High speed mobile broadband?
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Rowland McDonnell on 2 Jul 2010 14:28 The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > <shrug> Quite - one of the reasons this newsgroup has such a nasty > > > > atmosphere is your filthy behaviour. > > > > > > > > The above post is a prime example of one of your sneering snide posts > > > > designed to ensure that this newsgroup remains with a bad atmosphere. > > > > > > > > You're the turd in the corner, ensuring that the place always smells > > > > bad. > > > > > > Oh dear, oh dear. > > > > Tell me, do you ever have anything worthwhile to add to this newsgroup? > > > > And do you really lack the self-control to stop yourself making posts > > intended to ruin the usefulness of this newsgroup? > > > > Or is it just malice on your part? > > > > Do tell - I'm sure lots of people would like an insight into your mental > > pathology. > > Have you finished yet, or are you going to keep ranting at innocent > posts? Do you /ever/ have anything on-topic to say? Any comments that are not meant to be upsetting so as to wind up some poor sod? Anything that's not grotesquely hypocritical like your comment above - hypocritical, because your many posts to me over the last day have all been nothing but ranting at a perfectly straightforward factual explanation. Of course you're unable to address the points I raise - all you can do is say that I'm wrong. It's a problem you've got, you know that? The way you are unable to admit that I might possibly be correct about anything. I really don't understand why you keep posting these personal comments - why not stick to the technical issues this newsgroup is for? owland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: The Older Gentleman on 2 Jul 2010 18:07 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > Why do you have to spend so much time making these personal comments? One could ask you the same question. And mine weren't personal: they were general, as in general rule, which I and others have always found works best. Get it wrong: admit it. The world moves on. -- BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes! Try Googling before asking a damn silly question. chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: John DoH on 2 Jul 2010 19:00 In article <1jl0ob3.1o31pczv5w7luN%real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid>, real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: > The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > Oh, he was yammering on about a book called A TransAtlantic Tunnel, > > > > Hurrah! Early sort of steampunk thing. > > > > > > <pained> Not at all. > > > > > > Nothing remotely like steampunk, which is a modern fashion thing. > > > > Wrong again. It's a modern term, agreed, which (I think) postdates ATTH, > > but it's not just about fashion. > > <sigh> Of course TOG, of course. Whatever Rowland says, you have to > contradict, of course you do. > > It's a problem you've got, you know that? The way you are unable to > admit that I might possibly be correct about anything. > > Of course I'm perfectly correct - I knew more about SF when I was eight > years old that you know now. Don't bother rejecting that claim - I read > voraciously when I was young and we all know that you're not interested > in finding out the truth, only interested in winding me up to get a rise > out of me. > > It's strange behaviour you exhibit - I wonder if you're capable of > behaving in a fashion that's not anti-social? > > > > > > > It's conventional SF alternative history - nothing genre about it beyond > > > that classification. > > > > No? Coaldust-fired flying boats? > > <deeply puzzled> Yes, that's conventional SF alternative history, like > I said. > > Coal-dust fired internal combustion engines are not a SF invention: they > are a real-life innovation. > > Flying boats run from lower calorie fuel sources than coal dust are also > real. > > To replace a petrol-powered IC engine to power the flying boat you have > with a developed version of the prototype coal dust fired IC engines > that exist is not much of a leap. > > > Just admit you were wrong - it's always the easiest and best solution on > > Usenet, and it saves having people point and laugh as you tie yourself > > in knots trying to justify what you posted as "right". > > Yes, of course, you do have to say that, you are compelled to contradict > me because you know it's a good way to get a rise out of me. > > You really should see someone about your obsessive compulsion to > misbehave on Usenet, you know. This newsgroup is for technical > discussion, as you know - and you're just behaving like a tosser because > you like winding me up and watching me howl in pain. > > <shrug> But of course you have to, don't you? I'd love to understand > what sickness of mind causes this behaviour in you. You can't understand your own sickness of the mind, what chance do you have with others? Just like your achievements, none :-))) > > Rowland. -- "Telling someone to kill themselves is not harmful: it's merely me expressing an opinion. You try to drive people to suicide - that's evil. My behaviour is perfectly okay; your behaviour is evil - plain and simple evil." Rowland McDonnell - 9th. Mar. 2009
From: Rowland McDonnell on 2 Jul 2010 19:56
The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > Why do you have to spend so much time making these personal comments? > > One could ask you the same question. And mine weren't personal: they > were general, as in general rule, which I and others have always found > works best. > > Get it wrong: admit it. The world moves on. Strange - no matter what I say, he reverts to the same message. Does anyone else understand his pathology? He doesn't seem able to understand that his word is not an indicator of the invalidity of a concept. You need to take a good look at your behaviour and try to understand where you are going wrong. You see, The Older, you're mistaken in your ideas at this point. You keeping telling me that I'm wrong - but you've made the cognitive error of failing to actually address any of the actual points I've actually made. All you're doing is carrying on like a three year old who's refusing to listen and just yelling because he's having a strop and doesn't want to accept the truth. Do you understand the problem with your behaviour? You need to try to understand what you have got wrong, and also try to understand just what it is you're doing wrong with your posts in response to me. And then, maybe, you'll be able to correct your behaviour. It'd be worth if if you could, you know. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking |