:09:18 AM5/30/13
to
On May 30, 9:34 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article
> <d111928f-cfa0-4cd8-a515-3b7639806...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
My point was about self-control and whether responding or protesting
to an annoying thing is also lack of self-control of the same degree
of lack.
> In article
> <d111928f-cfa0-4cd8-a515-3b7639806...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
to an annoying thing is also lack of self-control of the same degree
of lack.
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 4:13:53 AM5/30/13
to
In article
<ac8a4da3-afbd-4258...@k4g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
And your analogy is flawed from the start.
Responding or protesting an ongoing thing you cannot avoid is inherently
different than simply choosing not to read a post in a newsgroup clearly
marked "OT".
Can you not see the fundamental difference?
If I start poking you in the ribs, you have every right to protest.
If you come into a room where there is a sign telling you you'll be
poked in the ribs, and you don't want to be poked: you're just an idiot.
The post was marked "OT", "Bobster".
YOU HAD A CHOICE.
<ac8a4da3-afbd-4258...@k4g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
Responding or protesting an ongoing thing you cannot avoid is inherently
different than simply choosing not to read a post in a newsgroup clearly
marked "OT".
Can you not see the fundamental difference?
If I start poking you in the ribs, you have every right to protest.
If you come into a room where there is a sign telling you you'll be
poked in the ribs, and you don't want to be poked: you're just an idiot.
The post was marked "OT", "Bobster".
YOU HAD A CHOICE.
-hh
May 30, 2013, 7:29:12 AM5/30/13
to
Ah, but you *are* my neighbor, hence this dialog.
Sorry, never heard your "loud party". There might have a tiny twinkle
of light near the horizon, but since it was marked "OT", it didn't
even make it past the windowshade filter.
Oh, but to continue with your attempted analogy anyway:
> ...you shout out to me to STFU. Sure, nobody held a gun to your head, but that doesn't
> let me off. The first incidence of lack of restraint provoked another.
On the contrary: there's city ordinances that prohibit such
disruptive behavior, so I wouldn't have bothered to shout out the
window at you - I simply would have called the local police to deal
with you.
Yes, the police are analogous to the situation being a **moderated**
discussion group...which this is not.
> > For better & worse, tangential discussions as well as generalized
> > socializing of regular participants has been part of the USENET
> > culture in unmoderated groups for *decades*.
>
> I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> the last few years.
at all hard to use Google to do some quick keyword searches:
1999:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/81d0646981d36f1b/f9ccfcc0c447fdcf?q=group:rec.scuba*+insubject:OT
1998:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/296ad5467cc9aa0f/b71c49ce4e68021?q=group:rec.scuba*+insubject:OT
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/d9461877cccfa675/36de4bf7d328f5a6?q=group:rec.scuba*+insubject:OT
(& these quick examples are just the ones that were explicitly marked
as 'OT' 1.5 decades ago)
> I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
> a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
> becomes about the people and not about the topic.
hear that.
All you're really doing is to acknowledge that the social connection
amongst a group's participants can & does vary. Granted, this had
been less frequent on USENET's earliest vocationally-centric groups,
but there's been avocational groups around just about as long, such as
<rec.scuba>, which dates back to before DejaNews's archives, which
peter out before 1990. So if you then accept taking the next step,
you'll realize that some groups have had IRL meetings...usually on-
topic even. For example, from <rec.scuba*>:
http://www.huntzinger.com/dive/strokes/archive/NYseahorse-dive.txt
http://www.huntzinger.com/dive/strokes/archive/NYseahorsedivers.jpg
http://www.huntzinger.com/francis/images/Seahorse2001.jpg
...which all started because of a heated **on-topic** online
discussion on the presence of tropicals (Sea Horses) in non-tropical
waters (Jamaica Bay, NYC), which lead to a "Let Us Go Look":
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/a7750f131be0cd99/2480c45cf404c794?lnk=gst&q=seahorse+jamaica+bay#2480c45cf404c794
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/21d200a95f712f27/06b83fcb10a93476?lnk=gst&q=seahorse+dive+cancer#06b83fcb10a93476
IIRC, there wasn't a "3rd Annual" because after 9/11, the New York
City Police didn't like the idea of a couple of dozen scuba divers
going into Jamaica Bay...too close to JFK Airport for their liking.
In any case, my personal discussion group "Meet IRL" count is at 26,
across 4 countries. And USENET has declined with the rise of MySpace,
Facebook and similar "Social Media" interfaces.
> > As a general rule of thumb, the lightweight fluff disappears as soon
> > as there's any significant on-topic matters for discussion and
> > engagement...which also means you now know how to fix what you see as
> > a 'problem'.
Horva...@net.net
May 30, 2013, 7:57:02 AM5/30/13
to
On Thu, 30 May 2013 00:34:57 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:
>> >
>> > For better & worse, tangential discussions as well as generalized
>> > socializing of regular participants has been part of the USENET
>> > culture in unmoderated groups for *decades*.
>>
>> I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
>> usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
>> the last few years.
I've seen it for 30 years. I think it's been worse before. Especially
crossposting.
wrote this crap:
>> >
>> > > It comes as no shock to me at all. I'm just having my say. As a
>> > > general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
>> > > is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
>> > > it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
>> >
>> > A reasonable enough comment, but hardly a new sentiment...which is why
>> > the "OT" subjectline tag had became an accepted convention by
>> > the1990s.
>> >
>> > > > Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
>> >
>> > > I think it's your self control that is at issue here. Nobody put a gun
>> > > to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
>> >
>> > Was this the same non-gun that forced you to comment too? ;-)
>> That line of argument doesn't really work if you start applying it a
>> little more generally.
>>
>> EG I'm your neighbour and I have a loud party and at 2am you shout out
>> to me to STFU. Sure, nobody held a gun to your head, but that doesn't
>> let me off. The first incidence of lack of restraint provoked another.
>
>The analogy utterly fails.
>
>A single subject line marked "OT" is hardly a loud party whose noise you
>can't help but hear.
Agreed. You can always turn your computer off at 0200.
>> > > general rule I think that anything that gets posted to a public forum
>> > > is fair game for comment, and those who want no discussion of whatever
>> > > it is they've posted should go elsewhere.
>> >
>> > A reasonable enough comment, but hardly a new sentiment...which is why
>> > the "OT" subjectline tag had became an accepted convention by
>> > the1990s.
>> >
>> > > > Perhaps if you had the self control necessary
>> >
>> > > I think it's your self control that is at issue here. Nobody put a gun
>> > > to your head and made you post your home movies to multiple groups.
>> >
>> > Was this the same non-gun that forced you to comment too? ;-)
>> That line of argument doesn't really work if you start applying it a
>> little more generally.
>>
>> EG I'm your neighbour and I have a loud party and at 2am you shout out
>> to me to STFU. Sure, nobody held a gun to your head, but that doesn't
>> let me off. The first incidence of lack of restraint provoked another.
>
>The analogy utterly fails.
>
>A single subject line marked "OT" is hardly a loud party whose noise you
>can't help but hear.
>> > For better & worse, tangential discussions as well as generalized
>> > socializing of regular participants has been part of the USENET
>> > culture in unmoderated groups for *decades*.
>>
>> I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
>> usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
>> the last few years.
crossposting.
Horva...@net.net
May 30, 2013, 8:00:47 AM5/30/13
to
On Thu, 30 May 2013 04:29:12 -0700 (PDT), -hh
<recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote this crap:
ladies.
<recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote this crap:
>>
>> That line of argument doesn't really work if you start applying it a
>> little more generally.
>>
>> EG I'm your neighbour and I have a loud party and at 2am ...
>
>Ah, but you *are* my neighbor, hence this dialog.
>
>Sorry, never heard your "loud party". There might have a tiny twinkle
>of light near the horizon, but since it was marked "OT", it didn't
>even make it past the windowshade filter.
>
>
>Oh, but to continue with your attempted analogy anyway:
>
>> ...you shout out to me to STFU. Sure, nobody held a gun to your head, but that doesn't
>> let me off. The first incidence of lack of restraint provoked another.
>
>On the contrary: there's city ordinances that prohibit such
>disruptive behavior, so I wouldn't have bothered to shout out the
>window at you - I simply would have called the local police to deal
>with you.
Wuss. I would have joined the party, drank their booze and hit on the
>> That line of argument doesn't really work if you start applying it a
>> little more generally.
>>
>> EG I'm your neighbour and I have a loud party and at 2am ...
>
>Ah, but you *are* my neighbor, hence this dialog.
>
>Sorry, never heard your "loud party". There might have a tiny twinkle
>of light near the horizon, but since it was marked "OT", it didn't
>even make it past the windowshade filter.
>
>
>Oh, but to continue with your attempted analogy anyway:
>
>> ...you shout out to me to STFU. Sure, nobody held a gun to your head, but that doesn't
>> let me off. The first incidence of lack of restraint provoked another.
>
>On the contrary: there's city ordinances that prohibit such
>disruptive behavior, so I wouldn't have bothered to shout out the
>window at you - I simply would have called the local police to deal
>with you.
ladies.
Horva...@net.net
May 30, 2013, 8:01:50 AM5/30/13
to
On Thu, 30 May 2013 00:35:57 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:
>> >
wrote this crap:
>> >
>> > I expected to let some folks who are friends of mine know how something
>> > I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
>> >
>>
>> Friends? Name two.
>
>In RSG alone:
>
>Scott Newell
>Bob Cotter
>Tex
Who are those guys?
>> > I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
>> >
>>
>> Friends? Name two.
>
>In RSG alone:
>
>Scott Newell
>Bob Cotter
>Tex
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 8:31:33 AM5/30/13
to
"Bobster" wrote in message
news:ac8a4da3-afbd-4258...@k4g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
The Baker Defect List:
Reacting to criticism with anger, shame, or humiliation
Taking advantage of others to reach own goals
Exaggerating own importance, achievements, and talents
Imagining unrealistic fantasies of success, beauty, power,
intelligence, or romance
intelligence, or romance
Requiring constant attention and positive reinforcement from others
Becoming jealous easily
Lacking empathy and disregarding the feelings of others
Being obsessed with self
Pursuing mainly selfish goals
Trouble keeping healthy relationships
Becoming easily hurt and rejected
Setting goals that are unrealistic
Wanting "the best" of everything
Appearing unemotional
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 8:34:05 AM5/30/13
to
"Dene" wrote in message
news:c606c657-e81c-4294...@ua8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
friend. It's called "Masochistic Narcissism".
golfbum18
May 30, 2013, 10:13:30 AM5/30/13
to
On May 29, 4:29 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article
> <7e247b73-05fc-4807-991e-881ae3cc8...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In article
> <7e247b73-05fc-4807-991e-881ae3cc8...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
latch onto anything to yap about. Have at it and do what the hell you
want. Like Ricky Nelson said years ago, "you can't please everyone, so
you got to please yourself." Amazing though how formula can run in a
driving rain and in nascar, if someone spits on the track, they red
flag it for awhile.
Flint
May 30, 2013, 12:30:44 PM5/30/13
to
On 5/28/2013 10:34 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
Agreed...
>
> Racing is a very intense activity.
Mixing can be rather intense as well. The point being that the
resulting mix benefits provides a direct experience that benefits more
than just ones self, but all audience listeners. The same can't be
said of the thrill of racing a car.
And it's something YOU do, not
> something that is done to you.
Incorrect. Live mixing IS something YOU do... You shape an overall
mix with eq, dynamics control, and FX sweeteners. Live mixing also
requires something between ones ears in addition to one's ears whereas
racecar driving is largely testosterone oriented and shares more in
common with hand-eye oriented coordination not unlike teenybop
shoot-em up games...
:)
--
MFB
> In article <ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
>
>> On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>>>
>>> It was... ...fantastic.
>>>
>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>>>
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>
>> On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>>>
>>> It was... ...fantastic.
>>>
>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>>>
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>
>> Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip. I
>> never understood some weenies amateurish fascination with racing.
>> Cars are *boring*, and so self-indulgent. "But you need to feel the
>> speed to understand!" they cry...
>>
>> never understood some weenies amateurish fascination with racing.
>> Cars are *boring*, and so self-indulgent. "But you need to feel the
>> speed to understand!" they cry...
>>
>> Personally, I prefer to see the effect a great live audio mix has on a
>> concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a
>> subharmonic synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through
>> concert crowd, especially when kicking in the sub-lows with a
>> subharmonic synth driven signal feeding 25,000 watts of power through
>> 18" - 21" subwoofers. *That's* 'fantastic'... ... none of this "look
>> at me" self indulgence of wannabe race car drivers.
>
> Different strokes...
>> at me" self indulgence of wannabe race car drivers.
>
Agreed...
>
> Racing is a very intense activity.
Mixing can be rather intense as well. The point being that the
resulting mix benefits provides a direct experience that benefits more
than just ones self, but all audience listeners. The same can't be
said of the thrill of racing a car.
And it's something YOU do, not
> something that is done to you.
Incorrect. Live mixing IS something YOU do... You shape an overall
mix with eq, dynamics control, and FX sweeteners. Live mixing also
requires something between ones ears in addition to one's ears whereas
racecar driving is largely testosterone oriented and shares more in
common with hand-eye oriented coordination not unlike teenybop
shoot-em up games...
:)
--
MFB
Dene
May 30, 2013, 12:33:56 PM5/30/13
to
You are attempting to reason with a troll. Baker doesn't honestly
engage anyone here.
-Greg
Flint
May 30, 2013, 12:34:50 PM5/30/13
to
On 5/29/2013 9:24 AM, jay birdsong wrote:
>
>
> "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
slow first two minutes, I started fast forwarding through huge
segments and found virtually nothing worth watching.
>
> Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is never
> consummated.
>
>
> Why would he post his crap on all these groups anyway if not to feed
> his insecurities?
>
>
> From the Baker List of Defects:
MFB
>
>
> "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>>
> On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>>
>> It was... ...fantastic.
>>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>
>> Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
>
>
>>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>
>> Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
>
>
> I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would piss
> all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> his "race car".
Actually, I didn't watch the whole thing either. After the boring
> the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would piss
> all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> his "race car".
slow first two minutes, I started fast forwarding through huge
segments and found virtually nothing worth watching.
>
> Now Alwin will proffer another "bet" that he will make sure is never
> consummated.
>
>
> his insecurities?
>
>
> From the Baker List of Defects:
>
> Exaggerating own importance, achievements, and talents
>
> Imagining unrealistic fantasies of success, beauty, power,
> intelligence, or romance
>
> Requiring constant attention and positive reinforcement from others
--
> Exaggerating own importance, achievements, and talents
>
> Imagining unrealistic fantasies of success, beauty, power,
> intelligence, or romance
>
> Requiring constant attention and positive reinforcement from others
MFB
Dene
May 30, 2013, 12:38:34 PM5/30/13
to
On May 30, 5:01 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 00:35:57 -0700, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net>
point is that Baker has no friends among active participants in RSG
and likely the other forums as well. If he can name two; it's in
contrast to the overwhelming numbers who despise him and his stalking,
trollish behaviors.
-Greg
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 00:35:57 -0700, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
>
>
> >> > I expected to let some folks who are friends of mine know how something
> >> > I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
>
> >> Friends? Name two.
>
> >In RSG alone:
>
> >Scott Newell
> >Bob Cotter
> >Tex
>
> Who are those guys?
They are very infrequent posters whom he plays golf once a year. The
>
>
>
> >> > I expected to let some folks who are friends of mine know how something
> >> > I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
>
> >> Friends? Name two.
>
> >In RSG alone:
>
> >Scott Newell
> >Bob Cotter
> >Tex
>
> Who are those guys?
point is that Baker has no friends among active participants in RSG
and likely the other forums as well. If he can name two; it's in
contrast to the overwhelming numbers who despise him and his stalking,
trollish behaviors.
-Greg
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 12:58:55 PM5/30/13
to
In article <ko7ujc$nc6$1...@dont-email.me>,
If that were true, no one would watch racing...
...and they do watch.
>
> And it's something YOU do, not
> > something that is done to you.
>
> Incorrect. Live mixing IS something YOU do... You shape an overall
> mix with eq, dynamics control, and FX sweeteners. Live mixing also
> requires something between ones ears in addition to one's ears whereas
> racecar driving is largely testosterone oriented and shares more in
> common with hand-eye oriented coordination not unlike teenybop
> shoot-em up games...
Actually, you couldn't be farther from the truth. Everyone assumes
racing is about testosterone and reflexes, but it really is about what
is between your ears, too.
...and they do watch.
>
> And it's something YOU do, not
> > something that is done to you.
>
> Incorrect. Live mixing IS something YOU do... You shape an overall
> mix with eq, dynamics control, and FX sweeteners. Live mixing also
> requires something between ones ears in addition to one's ears whereas
> racecar driving is largely testosterone oriented and shares more in
> common with hand-eye oriented coordination not unlike teenybop
> shoot-em up games...
racing is about testosterone and reflexes, but it really is about what
is between your ears, too.
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 12:59:22 PM5/30/13
to
In article
<811811f8-d4af-4f5a...@d8g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>,
That coming from you means so little, TITPB.
:-)
<811811f8-d4af-4f5a...@d8g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>,
:-)
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 1:01:04 PM5/30/13
to
In article
<5ce18e71-0fd6-4499...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
Perhaps they're very infrequent posters because they're tired of what
has been done to this forum.
At least my off topic posts are marked as such.
<5ce18e71-0fd6-4499...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
has been done to this forum.
At least my off topic posts are marked as such.
MNMikeW
May 30, 2013, 1:27:38 PM5/30/13
to
I see he has yet another "look at me, look at me" thread started,
crossposted as usual. And as usual he gets nothing but grief about it.
Yet he persists. Can you say insecure? Sure, I knew you could.
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 1:36:54 PM5/30/13
to
MNMikeW
May 30, 2013, 1:49:06 PM5/30/13
to
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 1:57:01 PM5/30/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
news:alangbaker-201E1...@news.shawcable.net...
snip dumb cunt
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 1:58:28 PM5/30/13
to
"Flint" wrote in message news:ko7ur2$oop$1...@dont-email.me...
On 5/29/2013 9:24 AM, jay birdsong wrote:
>
>
> "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>>
>> It was... ...fantastic.
>>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>
>> Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
>
>
> I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would
> piss
> all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> his "race car".
>Actually, I didn't watch the whole thing either. After the boring
>slow first two minutes, I started fast forwarding through huge
>segments and found virtually nothing worth watching.
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 2:02:37 PM5/30/13
to
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 2:06:20 PM5/30/13
to
In article <ko83nr$o4n$1...@dont-email.me>,
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Flint" wrote in message news:ko7ur2$oop$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> On 5/29/2013 9:24 AM, jay birdsong wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
> >
> > On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >>
> >> It was... ...fantastic.
> >>
> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >>
> >
> >> Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
> >
> >
> > I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> > the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> > crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> > great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> > car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would
> > piss
> > all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> > his "race car".
>
>
> >Actually, I didn't watch the whole thing either. After the boring
> >slow first two minutes, I started fast forwarding through huge
> >segments and found virtually nothing worth watching.
>
> So you possibly missed him crashing into something?
Sorry to disappoint you, Michael, but I didn't crash into anything.
> "Flint" wrote in message news:ko7ur2$oop$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> On 5/29/2013 9:24 AM, jay birdsong wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Flint" wrote in message news:ko3m0k$6vm$1...@dont-email.me...
> >
> > On 5/28/2013 8:30 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
> >>
> >> It was... ...fantastic.
> >>
> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >>
> >
> >> Yes, it appears to have been a fantastically *boring* video clip.
> >
> >
> > I didn't watch it, He's too much of an insecure dick, and I can bet
> > the show was a huge bore. My bet is; he doddered around the track
> > crawling through corners and running off the straights like an 80 YO
> > great grandmother. He's driving an "almost" go-kart; a wannabe race
> > car without much top end. In fact, there are go-karts that would
> > piss
> > all over his "race car". In fact, my street toy would piss all over
> > his "race car".
>
>
> >Actually, I didn't watch the whole thing either. After the boring
> >slow first two minutes, I started fast forwarding through huge
> >segments and found virtually nothing worth watching.
>
> So you possibly missed him crashing into something?
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 3:07:32 PM5/30/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
>but I didn't crash into anything.
>:-)
snip dumb cunt
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 3:08:44 PM5/30/13
to
In article <ko87pc$h9m$1...@dont-email.me>,
Hmmm...
So all you'd need to do would be to point to the part of the video where
I hit something...
...but that's not going to happen, is it?
So all you'd need to do would be to point to the part of the video where
I hit something...
...but that's not going to happen, is it?
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 3:57:52 PM5/30/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
>So all you'd need to do would be to point to the part of the video
>where
>I hit something...
like an 80 YO woman driving a baby carriage.
>...but that's not going to happen, is it?
>:-)
LOL!
snip dumb cunt.
Scott Newell
May 30, 2013, 4:05:47 PM5/30/13
to
On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:01:04 AM UTC-7, Alan Baker wrote:
I am appreciative of the hobbies that others have beyond golf, and am happy for Alan that he has been able to develop his dream of owning a car. Anyone who reads into it any more than that better look in the mirror. We all have a bit of narcissism to post on the this group -- whether it be political posturing, golf subjects (never!) or wanting to engage in dung flinging debates. IMHO, y'all need to get over each other, but that'll never happen, so I'll just sit back and watch the monkeys make them feel better about themselves, and realize that it's okay for RSG/Usenet to evolve from what it used to be. They're just words on a screen and it's still your choice to read who/what you want. :-)
> Dene <gdstr***@a**.com> wrote:
> > They are very infrequent posters whom he plays golf once a year. The
> > point is that Baker has no friends among active participants in RSG
> > and likely the other forums as well. If he can name two; it's in
> > contrast to the overwhelming numbers who despise him and his stalking,
> > trollish behaviors.
>
> > They are very infrequent posters whom he plays golf once a year. The
> > point is that Baker has no friends among active participants in RSG
> > and likely the other forums as well. If he can name two; it's in
> > contrast to the overwhelming numbers who despise him and his stalking,
> > trollish behaviors.
>
> Perhaps they're very infrequent posters because they're tired of what
> has been done to this forum.
>
> At least my off topic posts are marked as such.
Exactly. I still hang out here a bit to basically watch the social experiment of RSG. I guess you could say it's a bit of reality TV, but there isn't too much to comment on....unless you like banging your head against a wall.
> has been done to this forum.
>
> At least my off topic posts are marked as such.
I am appreciative of the hobbies that others have beyond golf, and am happy for Alan that he has been able to develop his dream of owning a car. Anyone who reads into it any more than that better look in the mirror. We all have a bit of narcissism to post on the this group -- whether it be political posturing, golf subjects (never!) or wanting to engage in dung flinging debates. IMHO, y'all need to get over each other, but that'll never happen, so I'll just sit back and watch the monkeys make them feel better about themselves, and realize that it's okay for RSG/Usenet to evolve from what it used to be. They're just words on a screen and it's still your choice to read who/what you want. :-)
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 4:06:17 PM5/30/13
to
In article <ko8ano$3g1$1...@dont-email.me>,
whether or not I have a life!
>
>
>
> >So all you'd need to do would be to point to the part of the video
> >where
> >I hit something...
>
> I have no intention of watching a Dick like you dodder around a track
> like an 80 YO woman driving a baby carriage.
LOL
>
> >...but that's not going to happen, is it?
>
> No, but if it did I would be able to pick out what you clipped out.
Riiiiiiight.
The only thing I clipped out was sitting in pre-grid for 15 minutes.
But go right ahead and show us all, Michael!
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > >Actually, I didn't watch the whole thing either. After the
> > > >boring
> > > >slow first two minutes, I started fast forwarding through huge
> > > >segments and found virtually nothing worth watching.
> > >
> > > So you possibly missed him crashing into something?
> >
> > >Sorry to disappoint you, Michael,"Disappoint" me!! Nah.
> >
> > >but I didn't crash into anything.
> >
> > Hmmm....so you say, and you are a known liar.
>
> >Hmmm...
>
>
> WOW!!!! Another one minute response from the Dick without a life.
WOW!!! You've determined that when I happen to see your post determines
> > > >Actually, I didn't watch the whole thing either. After the
> > > >boring
> > > >slow first two minutes, I started fast forwarding through huge
> > > >segments and found virtually nothing worth watching.
> > >
> > > So you possibly missed him crashing into something?
> >
> > >Sorry to disappoint you, Michael,"Disappoint" me!! Nah.
> >
> > >but I didn't crash into anything.
> >
> > Hmmm....so you say, and you are a known liar.
>
> >Hmmm...
>
>
> WOW!!!! Another one minute response from the Dick without a life.
whether or not I have a life!
>
>
>
> >So all you'd need to do would be to point to the part of the video
> >where
> >I hit something...
>
> I have no intention of watching a Dick like you dodder around a track
> like an 80 YO woman driving a baby carriage.
>
> >...but that's not going to happen, is it?
>
> No, but if it did I would be able to pick out what you clipped out.
The only thing I clipped out was sitting in pre-grid for 15 minutes.
But go right ahead and show us all, Michael!
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 4:11:12 PM5/30/13
to
In article <e74ea1ac-a0a3-4f22...@googlegroups.com>,
:-)
>
> I am appreciative of the hobbies that others have beyond golf, and am happy
> for Alan that he has been able to develop his dream of owning a car. Anyone
> who reads into it any more than that better look in the mirror. We all have
> a bit of narcissism to post on the this group -- whether it be political
> posturing, golf subjects (never!) or wanting to engage in dung flinging
> debates. IMHO, y'all need to get over each other, but that'll never happen,
> so I'll just sit back and watch the monkeys make them feel better about
> themselves, and realize that it's okay for RSG/Usenet to evolve from what it
> used to be. They're just words on a screen and it's still your choice to
> read who/what you want. :-)
Thanks, Scott.
BTW, I think I can make RSGNW... ...assuming it hasn't already filled up.
:-)
Scott Newell <newell...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:01:04 AM UTC-7, Alan Baker wrote:
> > Dene <gdstr***@a**.com> wrote:
> > > They are very infrequent posters whom he plays golf once a year. The
> > > point is that Baker has no friends among active participants in RSG
> > > and likely the other forums as well. If he can name two; it's in
> > > contrast to the overwhelming numbers who despise him and his stalking,
> > > trollish behaviors.
> >
> > Perhaps they're very infrequent posters because they're tired of what
> > has been done to this forum.
> >
> > At least my off topic posts are marked as such.
>
> Exactly. I still hang out here a bit to basically watch the social
> experiment of RSG. I guess you could say it's a bit of reality TV, but there
> isn't too much to comment on....unless you like banging your head against a
> wall.
Which, I guess I have to admit, I do...
> On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:01:04 AM UTC-7, Alan Baker wrote:
> > Dene <gdstr***@a**.com> wrote:
> > > They are very infrequent posters whom he plays golf once a year. The
> > > point is that Baker has no friends among active participants in RSG
> > > and likely the other forums as well. If he can name two; it's in
> > > contrast to the overwhelming numbers who despise him and his stalking,
> > > trollish behaviors.
> >
> > Perhaps they're very infrequent posters because they're tired of what
> > has been done to this forum.
> >
> > At least my off topic posts are marked as such.
>
> Exactly. I still hang out here a bit to basically watch the social
> experiment of RSG. I guess you could say it's a bit of reality TV, but there
> isn't too much to comment on....unless you like banging your head against a
> wall.
:-)
>
> I am appreciative of the hobbies that others have beyond golf, and am happy
> for Alan that he has been able to develop his dream of owning a car. Anyone
> who reads into it any more than that better look in the mirror. We all have
> a bit of narcissism to post on the this group -- whether it be political
> posturing, golf subjects (never!) or wanting to engage in dung flinging
> debates. IMHO, y'all need to get over each other, but that'll never happen,
> so I'll just sit back and watch the monkeys make them feel better about
> themselves, and realize that it's okay for RSG/Usenet to evolve from what it
> used to be. They're just words on a screen and it's still your choice to
> read who/what you want. :-)
BTW, I think I can make RSGNW... ...assuming it hasn't already filled up.
:-)
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 5:00:11 PM5/30/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
In article <ko8ano$3g1$1...@dont-email.me>,
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > >Actually, I didn't watch the whole thing either. After the
> > > >boring
> > > >slow first two minutes, I started fast forwarding through huge
> > > >segments and found virtually nothing worth watching.
> > >
> > > So you possibly missed him crashing into something?
> >
> > >Sorry to disappoint you, Michael,"Disappoint" me!! Nah.
> >
> > >but I didn't crash into anything.
> >
> > Hmmm....so you say, and you are a known liar.
>
> >Hmmm...
>
>
> WOW!!!! Another one minute response from the Dick without a life.
>WOW!!! You've determined that when I happen to see your post
>determines
>whether or not I have a life!
>
>
>
> >So all you'd need to do would be to point to the part of the video
> >where
> >I hit something...
>
> I have no intention of watching a Dick like you dodder around a
> track
> like an 80 YO woman driving a baby carriage.
>LOL
>
> >...but that's not going to happen, is it?
>
> No, but if it did I would be able to pick out what you clipped out.
>Riiiiiiight.
>The only thing I clipped out was sitting in pre-grid for 15 minutes.
>But go right ahead and show us all, Michael!
snip dumb cunt.
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 5:03:33 PM5/30/13
to
"MNMikeW" wrote in message news:b0pggb...@mid.individual.net...
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 5:05:53 PM5/30/13
to
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 5:06:30 PM5/30/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
snip dumb cunt.
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 5:07:40 PM5/30/13
to
"golfbum18" wrote in message
news:2920954e-4dec-4a8f...@m8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
Flint
May 30, 2013, 7:39:22 PM5/30/13
to
On 5/30/2013 12:58 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> Actually, you couldn't be farther from the truth. Everyone assumes
> racing is about testosterone and reflexes, but it really is about what
> is between your ears, too.
>
Such as? Oh I know: track conditions? Big deal. In audio, we have
> Actually, you couldn't be farther from the truth. Everyone assumes
> racing is about testosterone and reflexes, but it really is about what
> is between your ears, too.
>
to be aware of atmospheric conditions and how they affect sound as
well. But I still don't see race fans stomping their feet, singing
along with their favorite driver, or dancing to the whine of their
engine. MostlyI see them just watching their favorite drivers making
continual left turns... Not to mention a lot of race 'fans' are
really there just to get drunk and watch spectacular crashes. Real
hillbilly fun, I tellya!
--
MFB
Alan Baker
May 30, 2013, 7:42:14 PM5/30/13
to
In article <ko8nn1$8sh$1...@dont-email.me>,
Wow.
You're so uninformed you imagine that all racing involves oval tracks...
Perhaps if you'd set aside your preconceived notions for a moment...
...or is that just asking too much of you.
Changing track conditions, what the driver ahead of you is doing, what
the driver behind you is doing, lapped traffic you're coming up on, how
are your tires holding up...
...there's a reason they called Alain Prost, "The Professor", you know.
You're so uninformed you imagine that all racing involves oval tracks...
Perhaps if you'd set aside your preconceived notions for a moment...
...or is that just asking too much of you.
Changing track conditions, what the driver ahead of you is doing, what
the driver behind you is doing, lapped traffic you're coming up on, how
are your tires holding up...
...there's a reason they called Alain Prost, "The Professor", you know.
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 9:16:21 PM5/30/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
jay birdsong
May 30, 2013, 9:19:06 PM5/30/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
>But go right ahead and show us all, Michael!
snip cunt
Bobster
May 31, 2013, 12:17:17 AM5/31/13
to
On May 30, 1:29 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
<snip>
> > I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> > usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> > the last few years.
>
> Well, there is also some virtualized "regionalism" too, but it isn't
> at all hard to use Google to do some quick keyword searches:
Indeed not. I just search RASF1 for OT: and [OT] from 1/1/1981 to
1/1/1995. I got nothing. Search for the NEXT 14 years and I get
plenty. Which is what I said - it's become more prevalent in the last
few years. I was actually surprised to find nothing in the first
search, but some groups used to be better at staying on topic than
others.
And that's the thing, isn't it? Topic.
I remember when I got on line in the mid 90s there was a term "signal
to noise ratio". That was about the ratio of on-topic to other posts
in a group. Also it was applied to posters: "Old Bobster, he's got a
bad signal to noise ratio. Always going over to
alt.alan.baker.me.me.me and posting about motor racing."
So it's been a concern for a while, and been on the rise of late.
>
> 1999:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/81d0646981...
>
> 1998:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/296ad5467c...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/d9461877cc...
>
> (& these quick examples are just the ones that were explicitly marked
> as 'OT' 1.5 decades ago)
You did notice that I never said that it DIDN'T happen, but that it
was becoming more prevalent? And your time span now isn't quite as
impressive as the "decades" you originally claimed and which I
disputed. We're close to being on the same page here. The argument is
about desirability and authority.
The whole thing about "signal to noise" was that if you decided to
participate in alt.alan.baker.and.whatever.he.thinks.is.important then
you were supposed to talk about alan baker and whatever he thinks is
important. Which is why newsgroups have names that specify a topic. If
you wanted to post about Bon Jovi's latest single in alt.devilbunnies
then that was off topic and people were, still are in my book,
entitled to protest. If you posted about Bon Jovi's latest single in
alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb but stuck to the correct format
alt.bitching.bon_jovis_new_single.is.is.is
etc
then that would be OK. But post "dudes, it is totally bitching" and
that's not OK.
It's long been thus. Like I said, the problem started creeping in when
people who saw each other's posts in the same group all the time
started treating alt.alan.baker.narcissism as a social hangout because
they saw the same names there all the time and thought it was about
them and not the topic.
You might argue that that's democracy or the way things go, but that
doesn't make it invalid to point out that that's not what the group is
meant to be about.
The other part of this "social club" mentality is that a few start
thinking it's THEIR club and they lay down the de facto rules and they
set the tone and it becomes less welcoming to newbies. Again, some
groups had more of this than others.
>
> > I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
> > a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
> > becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> And you've never asked any coworker any non-work questions? Sorry to
> hear that.
>
> All you're really doing is to acknowledge that the social connection
> amongst a group's participants can & does vary.
Acknowledge it? I've never disputed it. I've give an example of how
I've dealt with it in the past.
Granted, this had
> been less frequent on USENET's earliest vocationally-centric groups,
> but there's been avocational groups around just about as long, such as
> <rec.scuba>, which dates back to before DejaNews's archives, which
> peter out before 1990. So if you then accept taking the next step,
> you'll realize that some groups have had IRL meetings...usually on-
> topic even. For example, from <rec.scuba*>:
Sure. So what?
>
> http://www.huntzinger.com/dive/strokes/archive/NYseahorse-dive.txthttp://www.huntzinger.com/dive/strokes/archive/NYseahorsedivers.jpghttp://www.huntzinger.com/francis/images/Seahorse2001.jpg
>
> ...which all started because of a heated **on-topic** online
> discussion on the presence of tropicals (Sea Horses) in non-tropical
> waters (Jamaica Bay, NYC), which lead to a "Let Us Go Look":
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/a7750f131b...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/21d200a95f...
>
> IIRC, there wasn't a "3rd Annual" because after 9/11, the New York
> City Police didn't like the idea of a couple of dozen scuba divers
> going into Jamaica Bay...too close to JFK Airport for their liking.
>
> In any case, my personal discussion group "Meet IRL" count is at 26,
> across 4 countries.
Whatever. Is this the "me old hand, you clueless newbie" thing?
> And USENET has declined with the rise of MySpace,
> Facebook and similar "Social Media" interfaces.
Where's this going, your honour?
<snip>
> > I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> > usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> > the last few years.
>
> Well, there is also some virtualized "regionalism" too, but it isn't
> at all hard to use Google to do some quick keyword searches:
Indeed not. I just search RASF1 for OT: and [OT] from 1/1/1981 to
1/1/1995. I got nothing. Search for the NEXT 14 years and I get
plenty. Which is what I said - it's become more prevalent in the last
few years. I was actually surprised to find nothing in the first
search, but some groups used to be better at staying on topic than
others.
And that's the thing, isn't it? Topic.
I remember when I got on line in the mid 90s there was a term "signal
to noise ratio". That was about the ratio of on-topic to other posts
in a group. Also it was applied to posters: "Old Bobster, he's got a
bad signal to noise ratio. Always going over to
alt.alan.baker.me.me.me and posting about motor racing."
So it's been a concern for a while, and been on the rise of late.
>
> 1999:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/81d0646981...
>
> 1998:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/296ad5467c...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/d9461877cc...
>
> (& these quick examples are just the ones that were explicitly marked
> as 'OT' 1.5 decades ago)
You did notice that I never said that it DIDN'T happen, but that it
was becoming more prevalent? And your time span now isn't quite as
impressive as the "decades" you originally claimed and which I
disputed. We're close to being on the same page here. The argument is
about desirability and authority.
The whole thing about "signal to noise" was that if you decided to
participate in alt.alan.baker.and.whatever.he.thinks.is.important then
you were supposed to talk about alan baker and whatever he thinks is
important. Which is why newsgroups have names that specify a topic. If
you wanted to post about Bon Jovi's latest single in alt.devilbunnies
then that was off topic and people were, still are in my book,
entitled to protest. If you posted about Bon Jovi's latest single in
alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb but stuck to the correct format
alt.bitching.bon_jovis_new_single.is.is.is
etc
then that would be OK. But post "dudes, it is totally bitching" and
that's not OK.
It's long been thus. Like I said, the problem started creeping in when
people who saw each other's posts in the same group all the time
started treating alt.alan.baker.narcissism as a social hangout because
they saw the same names there all the time and thought it was about
them and not the topic.
You might argue that that's democracy or the way things go, but that
doesn't make it invalid to point out that that's not what the group is
meant to be about.
The other part of this "social club" mentality is that a few start
thinking it's THEIR club and they lay down the de facto rules and they
set the tone and it becomes less welcoming to newbies. Again, some
groups had more of this than others.
>
> > I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
> > a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
> > becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> And you've never asked any coworker any non-work questions? Sorry to
> hear that.
>
> All you're really doing is to acknowledge that the social connection
> amongst a group's participants can & does vary.
Acknowledge it? I've never disputed it. I've give an example of how
I've dealt with it in the past.
Granted, this had
> been less frequent on USENET's earliest vocationally-centric groups,
> but there's been avocational groups around just about as long, such as
> <rec.scuba>, which dates back to before DejaNews's archives, which
> peter out before 1990. So if you then accept taking the next step,
> you'll realize that some groups have had IRL meetings...usually on-
> topic even. For example, from <rec.scuba*>:
Sure. So what?
>
> http://www.huntzinger.com/dive/strokes/archive/NYseahorse-dive.txthttp://www.huntzinger.com/dive/strokes/archive/NYseahorsedivers.jpghttp://www.huntzinger.com/francis/images/Seahorse2001.jpg
>
> ...which all started because of a heated **on-topic** online
> discussion on the presence of tropicals (Sea Horses) in non-tropical
> waters (Jamaica Bay, NYC), which lead to a "Let Us Go Look":
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/a7750f131b...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/21d200a95f...
>
> IIRC, there wasn't a "3rd Annual" because after 9/11, the New York
> City Police didn't like the idea of a couple of dozen scuba divers
> going into Jamaica Bay...too close to JFK Airport for their liking.
>
> In any case, my personal discussion group "Meet IRL" count is at 26,
> across 4 countries.
Whatever. Is this the "me old hand, you clueless newbie" thing?
> And USENET has declined with the rise of MySpace,
> Facebook and similar "Social Media" interfaces.
Where's this going, your honour?
Alan Baker
May 31, 2013, 1:12:02 AM5/31/13
to
In article
<076e39d7-c107-412d...@bh5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
First of all, a post about my experiences road racing isn't very far off
the strict topic of Formula 1, and the thing about newsgroups is that
they are collections of (likely) like-minded people. Meaning that off
topic posts by one poster are likely to be received well by at least a
percentage of those who are reading that group.
And those who don't want to read it can easily avoid it if they don't
want to be supercilious, sanctimonious twits.
>
> I remember when I got on line in the mid 90s there was a term "signal
> to noise ratio". That was about the ratio of on-topic to other posts
> in a group. Also it was applied to posters: "Old Bobster, he's got a
> bad signal to noise ratio. Always going over to
> alt.alan.baker.me.me.me and posting about motor racing."
>
> So it's been a concern for a while, and been on the rise of late.
It was a concern for a while because bandwidth was very expensive.
Newsflash: it's not anymore.
> >
> > 1999:
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/81d0646981...
> >
> > 1998:
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/296ad5467c...
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/d9461877cc...
> >
> > (& these quick examples are just the ones that were explicitly marked
> > as 'OT' 1.5 decades ago)
> You did notice that I never said that it DIDN'T happen, but that it
> was becoming more prevalent? And your time span now isn't quite as
> impressive as the "decades" you originally claimed and which I
> disputed. We're close to being on the same page here. The argument is
> about desirability and authority.
No. The real argument is about self control and not sweating incredibly
small stuff.
>
> The whole thing about "signal to noise" was that if you decided to
> participate in alt.alan.baker.and.whatever.he.thinks.is.important then
> you were supposed to talk about alan baker and whatever he thinks is
> important. Which is why newsgroups have names that specify a topic. If
> you wanted to post about Bon Jovi's latest single in alt.devilbunnies
> then that was off topic and people were, still are in my book,
> entitled to protest. If you posted about Bon Jovi's latest single in
> alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb but stuck to the correct format
> alt.bitching.bon_jovis_new_single.is.is.is
> etc
>
> then that would be OK. But post "dudes, it is totally bitching" and
> that's not OK.
>
> It's long been thus. Like I said, the problem started creeping in when
> people who saw each other's posts in the same group all the time
> started treating alt.alan.baker.narcissism as a social hangout because
> they saw the same names there all the time and thought it was about
> them and not the topic.
>
> You might argue that that's democracy or the way things go, but that
> doesn't make it invalid to point out that that's not what the group is
> meant to be about.
"Meant" is an extremely nebulous term, don't you think? And I'm fairly
certain that you don't get to make those decisions for anyone except
yourself.
But then, you have the power--either technological or personal--to
simply ignore all posts that start with "OT", don't you?
>
> The other part of this "social club" mentality is that a few start
> thinking it's THEIR club and they lay down the de facto rules and they
> set the tone and it becomes less welcoming to newbies. Again, some
> groups had more of this than others.
You mean... ...like what you're doing... ...right now?
Bah.
Enough.
<076e39d7-c107-412d...@bh5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Bobster <mega...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 30, 1:29 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > > I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> > > usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> > > the last few years.
> >
> > Well, there is also some virtualized "regionalism" too, but it isn't
> > at all hard to use Google to do some quick keyword searches:
> Indeed not. I just search RASF1 for OT: and [OT] from 1/1/1981 to
> 1/1/1995. I got nothing. Search for the NEXT 14 years and I get
> plenty. Which is what I said - it's become more prevalent in the last
> few years. I was actually surprised to find nothing in the first
> search, but some groups used to be better at staying on topic than
> others.
>
> And that's the thing, isn't it? Topic.
No, actually.
> On May 30, 1:29 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > > I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> > > usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> > > the last few years.
> >
> > Well, there is also some virtualized "regionalism" too, but it isn't
> > at all hard to use Google to do some quick keyword searches:
> Indeed not. I just search RASF1 for OT: and [OT] from 1/1/1981 to
> 1/1/1995. I got nothing. Search for the NEXT 14 years and I get
> plenty. Which is what I said - it's become more prevalent in the last
> few years. I was actually surprised to find nothing in the first
> search, but some groups used to be better at staying on topic than
> others.
>
> And that's the thing, isn't it? Topic.
First of all, a post about my experiences road racing isn't very far off
the strict topic of Formula 1, and the thing about newsgroups is that
they are collections of (likely) like-minded people. Meaning that off
topic posts by one poster are likely to be received well by at least a
percentage of those who are reading that group.
And those who don't want to read it can easily avoid it if they don't
want to be supercilious, sanctimonious twits.
>
> I remember when I got on line in the mid 90s there was a term "signal
> to noise ratio". That was about the ratio of on-topic to other posts
> in a group. Also it was applied to posters: "Old Bobster, he's got a
> bad signal to noise ratio. Always going over to
> alt.alan.baker.me.me.me and posting about motor racing."
>
> So it's been a concern for a while, and been on the rise of late.
Newsflash: it's not anymore.
> >
> > 1999:
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/81d0646981...
> >
> > 1998:
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/296ad5467c...
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/d9461877cc...
> >
> > (& these quick examples are just the ones that were explicitly marked
> > as 'OT' 1.5 decades ago)
> You did notice that I never said that it DIDN'T happen, but that it
> was becoming more prevalent? And your time span now isn't quite as
> impressive as the "decades" you originally claimed and which I
> disputed. We're close to being on the same page here. The argument is
> about desirability and authority.
small stuff.
>
> The whole thing about "signal to noise" was that if you decided to
> participate in alt.alan.baker.and.whatever.he.thinks.is.important then
> you were supposed to talk about alan baker and whatever he thinks is
> important. Which is why newsgroups have names that specify a topic. If
> you wanted to post about Bon Jovi's latest single in alt.devilbunnies
> then that was off topic and people were, still are in my book,
> entitled to protest. If you posted about Bon Jovi's latest single in
> alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb but stuck to the correct format
> alt.bitching.bon_jovis_new_single.is.is.is
> etc
>
> then that would be OK. But post "dudes, it is totally bitching" and
> that's not OK.
>
> It's long been thus. Like I said, the problem started creeping in when
> people who saw each other's posts in the same group all the time
> started treating alt.alan.baker.narcissism as a social hangout because
> they saw the same names there all the time and thought it was about
> them and not the topic.
>
> You might argue that that's democracy or the way things go, but that
> doesn't make it invalid to point out that that's not what the group is
> meant to be about.
certain that you don't get to make those decisions for anyone except
yourself.
But then, you have the power--either technological or personal--to
simply ignore all posts that start with "OT", don't you?
>
> The other part of this "social club" mentality is that a few start
> thinking it's THEIR club and they lay down the de facto rules and they
> set the tone and it becomes less welcoming to newbies. Again, some
> groups had more of this than others.
Bah.
Enough.
Dene
May 31, 2013, 3:01:17 AM5/31/13
to
I love it when BK tells a music story from his days as a successful
professional musician.
My beef with Baker is his incessant trolling... This is why he is so
despised. It has nothing to do with his racing interests.
-Greg
-hh
May 31, 2013, 6:57:30 AM5/31/13
to
On May 31, 12:17 am, Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 30, 1:29 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> >
> <snip>
Oh, how convenient that your analogy-which-got-trashed was snipped.
> On May 30, 1:29 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> >
> <snip>
> > I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> > > usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> > > the last few years.
>
> > Well, there is also some virtualized "regionalism" too, but it isn't
> > at all hard to use Google to do some quick keyword searches:
>
> Indeed not. I just search RASF1 for OT: and [OT] from 1/1/1981 to
> 1/1/1995. I got nothing. Search for the NEXT 14 years and I get
> plenty.
oldtimers know that the Deja archives were incomplete...
...and as I suspected, when looking at RASF1's archives, for the 14
year period of 1981-1994, 96% of your search was empty of *any* posts,
there's only six (6) months in 1994 which contained any posts to
search...well, except for pedantically THREE literal posts in November
1992, 66% of which were marked OT.
Ironically, of those three posts from Nov 1992, Google search missed,
because their subject lines were:
"WAY OT:Madonna's house is burguled in London, if only she had a gun"
"Improvements to Mtl Circuit" (body missing from archives)
"Very OT - ISP Rant"
Yes, a rate of 66% off-topic...and even explicitly marked with
'OT' ;-)
Looking further, the period of 1994 (1/1/94 to 1/1/95), in subject:OT
gets no hits.
Ditto zeros for 1995, 96, 97...although there's probably some Google
search misses in here too, since the 1992 posts do show that 'OT' had
been being used.
Then 1998 has 1010 hits.
And 1999 got 1930 hits.
2000 - 4880
2001 - 6050
2002 - 4830
2003 - 4040
2004 - 4170
2005 - 1350
2006 - 2470
2007 - 1420
2008 - 1050
2009 - 937
2010 - 977
2011 - 718
2012 - 822
1-6/13 - 71
> Which is what I said - it's become more prevalent in the last
> few years. I was actually surprised to find nothing in the first
> search, but some groups used to be better at staying on topic than
> others.
again, so is the total posting volume. You will need to go back and
normalize these values to calculate the rate to see if your claim is
correct or not.
> And that's the thing, isn't it? Topic.
>
> I remember when I got on line in the mid 90s there was a term "signal
> to noise ratio". That was about the ratio of on-topic to other posts
> in a group. Also it was applied to posters: "Old Bobster, he's got a
> bad signal to noise ratio. Always going over to
> alt.alan.baker.me.me.me and posting about motor racing."
generation; the revival of S/N concerns back then were because of the
rise of commercialism-based volume and crass advertising in
USENET...but note I said 'revival': S/N dates back to at least the
mid-80s when I came onboard, because back then, a "Power User" had a
1200 baud connection.
> So it's been a concern for a while, and been on the rise of late.
is larger than 4830.
> > 1999:
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/81d0646981...
>
> > 1998:
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/296ad5467c...
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/d9461877cc...
>
> > (& these quick examples are just the ones that were explicitly marked
> > as 'OT' 1.5 decades ago)
>
> You did notice that I never said that it DIDN'T happen, but that it
> was becoming more prevalent?
> And your time span now isn't quite as
> impressive as the "decades" you originally claimed and which I
> disputed.
years) found in your main newsgroup, plus there's the archives data
void limitation as well which is very well known to anyone who isn't a
raw novice.
> We're close to being on the same page here.
wrong. As I said, try getting back to us with actual rate
calculations.
> The argument is about desirability and authority.
> The whole thing about "signal to noise" was that if you decided to
> participate in alt.alan.baker.and.whatever.he.thinks.is.important then
> you were supposed to talk about alan baker and whatever he thinks is
> important. Which is why newsgroups have names that specify a topic. If
> you wanted to post about Bon Jovi's latest single in alt.devilbunnies
> then that was off topic and people were, still are in my book,
> entitled to protest. If you posted about Bon Jovi's latest single in
> alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb but stuck to the correct format
> alt.bitching.bon_jovis_new_single.is.is.is
> etc
being blind to the fact that their contents are populated by mere
mortal humans in an unmoderated fashion, so they do not strictly stay
faithfully on topic in every single post. Never have, and never will.
> then that would be OK. But post "dudes, it is totally bitching" and
> that's not OK.
> It's long been thus. Like I said, the problem started creeping in when
> people who saw each other's posts in the same group all the time
> started treating alt.alan.baker.narcissism as a social hangout because
> they saw the same names there all the time and thought it was about
> them and not the topic.
it too would go off-topic.
> You might argue that that's democracy or the way things go, but that
> doesn't make it invalid to point out that that's not what the group is
> meant to be about.
stronger (vs weaker) personalities in newsgroups which will tend to be
more dominant...which doesn't mean that these group members will force
everything to go off-topic.
> The other part of this "social club" mentality is that a few start
> thinking it's THEIR club and they lay down the de facto rules and they
> set the tone and it becomes less welcoming to newbies. Again, some
> groups had more of this than others.
destroyed for this very reason. I can name specific examples if
you've not ever heard of any.
> > > I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
> > > a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
> > > becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> > And you've never asked any coworker any non-work questions? Sorry to
> > hear that.
>
> > All you're really doing is to acknowledge that the social connection
> > amongst a group's participants can & does vary.
>
> Acknowledge it? I've never disputed it. I've give an example of how
> I've dealt with it in the past.
whine? Granted, both do have their place...within reason/moderation.
> > Granted, this had
> > been less frequent on USENET's earliest vocationally-centric groups,
> > but there's been avocational groups around just about as long, such as
> > <rec.scuba>, which dates back to before DejaNews's archives, which
> > peter out before 1990. So if you then accept taking the next step,
> > you'll realize that some groups have had IRL meetings...usually on-
> > topic even. For example, from <rec.scuba*>:
> Sure. So what?
>
>
> > ...which all started because of a heated **on-topic** online
> > discussion on the presence of tropicals (Sea Horses) in non-tropical
> > waters (Jamaica Bay, NYC), which lead to a "Let Us Go Look":
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/a7750f131b...
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/21d200a95f...
>
> > IIRC, there wasn't a "3rd Annual" because after 9/11, the New York
> > City Police didn't like the idea of a couple of dozen scuba divers
> > going into Jamaica Bay...too close to JFK Airport for their liking.
>
> > In any case, my personal discussion group "Meet IRL" count is at 26,
> > across 4 countries.
>
> Whatever. Is this the "me old hand, you clueless newbie" thing?
Yup. You're post-Eternal September. Bow to me :-)
> > ...which all started because of a heated **on-topic** online
> > discussion on the presence of tropicals (Sea Horses) in non-tropical
> > waters (Jamaica Bay, NYC), which lead to a "Let Us Go Look":
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/a7750f131b...
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/21d200a95f...
>
> > IIRC, there wasn't a "3rd Annual" because after 9/11, the New York
> > City Police didn't like the idea of a couple of dozen scuba divers
> > going into Jamaica Bay...too close to JFK Airport for their liking.
>
> > In any case, my personal discussion group "Meet IRL" count is at 26,
> > across 4 countries.
>
> Whatever. Is this the "me old hand, you clueless newbie" thing?
> > And USENET has declined with the rise of MySpace,
> > Facebook and similar "Social Media" interfaces.
>
> Where's this going, your honour?
-hh
Bobster
May 31, 2013, 7:50:53 AM5/31/13
to
On May 31, 12:57 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> On May 31, 12:17 am, Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 30, 1:29 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> Oh, how convenient that your analogy-which-got-trashed was snipped.
It's on record.
> On May 31, 12:17 am, Bobster <megap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 30, 1:29 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> Oh, how convenient that your analogy-which-got-trashed was snipped.
>
> > > I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> > > > usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> > > > the last few years.
>
> > > Well, there is also some virtualized "regionalism" too, but it isn't
> > > at all hard to use Google to do some quick keyword searches:
>
> > Indeed not. I just search RASF1 for OT: and [OT] from 1/1/1981 to
> > 1/1/1995. I got nothing. Search for the NEXT 14 years and I get
> > plenty.
>
> Golly, what an interesting spread of search dates, given that us
> oldtimers know that the Deja archives were incomplete...
I got on line sometime in '94, so I pushed the search to 1/1/95 to get
> > > I'd dispute the time aspect of that argument because I've been on
> > > > usenet for getting on two decades now and I've only seen lots of this
> > > > the last few years.
>
> > > Well, there is also some virtualized "regionalism" too, but it isn't
> > > at all hard to use Google to do some quick keyword searches:
>
> > Indeed not. I just search RASF1 for OT: and [OT] from 1/1/1981 to
> > 1/1/1995. I got nothing. Search for the NEXT 14 years and I get
> > plenty.
>
> Golly, what an interesting spread of search dates, given that us
> oldtimers know that the Deja archives were incomplete...
a feel for what was going on when I first go on line.
>
> ...and as I suspected, when looking at RASF1's archives, for the 14
> year period of 1981-1994, 96% of your search was empty of *any* posts,
> there's only six (6) months in 1994 which contained any posts to
> search...well, except for pedantically THREE literal posts in November
> 1992, 66% of which were marked OT.
As I said, I searched for [OT] and OT:, not every possible variation.
> ...and as I suspected, when looking at RASF1's archives, for the 14
> year period of 1981-1994, 96% of your search was empty of *any* posts,
> there's only six (6) months in 1994 which contained any posts to
> search...well, except for pedantically THREE literal posts in November
> 1992, 66% of which were marked OT.
Not perfect, but it would show if there was a lot of OTing going on
there at the time.
> since there's now a 1992 post (21
> years) found in your main newsgroup, plus there's the archives data
> void limitation as well which is very well known to anyone who isn't a
> raw novice.
>
> > We're close to being on the same page here.
>
> In your dreams, because then you wouldn't have to admit that you're
> wrong. As I said, try getting back to us with actual rate
> calculations.
>
> > The argument is about desirability and authority.
>
> WTF?
If we're on the same page about WHAT happens, then the arguments left
> > We're close to being on the same page here.
>
> In your dreams, because then you wouldn't have to admit that you're
> wrong. As I said, try getting back to us with actual rate
> calculations.
>
> > The argument is about desirability and authority.
>
> WTF?
are about whether it's a good thing and whether it's legitimate.
>
> > The whole thing about "signal to noise" was that if you decided to
> > participate in alt.alan.baker.and.whatever.he.thinks.is.important then
> > you were supposed to talk about alan baker and whatever he thinks is
> > important. Which is why newsgroups have names that specify a topic. If
> > you wanted to post about Bon Jovi's latest single in alt.devilbunnies
> > then that was off topic and people were, still are in my book,
> > entitled to protest. If you posted about Bon Jovi's latest single in
> > alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb but stuck to the correct format
> > alt.bitching.bon_jovis_new_single.is.is.is
> > etc
>
> True, newsgroups are organized topically. But you're purposefully
> being blind to the fact that their contents are populated by mere
> mortal humans in an unmoderated fashion, so they do not strictly stay
> faithfully on topic in every single post. Never have, and never will.
Sure. Things wander around. But there's natural meandering and then
> > The whole thing about "signal to noise" was that if you decided to
> > participate in alt.alan.baker.and.whatever.he.thinks.is.important then
> > you were supposed to talk about alan baker and whatever he thinks is
> > important. Which is why newsgroups have names that specify a topic. If
> > you wanted to post about Bon Jovi's latest single in alt.devilbunnies
> > then that was off topic and people were, still are in my book,
> > entitled to protest. If you posted about Bon Jovi's latest single in
> > alt.adjective.noun.verb.verb.verb but stuck to the correct format
> > alt.bitching.bon_jovis_new_single.is.is.is
> > etc
>
> True, newsgroups are organized topically. But you're purposefully
> being blind to the fact that their contents are populated by mere
> mortal humans in an unmoderated fashion, so they do not strictly stay
> faithfully on topic in every single post. Never have, and never will.
there's self-indulgence. I occasionally see people sending each other
messages on usenet that they could send via email.
>
> > then that would be OK. But post "dudes, it is totally bitching" and
> > that's not OK.
> > It's long been thus. Like I said, the problem started creeping in when
> > people who saw each other's posts in the same group all the time
> > started treating alt.alan.baker.narcissism as a social hangout because
> > they saw the same names there all the time and thought it was about
> > them and not the topic.
>
> Sorry, but even if you were to create a personal hero worship group,
> it too would go off-topic.
>
> > You might argue that that's democracy or the way things go, but that
> > doesn't make it invalid to point out that that's not what the group is
> > meant to be about.
>
> No, all you're pointing out is that there's always going to be
> stronger (vs weaker) personalities in newsgroups which will tend to be
> more dominant...which doesn't mean that these group members will force
> everything to go off-topic.
It depends on the extent to which they start thinking that the group
> > then that would be OK. But post "dudes, it is totally bitching" and
> > that's not OK.
> > It's long been thus. Like I said, the problem started creeping in when
> > people who saw each other's posts in the same group all the time
> > started treating alt.alan.baker.narcissism as a social hangout because
> > they saw the same names there all the time and thought it was about
> > them and not the topic.
>
> Sorry, but even if you were to create a personal hero worship group,
> it too would go off-topic.
>
> > You might argue that that's democracy or the way things go, but that
> > doesn't make it invalid to point out that that's not what the group is
> > meant to be about.
>
> No, all you're pointing out is that there's always going to be
> stronger (vs weaker) personalities in newsgroups which will tend to be
> more dominant...which doesn't mean that these group members will force
> everything to go off-topic.
is their personal club house. Which, is not what it's supposed to be
about.
>
> > The other part of this "social club" mentality is that a few start
> > thinking it's THEIR club and they lay down the de facto rules and they
> > set the tone and it becomes less welcoming to newbies. Again, some
> > groups had more of this than others.
>
> Yes, and there has been some newsgroups which have literally been
> destroyed for this very reason. I can name specific examples if
> you've not ever heard of any.
>
> > > > I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
> > > > a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
> > > > becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> > > And you've never asked any coworker any non-work questions? Sorry to
> > > hear that.
>
> > > All you're really doing is to acknowledge that the social connection
> > > amongst a group's participants can & does vary.
>
> > Acknowledge it? I've never disputed it. I've give an example of how
> > I've dealt with it in the past.
>
> Sorry, I missed the details on how you've 'dealt': was it ignore, or
> whine?
Read the thread. Oh, and you're being patronising. Is that some
> > The other part of this "social club" mentality is that a few start
> > thinking it's THEIR club and they lay down the de facto rules and they
> > set the tone and it becomes less welcoming to newbies. Again, some
> > groups had more of this than others.
>
> Yes, and there has been some newsgroups which have literally been
> destroyed for this very reason. I can name specific examples if
> you've not ever heard of any.
>
> > > > I think it happens because people start confusing a usenet group with
> > > > a social club where the same people hang out all the time. The group
> > > > becomes about the people and not about the topic.
>
> > > And you've never asked any coworker any non-work questions? Sorry to
> > > hear that.
>
> > > All you're really doing is to acknowledge that the social connection
> > > amongst a group's participants can & does vary.
>
> > Acknowledge it? I've never disputed it. I've give an example of how
> > I've dealt with it in the past.
>
> Sorry, I missed the details on how you've 'dealt': was it ignore, or
> whine?
privilege that old timers think they have?
> Granted, both do have their place...within reason/moderation.
ways. And, again, you're getting patronising and I'm starting to
wonder about straw men.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Granted, this had
> > > been less frequent on USENET's earliest vocationally-centric groups,
> > > but there's been avocational groups around just about as long, such as
> > > <rec.scuba>, which dates back to before DejaNews's archives, which
> > > peter out before 1990. So if you then accept taking the next step,
> > > you'll realize that some groups have had IRL meetings...usually on-
> > > topic even. For example, from <rec.scuba*>:
> > Sure. So what?
>
> > >http://www.huntzinger.com/dive/strokes/archive/NYseahorse-dive.txthtt...
>
> > > ...which all started because of a heated **on-topic** online
> > > discussion on the presence of tropicals (Sea Horses) in non-tropical
> > > waters (Jamaica Bay, NYC), which lead to a "Let Us Go Look":
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/a7750f131b...
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/21d200a95f...
>
> > > IIRC, there wasn't a "3rd Annual" because after 9/11, the New York
> > > City Police didn't like the idea of a couple of dozen scuba divers
> > > going into Jamaica Bay...too close to JFK Airport for their liking.
>
> > > In any case, my personal discussion group "Meet IRL" count is at 26,
> > > across 4 countries.
>
> > Whatever. Is this the "me old hand, you clueless newbie" thing?
>
> Yup. You're post-Eternal September. Bow to me :-)
Whatever that is.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Granted, this had
> > > been less frequent on USENET's earliest vocationally-centric groups,
> > > but there's been avocational groups around just about as long, such as
> > > <rec.scuba>, which dates back to before DejaNews's archives, which
> > > peter out before 1990. So if you then accept taking the next step,
> > > you'll realize that some groups have had IRL meetings...usually on-
> > > topic even. For example, from <rec.scuba*>:
> > Sure. So what?
>
> > >http://www.huntzinger.com/dive/strokes/archive/NYseahorse-dive.txthtt...
>
> > > ...which all started because of a heated **on-topic** online
> > > discussion on the presence of tropicals (Sea Horses) in non-tropical
> > > waters (Jamaica Bay, NYC), which lead to a "Let Us Go Look":
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/a7750f131b...
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/browse_frm/thread/21d200a95f...
>
> > > IIRC, there wasn't a "3rd Annual" because after 9/11, the New York
> > > City Police didn't like the idea of a couple of dozen scuba divers
> > > going into Jamaica Bay...too close to JFK Airport for their liking.
>
> > > In any case, my personal discussion group "Meet IRL" count is at 26,
> > > across 4 countries.
>
> > Whatever. Is this the "me old hand, you clueless newbie" thing?
>
> Yup. You're post-Eternal September. Bow to me :-)
>
> > > And USENET has declined with the rise of MySpace,
> > > Facebook and similar "Social Media" interfaces.
>
> > Where's this going, your honour?
>
> If you weren't naïve, you would already know...
Ah me! Another put down from one of my betters.
> > > And USENET has declined with the rise of MySpace,
> > > Facebook and similar "Social Media" interfaces.
>
> > Where's this going, your honour?
>
> If you weren't naïve, you would already know...
AC
May 31, 2013, 8:00:17 AM5/31/13
to
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article
> <c606c657-e81c-4294...@ua8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
> In article
> Dene <gds...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 29, 1:29 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <7e247b73-05fc-4807-991e-881ae3cc8...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> golfbum18 <golfbu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On May 28, 8:30 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>>>
>>>>> It was... ...fantastic.
>>>
>>>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>>>
>>>>> ;-)
>>>
>> On May 29, 1:29 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <7e247b73-05fc-4807-991e-881ae3cc8...@g9g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> golfbum18 <golfbu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On May 28, 8:30 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>> ...I did my first event in my own Formula Ford this past weekend.
>>>
>>>>> It was... ...fantastic.
>>>
>>>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_faLq9Ey5no>
>>>
>>>>> ;-)
>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alan Baker
>>>>> Vancouver, British Columbia
>>>>> "If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
>>>>> to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
>>>>> sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
>>>
>>>>> Alan Baker
>>>>> Vancouver, British Columbia
>>>>> "If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
>>>>> to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
>>>>> sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
>>>
>>>> Did you expect anything else from this post and your you tubing? Might
>>>> as well have come into the group this morning with a big bull's eye t-
>>>> shirt on.
>>>
>>> I expected to let some folks who are friends of mine know how something
>>> I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
>>>
>>
>>>> as well have come into the group this morning with a big bull's eye t-
>>>> shirt on.
>>>
>>> I expected to let some folks who are friends of mine know how something
>>> I'm very excited to be doing... ...was going.
>>>
>>
>> Friends? Name two.
>
> In RSG alone:
>
> Scott Newell
> Bob Cotter
> Tex
>
I'd never use the word "friend" on the internet, let alone usenet, but I
>
> In RSG alone:
>
> Scott Newell
> Bob Cotter
> Tex
>
do enjoy reading of your experiences. In that context, add me.
--
AC
Bobster
May 31, 2013, 8:02:58 AM5/31/13
to
> ...and as I suspected, when looking at RASF1's archives, for the 14
> year period of 1981-1994, 96% of your search was empty of *any* posts,
> there's only six (6) months in 1994 which contained any posts to
> search...well, except for pedantically THREE literal posts in November
> 1992, 66% of which were marked OT.
>
> Ironically, of those three posts from Nov 1992, Google search missed,
> because their subject lines were:
>
> "WAY OT:Madonna's house is burguled in London, if only she had a gun"
> "Improvements to Mtl Circuit" (body missing from archives)
> "Very OT - ISP Rant"
Ah! I see the error of my ways. My search was checking BODIES not
> year period of 1981-1994, 96% of your search was empty of *any* posts,
> there's only six (6) months in 1994 which contained any posts to
> search...well, except for pedantically THREE literal posts in November
> 1992, 66% of which were marked OT.
>
> Ironically, of those three posts from Nov 1992, Google search missed,
> because their subject lines were:
>
> "WAY OT:Madonna's house is burguled in London, if only she had a gun"
> "Improvements to Mtl Circuit" (body missing from archives)
> "Very OT - ISP Rant"
SUBJECTS.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages