Amazing
Just zis Guy, you know?
by my recent bike crash. It has 73 days of accidental damage warranty left
to run. The tech said that he would arrange to have it tested, component by
component, in the lab, so that if any part was damaged in a way that was not
immediately obvious, it would be replaced before the warranty ran out. And I
already have a replacement, so I will get a fully reconditioned D630 as a
spare. Nice!
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/
The usenet price promise: all opinions offered in newsgroups are guaranteed
to be worth the price paid.
Jim A
> I called Dell today about my laptop that was rendered banananananana shaped
> by my recent bike crash. It has 73 days of accidental damage warranty left
> to run. The tech said that he would arrange to have it tested, component by
> component, in the lab, so that if any part was damaged in a way that was not
> immediately obvious, it would be replaced before the warranty ran out. And I
> already have a replacement, so I will get a fully reconditioned D630 as a
> spare. Nice!
>
> Guy
Excellent! I don't think I've heard of accidental damage warranty
before - is that something you get as standard?
--
www.slowbicyclemovement.org - enjoy the ride
Just zis Guy, you know?
No, it's only available as an option when new - and it's ferrrociously
expensive, as our Caledonian cousins would have it. But jbex payeth and jbex
hath the zbarl.
Jim A
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 22:23:08 +0100, Jim A<j...@averyjim.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 07/15/2010 10:04 PM, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>> I called Dell today about my laptop that was rendered banananananana shaped
>>> by my recent bike crash. It has 73 days of accidental damage warranty left
>>> to run. The tech said that he would arrange to have it tested, component by
>>> component, in the lab, so that if any part was damaged in a way that was not
>>> immediately obvious, it would be replaced before the warranty ran out. And I
>>> already have a replacement, so I will get a fully reconditioned D630 as a
>>> spare. Nice!
>>>
>>> Guy
>>
>> Excellent! I don't think I've heard of accidental damage warranty
>> before - is that something you get as standard?
>
> No, it's only available as an option when new - and it's ferrrociously
> expensive, as our Caledonian cousins would have it. But jbex payeth and jbex
> hath the zbarl.
>
> Guy
OIC I don't think I'll be forking out for that on my next laptop at home
then!
My laptop at work refuses to die despite my ministrations (carrying it
around on the back of a bicycle I hoped would do the trick).
bobharvey
> My laptop at work refuses to die despite my ministrations (carrying it
> around on the back of a bicycle I hoped would do the trick).
$MEGACORP issued us a bunch of flatpots molished by shwvghf. We have
now had quite a lot of them rendered useless by someone nearby using a
Motorola UHF walkie talkie. The first press of the transmit button
and the graphics adaptor dies irreveocably. Rumour has it that the
manufacturers are not accepting warranty claims after the first half
dozen, calling it 'abuse'.
Sunny Bard
> the graphics adaptor dies irreveocably.
Hmmm, no afterlife for flatpots then?
Catman
I would *love* to see that happen.
--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS GT 3.2 V6
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
bobharvey
> >> My laptop at work refuses to die despite my ministrations (carrying it
> >> around on the back of a bicycle I hoped would do the trick).
>
> > $MEGACORP issued us a bunch of flatpots molished by shwvghf. We have
> > now had quite a lot of them rendered useless by someone nearby using a
> > Motorola UHF walkie talkie. The first press of the transmit button
> > and the graphics adaptor dies irreveocably. Rumour has it that the
> > manufacturers are not accepting warranty claims after the first half
> > dozen, calling it 'abuse'.
>
> I would *love* to see that happen.
It's happened to me twice. There's not much to see, certainly
afterwards. Oddly, the backlight goes out a few seconds later,
probably some status bit switching it off. The most amusing bit is
trying to persuade technical support that plugging a VGA screen into
the side is not a fix. FSVO 'amusing'.
soup
Proof that there is no silicon heaven.
Andrew Marshall
<cat...@rustcuore-sportivo.co.uk> writes
>bobharvey wrote:
>> On 16 July, 07:54, Jim A <j...@averyjim.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>> My laptop at work refuses to die despite my ministrations (carrying it
>>> around on the back of a bicycle I hoped would do the trick).
>> $MEGACORP issued us a bunch of flatpots molished by shwvghf. We
>>have
>> now had quite a lot of them rendered useless by someone nearby using a
>> Motorola UHF walkie talkie. The first press of the transmit button
>> and the graphics adaptor dies irreveocably. Rumour has it that the
>> manufacturers are not accepting warranty claims after the first half
>> dozen, calling it 'abuse'.
>I would *love* to see that happen.
MTAAW; I'd like to try it with my collection of UHF, VHF, and HF
handhelds. I'd say that someone was a bit slack with the EMC grfgvat for
that model of floptap, and that a case could be made that the it might
not comply with the Rheb electromagnetic compatibility roolz.
--
Regards,
Andrew Marshall, G8BUR, M0MAA.
Unsolicited advertising matter unwelcome. Offenders may be blacklisted.
Catman
But where would all the calculators go?
S K Patch.
sportivo.co.uk says...
> > Proof that there is no silicon heaven.
>
> But where would all the calculators go?
>
--
S K Patch - everyone needs escape.
George Peters
guy.c...@spamcop.net says...
>
> I called Dell today about my laptop that was rendered banananananana shaped
> by my recent bike crash. It has 73 days of accidental damage warranty left
> to run. The tech said that he would arrange to have it tested, component by
> component, in the lab, so that if any part was damaged in a way that was not
> immediately obvious, it would be replaced before the warranty ran out. And I
> already have a replacement, so I will get a fully reconditioned D630 as a
> spare. Nice!
Yeah. Nice that other Dell customers ultimately have to pay for your
constant belligerence towards motorists both on and off the roads.
Knowing all that I do about you, I'm pretty certain that you were in
some way more difficult towards the driver in question than you needed
to be. You just have to keep reminding people that you think they
should be feeling guilty for getting behind the wheel, despite you
knowing nothing about their individual circumstances, and despite them
having every right to do what they're doing. They don't care what you
think, but you have to force your opinions on them anyway. You have to
be as obstructive, uncooperative and rude as possible towards *all*
drivers, and of course you never, ever thank them no matter how nice
they are to you. They "shouldn't be driving" so you're going to be a
bastard towards them, end of.
And like with the shit-wallowing that you keep doing on usenet, you'll
keep trying to make life difficult for drivers again and again, no
matter how close you come to a serious collision. You won't stop
because that would be a sign of weakness and you'd have "conceded".
Much better to show that no-one pushes you about by carrying on picking
fights, and if you and others suffer because of that then it's a price
worth paying. You may get covered in shit, and you may receive injuries
in road traffic collisions, but at least you're refusing to give a
millimetre no matter what, something that you clearly pride yourself on
a great deal. As Ian Smith says, you *never* admit defeat no matter how
beaten you are.
Talking of which: Did you post as Lou Knee? DID YOU POST AS LOU KNEE?
Rusty Hinge
Just zis Guy, you know?
Funny how all these one-off drive-by trolls share the same ISP as the Guy
Cuthbertson / Nuxx Bar individual, isn't it?
Esra Sdrawkcab
<guy.c...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 21:26:33 +0100, Rusty Hinge
> <rusty...@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> George Peters wrote:
>>> In article <j6tu3693i10v9dof7...@4ax.com>,
>>
>> Something sad
>> Plonk.
>
> Funny how all these one-off drive-by trolls share the same ISP as the Guy
> Cuthbertson / Nuxx Bar individual, isn't it?
> Guy
Ah. One of your "friends"
Why do you do keep playing their game. (rhetorical)
--
Nuns! Nuns! Reverse
Just zis Guy, you know?
wrote:
>Ah. One of your "friends"
>Why do you do keep playing their game. (rhetorical)
I don't. I can't remember the last time I responded to that particular
person, I suspect it was a year or more ago. That's the one who took to
phoning me in the small hours and so on, not a sane individual.
Rusty Hinge
> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 21:26:33 +0100, Rusty Hinge
> <rusty...@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> George Peters wrote:
>>> In article <j6tu3693i10v9dof7...@4ax.com>,
>> Something sad
>> Plonk.
>
> Funny how all these one-off drive-by trolls share the same ISP as the Guy
> Cuthbertson / Nuxx Bar individual, isn't it?
It hadn't escaped me.
--
Rusty
Frank Erskine
wrote:
>Why do you do keep playing their game. (rhetorical)
IRTA:- "heretical".
--
Frank Erskine
Guy Cuthbertson
guy.c...@spamcop.net says...
>
> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:43:44 +0100, "Esra Sdrawkcab" <ad...@127.0.0.1>
> wrote:
>
> >Ah. One of your "friends"
> >Why do you do keep playing their game. (rhetorical)
>
> I don't. I can't remember the last time I responded to that particular
> person, I suspect it was a year or more ago.
You may think that's true but I'm afraid it isn't, and anyway making
inflammatory/libellous remarks about someone still counts as stirring it
and wallowing in shit even if it's not in direct reply to them. As you
know perfectly well. Particularly unacceptable is making your
unpleasant comments in URCM, in the knowledge that your post will be
approved but any rebuttal won't. No wonder you don't want the
"moderation" to change.
Why do you think it's you who has all these "friends" BTW? You can't
seriously think it's just coincidence?
> That's the one who took to
> phoning me in the small hours and so on, not a sane individual.
You have no evidence of me making any phone calls, and you're the one
who by your own admission has been to the doctor and got medication for
your mental problems. But you've never let the truth get in the way
before so why start now?
I wonder how your legion of sycophants manage to rationalise away your
refusal to say whether you posted as Lou Knee? That saga shows two key
things about you: that you are deceitful, and that you will do
*anything* to get out of admitting fault or conceding defeat.
Guy King = SkipWeasel
Guy Chapman = SHITWEEVIL
Catman
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Guy Cuthbertson) wrote in
> <MPG.26adcb28...@news.zen.co.uk>::
>
>> I wonder how your legion of sycophants manage to rationalise away your
>> refusal to say whether you posted as Lou Knee?
>
> UKRM dispute keep it there. Because, frankly, we in the shed don't GAF.
> When weighing the balance of possibilities, I note that it's *you*
> that's wandered in here spreading unpleasantness.
>
> Oh, and *PLONK*.
Nuffink to do with URKM.
Richard Robinson
> Znep wrote:
>> In uk.rec.sheds, (Guy Cuthbertson) wrote in
>> <MPG.26adcb28...@news.zen.co.uk>::
>>
>>> I wonder how your legion of sycophants manage to rationalise away your
>>> refusal to say whether you posted as Lou Knee?
>>
>> I don't like to intrude on private grief and all that- but if this is a
>> UKRM dispute keep it there. Because, frankly, we in the shed don't GAF.
>> When weighing the balance of possibilities, I note that it's *you*
>> that's wandered in here spreading unpleasantness.
>>
>> Oh, and *PLONK*.
>
> Nuffink to do with URKM.
Certainly nothing to do with the shed.
--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem
My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html
JonG
> Funny how all these one-off drive-by trolls share the same ISP as the Guy
> Cuthbertson / Nuxx Bar individual, isn't it?
>
Having been reading some of the Gillian McPoo stuff again in the last
week, I was struck by how so many of the accusations flung by her and
her woo-merchant ilk are about precisely the behaviour they are
themselves displaying -put me in mind of a budging squawking and pecking
at its reflection in a mirror.
It appears that the behavioural trait is not confined to those whose sad
obsessions and persecutory delusions revolve around health-related issues.
--
JonG
I went to the polling station, but the only option
given was to vote for one or other of the politicians.
Richard Robinson
>
> Having been reading some of the Gillian McPoo stuff again in the last
> week, I was struck by how so many of the accusations flung by her and
> her woo-merchant ilk are about precisely the behaviour they are
> themselves displaying -put me in mind of a budging squawking and pecking
> at its reflection in a mirror.
Good image, ta.
> It appears that the behavioural trait is not confined to those whose sad
> obsessions and persecutory delusions revolve around health-related issues.
Well, no. "Projection", I think they call it ?
Catman
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Catman) wrote in
> <i21434$ttr$1...@news.eternal-september.org>::
>
>> Znep wrote:
>>> In uk.rec.sheds, (Guy Cuthbertson) wrote in
>>> <MPG.26adcb28...@news.zen.co.uk>::
>>>
>>>> I wonder how your legion of sycophants manage to rationalise away your
>>>> refusal to say whether you posted as Lou Knee?
>>> I don't like to intrude on private grief and all that- but if this is a
>>> UKRM dispute keep it there. Because, frankly, we in the shed don't GAF.
>>> When weighing the balance of possibilities, I note that it's *you*
>>> that's wandered in here spreading unpleasantness.
>>>
>>> Oh, and *PLONK*.
>> Nuffink to do with URKM.
>
> about.
Sounds like a couple of lonely people that are mistaking usenet for real
life, to me.
Sunny Bard
> So what *is* it to do with?
URC and/or URCM and UNN*
> It's certainly nowt that the Shed cares about.
yet still it rumbles on.
S K Patch.
nospamformetodayplease.lodge.org.uk says...
> Having been reading some of the Gillian McPoo stuff again in the last
> week, I was struck by how so many of the accusations flung by her and
> her woo-merchant ilk are about precisely the behaviour they are
> themselves displaying -put me in mind of a budging squawking and pecking
> at its reflection in a mirror.
Oh, well, if you want to see a bucket-load of that, try reading the
comments in Why People Laugh At Creationists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY
Rusty Hinge
> Oh, and *PLONK*.
<echo>
Much plonking of plonkers happening ATM
</echo>
--
Rusty
Just zis Guy, you know?
<cat...@rustcuore-sportivo.co.uk> wrote:
>Sounds like a couple of lonely people that are mistaking usenet for real
>life, to me.
No, just the one. The two sets of posting history will readily show
that.
bobharvey
> In article <4c443096$0$7801$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>, news@dentrassi-
> nospamformetodayplease.lodge.org.uk says...
>
> > Having been reading some of the Gillian McPoo stuff again in the last
> > week, I was struck by how so many of the accusations flung by her and
> > her woo-merchant ilk are about precisely the behaviour they are
> > themselves displaying -put me in mind of a budging squawking and pecking
> > at its reflection in a mirror.
>
> Oh, well, if you want to see a bucket-load of that, try reading the
> comments in Why People Laugh At Creationists.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY
Oh glod. I'm not sure I'd allow the protagonists on either side to
vote.
S K Patch.
@d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, robert...@my-deja.com says...
> > Oh, well, if you want to see a bucket-load of that, try reading the
> > comments in Why People Laugh At Creationists.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY
>
> Oh glod. I'm not sure I'd allow the protagonists on either side to
> vote.
I can see why he's cross, but he does get rather worked up.
Chapman's Blinkered Fan Club
nospamformetodayplease.lodge.org.uk says...
>
>
>
> > Funny how all these one-off drive-by trolls share the same ISP as the Guy
> > Cuthbertson / Nuxx Bar individual, isn't it?
> >
>
> Having been reading some of the Gillian McPoo stuff again in the last
> week, I was struck by how so many of the accusations flung by her and
> her woo-merchant ilk are about precisely the behaviour they are
> themselves displaying -put me in mind of a budging squawking and pecking
> at its reflection in a mirror.
Except that you are either unaware of, or choose to ignore, critical
details, as is so often the case with Chapman's apologists. Just in
case you're actually interested in the truth rather than mere wishful
thinking, "her woo-merchant ilk" keep mentioning Chapman's Lou Knee post
not because of the post itself per se, but because of the following:
- Chapman's deceit once he was caught out. He did his best to *imply*
that it wasn't him (pouring scorn on his accusers in the process)
without actually saying so, but he has refused point blank to answer the
question "Did you post as Lou Knee?" In other words, he made the post,
but he's too proud to admit it. However he can't lie because of "God",
so he just tries to deceive without lying instead (apparently God's OK
with that). This epitomises Chapman in so many ways: his deceit, his
absolute refusal to ever admit that he's wrong about anything, his
cynicism and contempt for others, his stubbornness, etc.
- He said he had killfiled the person who he made the Lou Knee post in
response to. Clearly he had done no such thing. Deceit again.
- It was so bloody hypocritical of him: getting on his high horse
repeatedly about nym-shifting this, trolling that, making out that he
was such a righteous good Christian while his opponents were lying
barbarians who were beneath him in every way. Yet he is as dishonest as
anyone. He will try every dirty trick in the book to get out of
"losing".
- It was yet another example of him stirring/wallowing in shit/"troll-
wrestling"/whatever you want to call it. When he acts hard done by,
like he's been so picked on by those horrible bullies and he's done his
best to avoid it, he conveniently forgets about posts like the Lou Knee
ones. His pathetic apologists conveniently forget that as well, of
course.
I genuinely don't think some of you Chapman-lovers realise just what a
shit he really is. It's no accident that there are people who have it
in for him, in particular, all over the Internet. You should wait until
you get into a debate with him where you *know* that you are correct,
and he also knows (or realises) that you are correct. He will try
anything and everything to avoid conceding. He is utterly infuriating.
There are *no* examples of JMS or Chapman's other critics being *so*
determined to never admit any kind of fault. JMS and pretty much anyone
else who had made that Lou Knee post would have long since admitted it.
Why hasn't Chapman? If it's "so unimportant" then why is he so
reluctant to tell the truth about it? It would be far, far easier for
him in the long run if he fessed up, but he won't, and I know that you
know that that's not reasonable behaviour, and demonstrates very bad
things about Chapman.
No doubt you'll show what a big man you are by saying "I didn't read
that", "Plonk", not replying at all or something equally big and tough,
but really you're just proving my point that Chapman's fan club simply
aren't interested in their idol being criticised, however accurate that
criticism is. There's no "Generally I support Chapman but he's been a
twat about not admitting to posting as Lou Knee", it's just 100%
"Chapman can do no wrong, end of story, and anyone who says otherwise is
a 'troll'". It's very sad.
Guy C
rich...@privacy.net says...
>
> JonG said:
> >
> > Having been reading some of the Gillian McPoo stuff again in the last
> > week, I was struck by how so many of the accusations flung by her and
> > her woo-merchant ilk are about precisely the behaviour they are
> > themselves displaying -put me in mind of a budging squawking and pecking
> > at its reflection in a mirror.
>
> Good image, ta.
You don't know anything about the situation either, do you? Nor do you
want to know. The usual mentality of the Chapman apologists. After
all, if they *did* know the full story then they wouldn't be his
apologists (except for the very few who were as bad as him).
The Adventures of Richard Robinson. (Sorry, it's just that when
someone's got a silly alliterative name, I like putting "The Adventures
of" in front of it...pathetic though it may seem, it gives me a giggle,
even now, and hey, laughter is the best medicine and all that. Hope you
don't mind. Thanks in advance for being OK with it.)
S K Patch.
guy.cut...@nothing.invalid says...
> Thanks in advance for being OK with it.
If we can tolerate Mike Corley, we can surely manage you.
Richard Robinson
>
> It's at moments like this that I cherish the fond belief that the shed
> still eschews explicit plonkings, serving no useful purpose as they do.
Thank you, Sir.
Ancipital
>
> It's at moments like this that I cherish the fond belief that the shed
> still eschews explicit plonkings, serving no useful purpose as they do.
>
It has happened, but it would take a special sort of prat, very
different from these budget trolls.
Richard Robinson
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Chapman's Blinkered Fan Club) wrote in
><MPG.26b002765...@news.zen.co.uk>::
>
>>I genuinely don't think some of you Chapman-lovers
>
> Chapman-lovers as Cuthbertson-apathists. Like any other shambling
> subpontine life-form that wanders in here looking to pick a fight, we
> disregard most of what you say. You wanna fight with Guy? Fine. Fight
> with Guy. We *don't care*.
>
> And when you start in on Richard as collateral damage, it's hardly going
> to endear you to us.
Thanks, but a silent killfiling makes less noise.
S K Patch.
385...@cleopatra.co.uk says...
> I know, but the sodding thing keeps coming back whenever I lop its head
> off.
Bindweed and ground-elder come to mind.
Richard Robinson
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>
>>Thanks, but a silent killfiling makes less noise.
>
> off.
I keep meaning to count the keystrokes. Maybe I'll unforget next time.
Equivalent to posting a single four-letter word, I think.
Ancipital
>> And when you start in on Richard as collateral damage, it's hardly going
>> to endear you to us.
>
> Thanks, but a silent killfiling makes less noise.
>
IRTA "silent knifing", but the principle holds.
Ancipital
> Znep said:
>> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>>
>>> Thanks, but a silent killfiling makes less noise.
>>
>> I know, but the sodding thing keeps coming back whenever I lop its head
>> off.
>
> I keep meaning to count the keystrokes. Maybe I'll unforget next time.
> Equivalent to posting a single four-letter word, I think.
>
NUNS
Richard Robinson
... makes for less mopping-up afterwards.
Kate XXXXXX
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:21:46 +0100, Znep
> <E-0C0013...@cleopatra.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I think you're missing the point, matey- we're not so much
>> Chapman-lovers as Cuthbertson-apathists. Like any other shambling
>> subpontine life-form that wanders in here looking to pick a fight, we
>> disregard most of what you say. You wanna fight with Guy? Fine. Fight
>> with Guy. We *don't care*.
>
> years and the novelty wore off even before he started taking it to
> other places (including off-net). This is not yer Mehran Basti type
> loony, this is altogether nastier.
>
> Guy
I though internet stalking was a crime?
--
Kate XXXXXX R.C.T.Q Madame Chef des Trolls
Lady Catherine, Wardrobe Mistress of the Chocolate Buttons
http://www.katedicey.co.uk
Click on Kate's Pages and explore!
Richard Robinson
> Ancipital <ancipitalISPERS...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Equivalent to posting a single four-letter word, I think.
>> >
>>
>> NUNS
>
SNUN
Richard Robinson
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:21:46 +0100, Znep
><E-0C0013...@cleopatra.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>I think you're missing the point, matey- we're not so much
>>Chapman-lovers as Cuthbertson-apathists. Like any other shambling
>>subpontine life-form that wanders in here looking to pick a fight, we
>>disregard most of what you say. You wanna fight with Guy? Fine. Fight
>>with Guy. We *don't care*.
>
> I rather wish he wouldn't actually - he's been doing it for over two
> years and the novelty wore off even before he started taking it to
> other places (including off-net). This is not yer Mehran Basti type
> loony, this is altogether nastier.
IRTA "the novelty wore off even before he started".
And, yes, it sounds unpleasant.
Esra Sdrawkcab
wrote:
> Ancipital <ancipitalISPERS...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Equivalent to posting a single four-letter word, I think.
>> >
>>
>> NUNS
>
> Reverse!
>
You called?
--
Nuns! Nuns! Reverse
Just zis Guy, you know?
<ka...@diceyhome.free-online.co.uk> wrote:
>On 21/07/2010 20:43, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:21:46 +0100, Znep
>> <E-0C0013...@cleopatra.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> I think you're missing the point, matey- we're not so much
>>> Chapman-lovers as Cuthbertson-apathists. Like any other shambling
>>> subpontine life-form that wanders in here looking to pick a fight, we
>>> disregard most of what you say. You wanna fight with Guy? Fine. Fight
>>> with Guy. We *don't care*.
>>
>> I rather wish he wouldn't actually - he's been doing it for over two
>> years and the novelty wore off even before he started taking it to
>> other places (including off-net). This is not yer Mehran Basti type
>> loony, this is altogether nastier.
>I though internet stalking was a crime?
It is. But please don't pursue that line of thought any further as I
can't comment on it.
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/
The usenet price promise: all opinions offered in newsgroups are guaranteed
to be worth the price paid.
Kate XXXXXX
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:35:51 +0100, Kate XXXXXX
> <ka...@diceyhome.free-online.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 21/07/2010 20:43, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:21:46 +0100, Znep
>>> <E-0C0013...@cleopatra.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think you're missing the point, matey- we're not so much
>>>> Chapman-lovers as Cuthbertson-apathists. Like any other shambling
>>>> subpontine life-form that wanders in here looking to pick a fight, we
>>>> disregard most of what you say. You wanna fight with Guy? Fine. Fight
>>>> with Guy. We *don't care*.
>>>
>>> I rather wish he wouldn't actually - he's been doing it for over two
>>> years and the novelty wore off even before he started taking it to
>>> other places (including off-net). This is not yer Mehran Basti type
>>> loony, this is altogether nastier.
>
>> I though internet stalking was a crime?
>
> It is. But please don't pursue that line of thought any further as I
> can't comment on it.
>
> Guy
"."
JonG
>>> If he thinks we're all going to (a) take his side, on his word or (b)
>>> spend our valuable time looking up the various clues and hints he's
>>> posted, he's delusional to the extent of at least 750 milliCorleys.
>> I can save you a small amount of time there, if you care (and I
>> wouldn't blame you for not caring):
>> <http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Nuxx_bar>.
>
> OIC. Let's revise that to 950 milliCorleys.
Quite an appropriate symbol, I suppose, the capital 'C', with the
implication that, like its lower-case equivalent, it can be approached
but not exceeded.
--
JonG
I went to the polling station, but the only option
given was to vote for one or other of the politicians.
JonG
> hey, laughter is the best medicine and all that.
Don't get too full of yourself. You've provided an occasional snigger,
no more, and I am sure that even that mild amusement would start wearing
very thin very quickly.
Richard Robinson
> Znep wrote:
>
>>>> If he thinks we're all going to (a) take his side, on his word or (b)
>>>> spend our valuable time looking up the various clues and hints he's
>>>> posted, he's delusional to the extent of at least 750 milliCorleys.
>>> I can save you a small amount of time there, if you care (and I
>>> wouldn't blame you for not caring):
>>> <http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Nuxx_bar>.
>>
>> OIC. Let's revise that to 950 milliCorleys.
>
> Quite an appropriate symbol, I suppose, the capital 'C', with the
> implication that, like its lower-case equivalent, it can be approached
> but not exceeded.
What would it represent ? The delusionality necessary in order to see one
extrafenestral orgasm ?
JonG
>>> OIC. Let's revise that to 950 milliCorleys.
>> Quite an appropriate symbol, I suppose, the capital 'C', with the
>> implication that, like its lower-case equivalent, it can be approached
>> but not exceeded.
>
> What would it represent ? The delusionality necessary in order to see one
> extrafenestral orgasm ?
>
>
Snigger.
I am reminded of an entry, several decafortnights ago, in the Guinness
Bwk of Records discussing feminine beauty. It tentatively suggested
that, in an attempt to quantify such, errr, attributes, the unit of the
Helen should be introduced, such that a face capable of launching one
ship [1] is defined as one milliHelen.
[1] Through attractiveness and inspiration, in this case, rather than
any resemblance to a champagne bottle.
Richard Robinson
> Richard Robinson wrote:
>
>>>> OIC. Let's revise that to 950 milliCorleys.
>>> Quite an appropriate symbol, I suppose, the capital 'C', with the
>>> implication that, like its lower-case equivalent, it can be approached
>>> but not exceeded.
>>
>> What would it represent ? The delusionality necessary in order to see one
>> extrafenestral orgasm ?
>
> Snigger.
>
> I am reminded of an entry, several decafortnights ago, in the Guinness
> Bwk of Records discussing feminine beauty. It tentatively suggested
> that, in an attempt to quantify such, errr, attributes, the unit of the
> Helen should be introduced, such that a face capable of launching one
> ship [1] is defined as one milliHelen.
Well, yes. I think that's the, er, launching pad for all of this.
> [1] Through attractiveness and inspiration, in this case, rather than
> any resemblance to a champagne bottle.
*loud* laughter.
Mr Cuthbertson
rich...@privacy.net says...
>
> Ancipital said:
> > On 21/07/2010 19:21, Richard Robinson wrote:
> >>> And when you start in on Richard as collateral damage, it's hardly going
> >>> to endear you to us.
> >>
> >> Thanks, but a silent killfiling makes less noise.
> >
> > IRTA "silent knifing", but the principle holds.
>
> ... makes for less mopping-up afterwards.
You're truly very funny, and also extremely clever...I mean anybody who
routinely ignores anyone who disagrees with them has got to be a Grade A
intellectual who's incredibly sophisticated, rather than simply an
insecure fuckwit who's afraid that he'll lose the argument if he engages
with his detractors. (You got that from Chapman didn't you? Another
gullible idiot who's decided to idolise one of the Internet's most
bitter, belligerent, deceitful car-haters....)
Why do you have a silly name anyway? I mean, with married women it's
understandable, but anyone who decides to call their kid Richard
Robinson isn't going to be the best parent, and so it would appear from
the amount (or otherwise) that you've learnt from your folks. (Oops,
sorry, someone else here told me that I wasn't allowed to have a go at
Richard...I do apologise but I didn't realise you were more important
than everyone else. Don't I know who you are? Well, actually I do: a
sad asshole in a diamond pringle. You do wear old man jumpers don't
you? Maybe you're not called Richard Robinson at all, and it was the
first silly Internet moniker you could think of...is your real name
Clive George, or maybe Jack Flatley?)
JonG
> You're truly very funny, and also extremely clever...I mean anybody who
> routinely ignores anyone who disagrees with them has got to be a Grade A
> intellectual who's incredibly sophisticated, rather than simply an
> insecure fuckwit who's afraid that he'll lose the argument if he engages
> with his detractors. (You got that from Chapman didn't you? Another
> gullible idiot who's decided to idolise one of the Internet's most
> bitter, belligerent, deceitful car-haters....)
Squawk squawk cheep cheep peck peck.
JonG
John Williamson
> In uk.rec.sheds, (JonG) wrote in
> <4c485f5e$0$15723$c3e...@news.astraweb.com>::
>> I am reminded of an entry, several decafortnights ago, in the Guinness
>> Bwk of Records discussing feminine beauty. It tentatively suggested
>> that, in an attempt to quantify such, errr, attributes, the unit of the
>> Helen should be introduced, such that a face capable of launching one
>> ship [1] is defined as one milliHelen.
>
Also in Wikip:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_humorous_units_of_measurement#Beauty:_Helen
But I'm sure we all knew about that reference already.
I've read that some others on the page were first found in ye Shedde.
--
Tciao for Now!
John.
Dave Larrington
JonG <ne...@dentrassi-nospamformetodayplease.lodge.org.uk> tweaked the
Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> I am reminded of an entry, several decafortnights ago, in the Guinness
> Bwk of Records discussing feminine beauty. It tentatively suggested
> that, in an attempt to quantify such, errr, attributes, the unit of
> the Helen should be introduced, such that a face capable of launching
> one ship [1] is defined as one milliHelen.
>
> [1] Through attractiveness and inspiration, in this case, rather than
> any resemblance to a champagne bottle.
Jack de Manio once said "Glenda Jackson has a face to launch a thousand
dredgers."
--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Kinder surprise! What's the surprise? Your children are now dead.
Just zis Guy, you know?
<ne...@legslarry.org.uk> wrote:
>In news:4c485f5e$0$15723$c3e...@news.astraweb.com,
>JonG <ne...@dentrassi-nospamformetodayplease.lodge.org.uk> tweaked the
>Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>
>> I am reminded of an entry, several decafortnights ago, in the Guinness
>> Bwk of Records discussing feminine beauty. It tentatively suggested
>> that, in an attempt to quantify such, errr, attributes, the unit of
>> the Helen should be introduced, such that a face capable of launching
>> one ship [1] is defined as one milliHelen.
>>
>> [1] Through attractiveness and inspiration, in this case, rather than
>> any resemblance to a champagne bottle.
>
>Jack de Manio once said "Glenda Jackson has a face to launch a thousand
>dredgers."
Precisely.
JonG
> Znep wrote:
>> In uk.rec.sheds, (JonG) wrote in
>> <4c485f5e$0$15723$c3e...@news.astraweb.com>::
>>> I am reminded of an entry, several decafortnights ago, in the
>>> Guinness Bwk of Records discussing feminine beauty. It tentatively
>>> suggested that, in an attempt to quantify such, errr, attributes, the
>>> unit of the Helen should be introduced, such that a face capable of
>>> launching one ship [1] is defined as one milliHelen.
>>
>> That's in one of my sig files.
>
> Also in Wikip:-
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_humorous_units_of_measurement#Beauty:_Helen
>
>
> But I'm sure we all knew about that reference already.
>
Mild chagrin. A reminder that there is no such thing as an obscure topic
in the Shed. I certainly can't unforget seeing the milliHelen mentioned
anywhere else.
If I should ever find myself stranded in a desert, rather than trying to
walk out, I would sit down in the sand and start writing about the most
obscure song from the most obscure album from the most obscure band I
could think of, comfortable that before long, one or two more Sheddi
would soon be along to mention that they had been listening to it ther
week before, and discuss the relative merits of that album compared to
the band's previous and subsequent output.
Richard Robinson
>
> If I should ever find myself stranded in a desert, rather than trying to
> walk out, I would sit down in the sand and start writing about the most
> obscure song from the most obscure album from the most obscure band I
> could think of, comfortable that before long, one or two more Sheddi
> would soon be along to mention that they had been listening to it ther
> week before, and discuss the relative merits of that album compared to
> the band's previous and subsequent output.
*laughter*. One for a FAQ.
Desert Island Discs, indeed !
bobharvey
wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_humorous_units_of_measurement#Be...
>
> But I'm sure we all knew about that reference already.
Or, indeed, contributed to it.
> I've read that some others on the page were first found in ye Shedde.
I note, with some curiosity, that they want a citation for the
Stobart. Ho Hum. How about 'Trucker's: the weekly journal of artci
driving, vol 31, issue 7, 7-jan-1988, editorial ' Where have all the
tea caravans gone', ed. Stod Martinmass'
®óñ© © ²°¹°
<ne...@dentrassi-nospamformetodayplease.lodge.org.uk> wrote:
>
>If I should ever find myself stranded in a desert, rather than trying to
>walk out, I would sit down in the sand and start writing about the most
>obscure song from the most obscure album from the most obscure band I
>could think of, comfortable that before long, one or two more Sheddi
>would soon be along to mention that they had been listening to it ther
>week before,
If you should be stranded in the desert, remember that a sheet of
sandpaper makes a good map
--
(¯`·. ®óñ© © ²°¹° .·´¯)
JonG
>> If I should ever find myself stranded in a desert, rather than trying to
>> walk out, I would sit down in the sand and start writing about the most
>> obscure song from the most obscure album from the most obscure band I
>> could think of, comfortable that before long, one or two more Sheddi
>> would soon be along to mention that they had been listening to it ther
>> week before,
>
> If you should be stranded in the desert, remember that a sheet of
> sandpaper makes a good map
....but determining grid north may be problematic.
bobharvey
> If you should be stranded in the desert, remember that a sheet of
> sandpaper makes a good map
but very poor toilet paper
nev young
> ®óñ© © ²°¹° wrote:
>
>>> If I should ever find myself stranded in a desert, rather than trying
>>> to walk out, I would sit down in the sand and start writing about the
>>> most obscure song from the most obscure album from the most obscure
>>> band I could think of, comfortable that before long, one or two more
>>> Sheddi would soon be along to mention that they had been listening to
>>> it ther week before,
>>
>> If you should be stranded in the desert, remember that a sheet of
>> sandpaper makes a good map
>
> ....but determining grid north may be problematic.
>
The map works any way up.
--
nev
Rusty Hinge
> On 20/07/2010 22:04, Sn!pe wrote:
>
>>
>> It's at moments like this that I cherish the fond belief that the shed
>> still eschews explicit plonkings, serving no useful purpose as they do.
>>
>
> It has happened, but it would take a special sort of prat, very
> different from these budget trolls.
I'm using them to navigate the rather naff killfile in Thunderbum.
--
Rusty
Rusty Hinge
> In uk.rec.sheds, (Richard Robinson) wrote in
> <lOKdnZNmq7w2p9rR...@brightview.co.uk>::
>
>> Znep said:
>>> In uk.rec.sheds, (Chapman's Blinkered Fan Club) wrote in
>>> <MPG.26b002765...@news.zen.co.uk>::
>>>
>>>> I genuinely don't think some of you Chapman-lovers
>>> Chapman-lovers as Cuthbertson-apathists. Like any other shambling
>>> subpontine life-form that wanders in here looking to pick a fight, we
>>> disregard most of what you say. You wanna fight with Guy? Fine. Fight
>>> with Guy. We *don't care*.
>>>
>>> to endear you to us.
>> Thanks, but a silent killfiling makes less noise.
>
> off.
That's the promble with oozystuff.
Custard begets custardson, ad infinitum.
You have sweet custardso, runny custardson, and of course, thick
custardson that sticks like fubc to a blanket.
--
Rusty
Rusty Hinge
> In article <4khe46lojj5spikqs...@4ax.com>, E-0C001302-
> 385...@cleopatra.co.uk says...
>> I know, but the sodding thing keeps coming back whenever I lop its head
>> off.
>
Bindweed isn't a lot of hfr, even though it is (IIRC) Britains only
member of the yam family.
Ground elder, OTOH, makes a pleasant green vegetabubble or pot herb.
--
Rusty
Rusty Hinge
> NUNS
Always revere NUNS
--
Rusty
Rusty Hinge
> I rather wish he wouldn't actually - he's been doing it for over two
> years and the novelty wore off even before he started taking it to
> other places (including off-net). This is not yer Mehran Basti type
> loony, this is altogether nastier.
Basti was fun. Basti was so full of himself that he must have been going
round in ever-decreasing circles at very high rpm.
--
Rusty
Rusty Hinge
> Richard Robinson wrote:
>
>>>> OIC. Let's revise that to 950 milliCorleys.
>>> Quite an appropriate symbol, I suppose, the capital 'C', with the
>>> implication that, like its lower-case equivalent, it can be
>>> approached but not exceeded.
>>
>> What would it represent ? The delusionality necessary in order to see
>> one
>> extrafenestral orgasm ?
>>
>>
>
> Snigger.
>
> I am reminded of an entry, several decafortnights ago, in the Guinness
> Bwk of Records discussing feminine beauty. It tentatively suggested
> that, in an attempt to quantify such, errr, attributes, the unit of the
> Helen should be introduced, such that a face capable of launching one
> ship [1] is defined as one milliHelen.
>
> [1] Through attractiveness and inspiration, in this case, rather than
> any resemblance to a champagne bottle.
Subject of a nanuk dote by the late lamented Frank Muir.
--
Rusty
Richard Robinson
>
> Custard begets custardson, ad infinitum.
>
> You have sweet custardso, runny custardson, and of course, thick
> custardson that sticks like fubc to a blanket.
IRTA Cuthbert.
Ancipital
> Ancipital wrote:
>
>> NUNS
>
> Always revere NUNS
>
Confronted by nuns, as a teenager, I pretended to be French. True, oddly.
Geoff Berrow
Would that work with Jehovah's Witnesses?
--
Geoff Berrow
[formerly known as Geoff(Blade-Runner)]
Ancipital
>> Confronted by nuns, as a teenager, I pretended to be French. True, oddly.
>
> Would that work with Jehovah's Witnesses?
I purchased a copy of Aelister Crowley's 777 in a sale, which had a very
striking woodcut as a cover. That was left by the door, to have
clutched in my hand as though I was in the middle of something. I also
practised my Grin. That did quite well.
Eric
My parents had a different approach. They kept them talking for hours,
finding and questioning the logical holes in everything the JWs said,
then having a great laugh about it afterwards. After a year or two the
supply of JWs suddenly and mysteriously dried up.
Eric
Richard Robinson
>
> Aelister Crowley's 777
Mumbo-jet ?
Ancipital
> Ancipital said:
>>
>> Aelister Crowley's 777
>
> Mumbo-jet ?
>
Pretty much, it seemed to be mostly tedious numerology and similar- but
the cover scared the godsquadders.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
A copy of the companion volume 666 would probably have been
even more effective.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
S K Patch.
ancipitalISPERS...@hotmail.com says...
> > Would that work with Jehovah's Witnesses?
>
> I purchased a copy of Aelister Crowley's 777 in a sale, which had a very
> striking woodcut as a cover. That was left by the door, to have
> clutched in my hand as though I was in the middle of something. I also
> practised my Grin. That did quite well.
A friend and I invited them in. Once. We thought we could have a wet
afternoon's fun with them. It was very disappointing - you could lead
them along a string of well thought-out arguments and as they approached
the precipice they'd just say "Ah, but our faith tells us [$credulous].
--
S K Patch - everyone needs escape.