On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
In article , The Real Bev
wrote:

On 01/27/2016 05:07 PM, Orange wrote:
"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 11:52 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2016-01-27, The Real Bev wrote:
On 01/26/2016 06:11 AM, chris wrote:
On 22/01/2016 22:47, The Real Bev wrote:
This **** is why usenet has so few viable groups left. Do you really
want to kill this one too?

That's what killfiles are for. You never need to hear from the
trolls/idiots/flamers again.

Of course. It's also possible to just not look at things. But when the
overwhelming majority of posts are pure trash, reasonable people just
stop reading. I'm tougher than most, I don't give up easily, and I
know how useless taking a group moderated can be. If people would just
stop responding to the ****heads (clearly an impossibility, as history
shows) the problem would disappear; unfortunately, it's more likely
that the group disappears.

Of the groups into which this is x-posted, I only read
comp.mobile.android. I really hope that this crap doesn't kill that
group.

People have been trying and failing to kill Usenet for a long, long
time. I wouldn't worry about it.

The groups that I reallly liked and was involved with are all dead.
Perhaps people just find facebook easier to deal with. Or more pleasant.
Or something.

What has actually happened is that almost no one has even
heard of usenet, so inevitably it fades away as people die off
or stop using it.

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia, IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year olds
(either physically or mentally).

The benefit of proper Usenet software or good forum software is that
you can killfile such imbeciles and ignore them.

The problem with forums is the low density of text and ****-poor indexing.

--
Cheers, Bev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I would be most content if my children grew up to be the kind of people
who think decorating consists mostly of building enough bookshelves."
-- Anna Quindlen

"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 08:28 PM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 05:07 PM, Orange wrote:
"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 11:52 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2016-01-27, The Real Bev wrote:
On 01/26/2016 06:11 AM, chris wrote:
On 22/01/2016 22:47, The Real Bev wrote:
This **** is why usenet has so few viable groups left. Do you
really
want to kill this one too?

That's what killfiles are for. You never need to hear from the
trolls/idiots/flamers again.

Of course. It's also possible to just not look at things. But when
the
overwhelming majority of posts are pure trash, reasonable people
just
stop reading. I'm tougher than most, I don't give up easily, and I
know how useless taking a group moderated can be. If people would
just
stop responding to the ****heads (clearly an impossibility, as
history
shows) the problem would disappear; unfortunately, it's more likely
that the group disappears.

Of the groups into which this is x-posted, I only read
comp.mobile.android. I really hope that this crap doesn't kill that
group.

People have been trying and failing to kill Usenet for a long, long
time. I wouldn't worry about it.

The groups that I reallly liked and was involved with are all dead.
Perhaps people just find facebook easier to deal with. Or more
pleasant.
Or something.

What has actually happened is that almost no one has even
heard of usenet, so inevitably it fades away as people die off
or stop using it.

Few used it even when it was highly active.

And few had even heard about it even then.

When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if
that --
but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

And I wouldn’t be surprised if almost none of them had even heard about
it.

Exactly. The closest response was "You mean like myspace?"

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified to
offer it, nothing has even come close.

You clearly don’t use facebook. Even with the most basic question
like what shops are open on Xmas day or who is the best vet to
get a pet microchipped at most cheaply, you normally get an
answer very quickly, even if you ask at say 4am.

Most of my FB friends live in other states and are unlikely to know such
things.

I wasn’t talking about facebook friends.

What do you mean?

The local facebook group. Ours is called 'xxxxxx community notice board'

On 01/28/2016 12:24 AM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 08:28 PM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 05:07 PM, Orange wrote:
"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 11:52 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2016-01-27, The Real Bev wrote:
On 01/26/2016 06:11 AM, chris wrote:
On 22/01/2016 22:47, The Real Bev wrote:
This **** is why usenet has so few viable groups left. Do you
really
want to kill this one too?

That's what killfiles are for. You never need to hear from the
trolls/idiots/flamers again.

Of course. It's also possible to just not look at things. But when
the
overwhelming majority of posts are pure trash, reasonable people
just
stop reading. I'm tougher than most, I don't give up easily, and I
know how useless taking a group moderated can be. If people would
just
stop responding to the ****heads (clearly an impossibility, as
history
shows) the problem would disappear; unfortunately, it's more likely
that the group disappears.

Of the groups into which this is x-posted, I only read
comp.mobile.android. I really hope that this crap doesn't kill that
group.

People have been trying and failing to kill Usenet for a long, long
time. I wouldn't worry about it.

The groups that I reallly liked and was involved with are all dead.
Perhaps people just find facebook easier to deal with. Or more
pleasant.
Or something.

What has actually happened is that almost no one has even
heard of usenet, so inevitably it fades away as people die off
or stop using it.

Few used it even when it was highly active.

And few had even heard about it even then.

When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if
that --
but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

And I wouldn’t be surprised if almost none of them had even heard about
it.

Exactly. The closest response was "You mean like myspace?"

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified to
offer it, nothing has even come close.

You clearly don’t use facebook. Even with the most basic question
like what shops are open on Xmas day or who is the best vet to
get a pet microchipped at most cheaply, you normally get an
answer very quickly, even if you ask at say 4am.

Most of my FB friends live in other states and are unlikely to know such
things.

I wasn’t talking about facebook friends.

What do you mean?

The local facebook group. Ours is called 'xxxxxx community notice board'

In my experience with other 'local' non-facebook groups, 'local' people
for my locality are... inexpert.

--
Cheers,
Bev
================================================== =
Salesmen welcome -- dog food is expensive

"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/28/2016 12:24 AM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 08:28 PM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 05:07 PM, Orange wrote:
"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 11:52 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2016-01-27, The Real Bev wrote:
On 01/26/2016 06:11 AM, chris wrote:
On 22/01/2016 22:47, The Real Bev wrote:
This **** is why usenet has so few viable groups left. Do you
really
want to kill this one too?

That's what killfiles are for. You never need to hear from the
trolls/idiots/flamers again.

Of course. It's also possible to just not look at things. But
when
the
overwhelming majority of posts are pure trash, reasonable people
just
stop reading. I'm tougher than most, I don't give up easily, and
I
know how useless taking a group moderated can be. If people would
just
stop responding to the ****heads (clearly an impossibility, as
history
shows) the problem would disappear; unfortunately, it's more
likely
that the group disappears.

Of the groups into which this is x-posted, I only read
comp.mobile.android. I really hope that this crap doesn't kill
that
group.

People have been trying and failing to kill Usenet for a long, long
time. I wouldn't worry about it.

The groups that I reallly liked and was involved with are all dead.
Perhaps people just find facebook easier to deal with. Or more
pleasant.
Or something.

What has actually happened is that almost no one has even
heard of usenet, so inevitably it fades away as people die off
or stop using it.

Few used it even when it was highly active.

And few had even heard about it even then.

When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the skiing
or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if
that --
but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

And I wouldn’t be surprised if almost none of them had even heard about
it.

Exactly. The closest response was "You mean like myspace?"

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified to
offer it, nothing has even come close.

You clearly don’t use facebook. Even with the most basic question
like what shops are open on Xmas day or who is the best vet to
get a pet microchipped at most cheaply, you normally get an
answer very quickly, even if you ask at say 4am.

Most of my FB friends live in other states and are unlikely to know such
things.

I wasn’t talking about facebook friends.

What do you mean?

The local facebook group. Ours is called 'xxxxxx community notice board'

In my experience with other 'local' non-facebook groups, 'local' people
for my locality are... inexpert.

You don’t need to be an expert in that sort of thing,
just to have noticed it or to have experienced it.

And you get the experts there too. In the case of the
places open on a national holiday, one of the few
places in my town that chose to be open that day did
in fact publicise that fact in that group deliberately.

The same thing has happened with those the people
who show up in town and will microchip your pet in
your own home much more cheaply than the vets
will do it for, in a blitz town by town. That is in fact
by far the best way to get the word out when you
are doing something like that, now that so few
bother to pay for the town newspaper anymore.

Same with those whose pet goes missing, plenty
post a picture of it in that facebook group and
quite quickly have someone say where they have
seen the pet. And the reverse, post a picture of
a pet that has clearly got lost, to have others say
whose pet it might be and have the owner show
say that it is theirs and thank the original poster.

That's in a town of about 26K people.

In article , The Real Bev
wrote:
On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
In article , The Real Bev
wrote:

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia, IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year olds
(either physically or mentally).

The benefit of proper Usenet software or good forum software is that
you can killfile such imbeciles and ignore them.

The problem with forums is the low density of text and ****-poor indexing.

As against the almost-no indexing in Usenet newsgroups, and the fact
that in most newsgroups the morons can't be banned.

On 01/28/2016 11:05 AM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/28/2016 12:24 AM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 08:28 PM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 05:07 PM, Orange wrote:
"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 11:52 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2016-01-27, The Real Bev
wrote:
On 01/26/2016 06:11 AM, chris wrote:
On 22/01/2016 22:47, The Real Bev wrote:
This **** is why usenet has so few viable
groups left. Do you really want to kill this
one too?

That's what killfiles are for. You never need to
hear from the trolls/idiots/flamers again.

Of course. It's also possible to just not look at
things. But when the overwhelming majority of
posts are pure trash, reasonable people just stop
reading. I'm tougher than most, I don't give up
easily, and I know how useless taking a group
moderated can be. If people would just stop
responding to the ****heads (clearly an
impossibility, as history shows) the problem would
disappear; unfortunately, it's more likely that
the group disappears.

Of the groups into which this is x-posted, I only
read comp.mobile.android. I really hope that this
crap doesn't kill that group.

People have been trying and failing to kill Usenet
for a long, long time. I wouldn't worry about it.

The groups that I reallly liked and was involved with
are all dead. Perhaps people just find facebook easier
to deal with. Or more pleasant. Or something.

What has actually happened is that almost no one has even
heard of usenet, so inevitably it fades away as people
die off or stop using it.

Few used it even when it was highly active.

And few had even heard about it even then.

When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of
the skiing or other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample
-- maybe 100 people, if that -- but you'd think that ONE
might have been an addict. Nope.

And I wouldn’t be surprised if almost none of them had even
heard about it.

Exactly. The closest response was "You mean like myspace?"

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually
qualified to offer it, nothing has even come close.

You clearly don’t use facebook. Even with the most basic
question like what shops are open on Xmas day or who is the
best vet to get a pet microchipped at most cheaply, you
normally get an answer very quickly, even if you ask at say
4am.

Most of my FB friends live in other states and are unlikely to
know such things.

I wasn’t talking about facebook friends.

What do you mean?

The local facebook group. Ours is called 'xxxxxx community
notice board'

In my experience with other 'local' non-facebook groups, 'local'
people for my locality are... inexpert.

You don’t need to be an expert in that sort of thing, just to have
noticed it or to have experienced it.

And you get the experts there too. In the case of the places open on
a national holiday, one of the few places in my town that chose to
be open that day did in fact publicise that fact in that group
deliberately.

I was trying to be diplomatic. What I really meant was "too dumb to
actually have a useful opinion about anything including the current
weather".

The same thing has happened with those the people who show up in
town and will microchip your pet in your own home much more cheaply
than the vets will do it for, in a blitz town by town. That is in
fact by far the best way to get the word out when you are doing
something like that, now that so few bother to pay for the town
newspaper anymore.

I canceled ours a few years ago (after having read it for over 50 years)
because it had degenerated into social notes and "We buy gold"
advertisements.

Same with those whose pet goes missing, plenty post a picture of it
in that facebook group and quite quickly have someone say where they
have seen the pet. And the reverse, post a picture of a pet that has
clearly got lost, to have others say whose pet it might be and have
the owner show say that it is theirs and thank the original poster.

That's in a town of about 26K people.

140K. I've lived here for 48 years and I don't even know my next door
neighbors, although we say 'Hi' on the off-chance that we happen to see
one another.

--
Cheers, Bev
I'd tell you a UDP joke, but you might not get it.
-- K.E. Long

On 01/28/2016 11:47 AM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:
On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia, IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year olds
(either physically or mentally).

My only facebook friends are people I "knew" from usenet, actual RL
friends and relatives, and friends/relatives of usenet "friends". I
have met some of the usenet people in real life and stayed in their
home. How often does that happen in facebook-only relationships? With
usenet you could get to "know" people from their repeated interactions
with you and others; with facebook you're limited to pre-approved
people for the most part, and total strangers just don't wander in
because they're interested in the subject of the group.

Or maybe that actually happens, but I'd bet against it. The interface
doesn't encourage serious interchanges, just pronouncements. Twitter,
of course, is worse. I have a Twitter account, but I just used it to
track down people I knew in a previous life, and I've done that maybe 3
times.

The benefit of proper Usenet software or good forum software is that
you can killfile such imbeciles and ignore them.

The problem with forums is the low density of text and ****-poor indexing.

As against the almost-no indexing in Usenet newsgroups, and the fact
that in most newsgroups the morons can't be banned.

Google used to have an excellent usenet search function, but they gutted
it a few years ago. Better than nothing now, but not by much. You can
still ask a question in some relevant groups and get good answers, but
many are just gone forever.

It was a tremendous resource, and we let it die. We should be ashamed.

--
Cheers, Bev
I'd tell you a UDP joke, but you might not get it.
-- K.E. Long

"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/28/2016 11:05 AM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/28/2016 12:24 AM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 08:28 PM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 05:07 PM, Orange wrote:
"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/27/2016 11:52 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2016-01-27, The Real Bev
wrote:
On 01/26/2016 06:11 AM, chris wrote:
On 22/01/2016 22:47, The Real Bev wrote:
This **** is why usenet has so few viable
groups left. Do you really want to kill this
one too?

That's what killfiles are for. You never need to
hear from the trolls/idiots/flamers again.

Of course. It's also possible to just not look at
things. But when the overwhelming majority of
posts are pure trash, reasonable people just stop
reading. I'm tougher than most, I don't give up
easily, and I know how useless taking a group
moderated can be. If people would just stop
responding to the ****heads (clearly an
impossibility, as history shows) the problem would
disappear; unfortunately, it's more likely that
the group disappears.

Of the groups into which this is x-posted, I only
read comp.mobile.android. I really hope that this
crap doesn't kill that group.

People have been trying and failing to kill Usenet
for a long, long time. I wouldn't worry about it.

The groups that I reallly liked and was involved with
are all dead. Perhaps people just find facebook easier
to deal with. Or more pleasant. Or something.

What has actually happened is that almost no one has even
heard of usenet, so inevitably it fades away as people
die off or stop using it.

Few used it even when it was highly active.

And few had even heard about it even then.

When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of
the skiing or other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample
-- maybe 100 people, if that -- but you'd think that ONE
might have been an addict. Nope.

And I wouldn’t be surprised if almost none of them had even
heard about it.

Exactly. The closest response was "You mean like myspace?"

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually
qualified to offer it, nothing has even come close.

You clearly don’t use facebook. Even with the most basic
question like what shops are open on Xmas day or who is the
best vet to get a pet microchipped at most cheaply, you
normally get an answer very quickly, even if you ask at say
4am.

Most of my FB friends live in other states and are unlikely to
know such things.

I wasn’t talking about facebook friends.

What do you mean?

The local facebook group. Ours is called 'xxxxxx community
notice board'

In my experience with other 'local' non-facebook groups, 'local'
people for my locality are... inexpert.

You don’t need to be an expert in that sort of thing, just to have
noticed it or to have experienced it.

And you get the experts there too. In the case of the places open on
a national holiday, one of the few places in my town that chose to
be open that day did in fact publicise that fact in that group
deliberately.

I was trying to be diplomatic. What I really meant was "too dumb to
actually have a useful opinion about anything including the current
weather".

That isnt the case with those facebook groups where people ask
who is currently getting no mains power, what time the fireworks
are scheduled to happen at, is a particularly TV channel currently
being broadcast, does anyone recognise this lost pet etc.

The same thing has happened with those the people who show up in
town and will microchip your pet in your own home much more cheaply
than the vets will do it for, in a blitz town by town. That is in
fact by far the best way to get the word out when you are doing
something like that, now that so few bother to pay for the town
newspaper anymore.

I canceled ours a few years ago (after having read it for over 50 years)
because it had degenerated into social notes and "We buy gold"
advertisements.

Ours still does have all the local news, like the house that was just
set alight deliberately, the ones that burn down accidentally, what
new businesses are starting up, which ones are closing, the latest
**** fight between the local politicians and the town councillors etc.

Same with those whose pet goes missing, plenty post a picture of it
in that facebook group and quite quickly have someone say where they
have seen the pet. And the reverse, post a picture of a pet that has
clearly got lost, to have others say whose pet it might be and have
the owner show say that it is theirs and thank the original poster.

That's in a town of about 26K people.

140K. I've lived here for 48 years and I don't even know my next door
neighbors, although we say 'Hi' on the off-chance that we happen to see
one another.

I know all of mine very well indeed and have known about half of
them for well over 40 years. And I did with most of them when I
lived in the much bigger city of 200K too. And I know that that
much bigger city has the same sort of facebook groups too
because quite a few of those who I have known for 40+ years
have moved there, including one of my neighbours.

And the kids I just recently helped to move to a much bigger
city again of 5M also have them too and we used them to get
some stuff for the place they are renting instead of buying it new.

"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/28/2016 11:47 AM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:
On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the skiing
or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if
that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia, IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year olds
(either physically or mentally).

My only facebook friends are people I "knew" from usenet, actual RL
friends and relatives, and friends/relatives of usenet "friends". I have
met some of the usenet people in real life and stayed in their home. How
often does that happen in facebook-only relationships?

Much more in my experience.

With usenet you could get to "know" people from their repeated
interactions with you and others; with facebook you're limited to
pre-approved people for the most part,

No you are not with the facebook groups.

and total strangers just don't wander in because they're interested in the
subject of the group.

Hordes of them do with the facebook groups.

Or maybe that actually happens,

It does.

but I'd bet against it.

You've just lost that bet.

The interface doesn't encourage serious interchanges, just pronouncements.

That is just plain wrong.

Twitter, of course, is worse. I have a Twitter account, but I just used
it to track down people I knew in a previous life, and I've done that
maybe 3 times.

Plenty use it for much more than that.

The benefit of proper Usenet software or good forum software is that
you can killfile such imbeciles and ignore them.

The problem with forums is the low density of text and ****-poor
indexing.

As against the almost-no indexing in Usenet newsgroups, and the fact
that in most newsgroups the morons can't be banned.

Google used to have an excellent usenet search function, but they gutted
it a few years ago. Better than nothing now, but not by much. You can
still ask a question in some relevant groups and get good answers, but
many are just gone forever.

It was a tremendous resource, and we let it die.

We didn’t let it die, it died because hardly anyone even knew it exited.

We should be ashamed.

Nothing to be ashamed of. It never got anything like the public
recognition that facebook etc has. Even those who have never
used it and refuse to even have a cellphone at all have heard
of facebook. Nothing like that ever happened with usenet.

In article , The Real Bev
wrote:
On 01/28/2016 11:47 AM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:
On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia, IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year olds
(either physically or mentally).

My only facebook friends are people I "knew" from usenet, actual RL
friends and relatives, and friends/relatives of usenet "friends". I
have met some of the usenet people in real life and stayed in their
home. How often does that happen in facebook-only relationships? With
usenet you could get to "know" people from their repeated interactions
with you and others; with facebook you're limited to pre-approved
people for the most part, and total strangers just don't wander in
because they're interested in the subject of the group.

Or maybe that actually happens, but I'd bet against it. The interface
doesn't encourage serious interchanges, just pronouncements. Twitter,
of course, is worse. I have a Twitter account, but I just used it to
track down people I knew in a previous life, and I've done that maybe 3
times.

I have a Facebook account I created (under a fake name) years ago to
enter competitions, but since the website is hopelessly slow and
doesn't work properly on this ancient Mac, I've never actually used it
.... and yet I still get emails a few times a month asking if I know
different people.

"Your Name" wrote in message
...
In article , The Real Bev
wrote:
On 01/28/2016 11:47 AM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:
On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the
skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if
that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified
to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are
maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia, IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year olds
(either physically or mentally).

My only facebook friends are people I "knew" from usenet, actual RL
friends and relatives, and friends/relatives of usenet "friends". I
have met some of the usenet people in real life and stayed in their
home. How often does that happen in facebook-only relationships? With
usenet you could get to "know" people from their repeated interactions
with you and others; with facebook you're limited to pre-approved
people for the most part, and total strangers just don't wander in
because they're interested in the subject of the group.

Or maybe that actually happens, but I'd bet against it. The interface
doesn't encourage serious interchanges, just pronouncements. Twitter,
of course, is worse. I have a Twitter account, but I just used it to
track down people I knew in a previous life, and I've done that maybe 3
times.

I have a Facebook account I created (under a fake name) years ago to
enter competitions, but since the website is hopelessly slow and
doesn't work properly on this ancient Mac, I've never actually used it
... and yet I still get emails a few times a month asking if I know
different people.

Those are sent by facebook itself and appears to use usenet to
decide that you likely do know those people. Most of the ones
it suggest to me are the ones I have typed to on usenet.

In article , Simmy Jacks
wrote:
"Your Name" wrote in message
...
In article , The Real Bev
wrote:
On 01/28/2016 11:47 AM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:
On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the
skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if
that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified
to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are
maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia, IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year olds
(either physically or mentally).

My only facebook friends are people I "knew" from usenet, actual RL
friends and relatives, and friends/relatives of usenet "friends". I
have met some of the usenet people in real life and stayed in their
home. How often does that happen in facebook-only relationships? With
usenet you could get to "know" people from their repeated interactions
with you and others; with facebook you're limited to pre-approved
people for the most part, and total strangers just don't wander in
because they're interested in the subject of the group.

Or maybe that actually happens, but I'd bet against it. The interface
doesn't encourage serious interchanges, just pronouncements. Twitter,
of course, is worse. I have a Twitter account, but I just used it to
track down people I knew in a previous life, and I've done that maybe 3
times.

I have a Facebook account I created (under a fake name) years ago to
enter competitions, but since the website is hopelessly slow and
doesn't work properly on this ancient Mac, I've never actually used it
... and yet I still get emails a few times a month asking if I know
different people.

Those are sent by facebook itself and appears to use usenet to
decide that you likely do know those people. Most of the ones
it suggest to me are the ones I have typed to on usenet.

The ones I get that I do actually know are work clients or through web
forums. It probably gets them from things like Google searches, web
trawling bots, people stupidly uploading their email address books,
etc. It also searches through it's own information to match people with
similar interests in the same area (for example, if you have on your
Facebook account that you like Macs / Like Mac Facebook pages and live
in Eggnog, Ohio, then it will match you with other people near Eggnog
who like Macs too).

"Your Name" wrote in message
...
In article , Simmy Jacks
wrote:
"Your Name" wrote in message
...
In article , The Real Bev
wrote:
On 01/28/2016 11:47 AM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:
On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the
ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the
skiing or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people,
if
that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually
qualified
to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are
maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia,
IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year
olds
(either physically or mentally).

My only facebook friends are people I "knew" from usenet, actual RL
friends and relatives, and friends/relatives of usenet "friends". I
have met some of the usenet people in real life and stayed in their
home. How often does that happen in facebook-only relationships?
With
usenet you could get to "know" people from their repeated interactions
with you and others; with facebook you're limited to pre-approved
people for the most part, and total strangers just don't wander in
because they're interested in the subject of the group.

Or maybe that actually happens, but I'd bet against it. The interface
doesn't encourage serious interchanges, just pronouncements. Twitter,
of course, is worse. I have a Twitter account, but I just used it to
track down people I knew in a previous life, and I've done that maybe
3
times.

I have a Facebook account I created (under a fake name) years ago to
enter competitions, but since the website is hopelessly slow and
doesn't work properly on this ancient Mac, I've never actually used it
... and yet I still get emails a few times a month asking if I know
different people.

Those are sent by facebook itself and appears to use usenet to
decide that you likely do know those people. Most of the ones
it suggest to me are the ones I have typed to on usenet.

The ones I get that I do actually know are work clients or through web
forums. It probably gets them from things like Google searches, web
trawling bots, people stupidly uploading their email address books,
etc. It also searches through it's own information to match people with
similar interests in the same area (for example, if you have on your
Facebook account that you like Macs / Like Mac Facebook pages and live
in Eggnog, Ohio, then it will match you with other people near Eggnog
who like Macs too).

Don't believe it given that none of mine are.

Les Cargill writes:
The Real Bev wrote:


Nah. NNTP is just one-to-many email. It was supposed to be ephemeral,
the "messaging" protocol. If anything needed to be persistent,
there was FTP, GOPHER, then HTTP.

NNTP was designed originally as a mechanism to allow network
readers access to a BNEWS or CNEWS setup. In the olden days,
usenet readers had to log into the unix system with the newsfeed
in order to read usenet (using rn, trn, et alia tools).

http://www.giganews.com/usenet-history/cnews.html

NNTP is not, and was never a "one-to-many email". If anything,
it's a store-and-forward setup, but in today's parlance, it's
a publish-subscribe setup.

http://www.giganews.com/usenet-history/nntp.html

On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 01:34:29 -0000, tlvp wrote:

On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 20:08:13 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote:

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the mental age of 12?

You're trying to expand your horizons ;-) ? Cheers, -- tlvp

Expansion in the wrong direction.

--
A man spoke frantically into the phone, "My wife is pregnant and her contractions are only two minutes apart!"
"Is this her first child?" the doctor asked.
"No, you idiot!" the man shouted. "This is her husband!"

"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/28/2016 06:59 PM, Orange wrote:


"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
On 01/28/2016 11:47 AM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:
On 01/27/2016 09:15 PM, Your Name wrote:
wrote:

Few used it even when it was highly active. When I rode on the ski
lifts with strangers I asked them if they ever used any of the
skiing
or
other newsgroups. Granted, a small sample -- maybe 100 people, if
that
-- but you'd think that ONE might have been an addict. Nope.

For swift help from strangers, many of whom are actually qualified
to
offer it, nothing has even come close. The "forums" are
maddeningly
inefficient and the users are frequently... of negative utility.

Hi, you must be new to the internet. ;-)

sigh You guessed it. Only since 1994 sob.

*All* internet forums, including Usenet, Facebook, Wikipedia, IMDB,
etc., etc., are infested with idiots, know-nothings, and trolls
claiming to be experts. The reality is most of them are 12 year olds
(either physically or mentally).

My only facebook friends are people I "knew" from usenet, actual RL
friends and relatives, and friends/relatives of usenet "friends". I
have
met some of the usenet people in real life and stayed in their home.
How
often does that happen in facebook-only relationships?

Much more in my experience.

With usenet you could get to "know" people from their repeated
interactions with you and others; with facebook you're limited to
pre-approved people for the most part,

No you are not with the facebook groups.

Wait, I did join a facebook group with something like 10K members. It's
really a chore to read it even if I'm interested in the subject matter.

Depends on what you want to read it for. I don’t find the one where
plenty ask questions about local events and services and pet stuff in
to be a chore to read and its got 4K members in a town of 20K people.

I also belong to a small group of motorcyclists, and for some reason I
can't see only NEW posts even though I use Social Fixer to either mark all
read or mute all.

The best way to get that result is to turn notification on for that group.

This is annoying. Facebook screws around with stuff so that Social Fixer
has lost much of its utility, but the aforementioned functions still work
on non-groups.

and total strangers just don't wander in because they're interested in
the
subject of the group.

Hordes of them do with the facebook groups.

Or maybe that actually happens,

It does.

but I'd bet against it.

You've just lost that bet.

The interface doesn't encourage serious interchanges, just
pronouncements.

That is just plain wrong.

Twitter, of course, is worse. I have a Twitter account, but I just used
it to track down people I knew in a previous life, and I've done that
maybe 3 times.

Plenty use it for much more than that.

The benefit of proper Usenet software or good forum software is that
you can killfile such imbeciles and ignore them.

The problem with forums is the low density of text and ****-poor
indexing.

As against the almost-no indexing in Usenet newsgroups, and the fact
that in most newsgroups the morons can't be banned.

Google used to have an excellent usenet search function, but they gutted
it a few years ago. Better than nothing now, but not by much. You can
still ask a question in some relevant groups and get good answers, but
many are just gone forever.

It was a tremendous resource, and we let it die.

We didn’t let it die, it died because hardly anyone even knew it existed.

Hardly anyone knew it existed in its heyday.

Yeah, that's what I was saying.

We should be ashamed.

Nothing to be ashamed of. It never got anything like the public
recognition that facebook etc has. Even those who have never
used it and refuse to even have a cellphone at all have heard
of facebook. Nothing like that ever happened with usenet.

Perhaps that was a pretty damn good filter -- if you have to actually seek
out something you'll value it more than if it just dropped into your lap.

Clearly most didn’t value it enough to keep using it enough to stop it
dying.

Scott Lurndal wrote:
Les Cargill writes:
The Real Bev wrote:


Nah. NNTP is just one-to-many email. It was supposed to be ephemeral,
the "messaging" protocol. If anything needed to be persistent,
there was FTP, GOPHER, then HTTP.

NNTP was designed originally as a mechanism to allow network
readers access to a BNEWS or CNEWS setup.

I did not know that.

In the olden days,
usenet readers had to log into the unix system with the newsfeed
in order to read usenet (using rn, trn, et alia tools).

http://www.giganews.com/usenet-history/cnews.html


Thanks for that. I knew (some of ) the history back
to the Great Renaming.

NNTP is not, and was never a "one-to-many email".

I didn't mean literally, I meant that's what it
looks like from the user perspective circa 1995,
especially if you used Netscape.

NNTP is to email as multicast is to unicast,
metaphorically.

If anything,
it's a store-and-forward setup,

Yep.

but in today's parlance, it's
a publish-subscribe setup.


That too.

http://www.giganews.com/usenet-history/nntp.html


UUCP - the horror.... the horror... if they'd only
had rsync.....

--
Les Cargill

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:34 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:49:32 -0000, Your Name wrote:

In article , Mr Macaw wrote:

Agreed, as long as they DON'T get any punishment for driving while
drunk and NOT hitting anyone.

Oh joy, yet another completely brainless moron to add to the killfile.
:-\

Went right over your head didn't it? Why do you like punishing people for
something that didn't happen?

Are you really that thick, or one of the more worthless trolls we've
seen of late?

Are you incapable of showing reasoning for your side of the argument?
Again, if nothing bad happened, why punish anyone?

Doing the world a favour and killing off you ought not to be a crime.
After all, amazingly no one has yet...
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:01 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:34 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:49:32 -0000, Your Name wrote:

In article , Mr Macaw wrote:

Agreed, as long as they DON'T get any punishment for driving while
drunk and NOT hitting anyone.

Oh joy, yet another completely brainless moron to add to the killfile.
:-\

Went right over your head didn't it? Why do you like punishing people for
something that didn't happen?

Are you really that thick, or one of the more worthless trolls we've
seen of late?

Are you incapable of showing reasoning for your side of the argument?
Again, if nothing bad happened, why punish anyone?

Doing the world a favour and killing off you ought not to be a crime.
After all, amazingly no one has yet...

Still no reasoning. If nothing bad happened, why punish anyone?

--
The three most common expressions (or famous last words) in aviation a
"Why is it doing that?", "Where the hell are we?", and "Oh ****!"

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

--
The three most common expressions (or famous last words) in aviation a
"Why is it doing that?", "Where the hell are we?", and "Oh ****!"

"Mr Macaw" wrote in message news
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re
seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one
...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH.
Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather
than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If
you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one
is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with
the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

But he was too stupid to get qualified in an area which
would get him a job where he chooses to live and ended
up on benefits and then had to flog **** door to door and
exist in a hovel that doesn't even have hot running water.

In message
Mr Macaw wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

GUFFAW

--
€œAn idea isn't responsible for the people who believe it.€�
ۥ Don Marquis

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:45:07 -0000, Lewis wrote:

In message
Mr Macaw wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

GUFFAW

It is.

--
If only women came with pull-down menus and on-line help.

To the original poster of this inane thread.

If you believe that you can safely text and drive, you're a jerk, a
compleat asshole.

"Blue Lou" wrote in message
...
To the original poster of this inane thread.

If you believe that you can safely text and drive, you're a jerk, a
compleat asshole.

Bet that will see him curl up and die for sure.

In message
Mr Macaw wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:45:07 -0000, Lewis wrote:

In message
Mr Macaw wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

GUFFAW

It is.

DOUBLE GUFFAW

Perhaps even...

Yes.

GUFFAW SQUARED

--
The Steve is seen, rightly or wrongly, as the visionary, the leader,
the savant. Bill is the Boswell to The Steve's Johnson, but lacking
Boswell's wit, charm, and dynamic personality.

On 2/2/16, 17:56, Lewis wrote:
In
Mr wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:45:07 -0000, wrote:

In
Mr wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

GUFFAW

It is.

DOUBLE GUFFAW

Perhaps even...

Yes.

GUFFAW SQUARED



How cruel of you. We ought to believe his IQ is what he says it is as
much as we believe what he asserts about his name being "Macaw."


--
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=== ==+=====+=====+====++
||Arnold VICTOR, New York City, i. e., ||
||Arnoldo VIKTORO, Nov-jorkurbo, t. e., ||
||Remove capital letters from e-mail address for correct address/ ||
|| Forigu majusklajn literojn el e-po�ta adreso por �usta adreso ||
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=== ==+=====+=====+====++}

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing
one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If
you think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without
one is ok too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

No, it is not. You lack logic and reasoning abilities required to have
such an IQ.
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

In message
AV3 wrote:
On 2/2/16, 17:56, Lewis wrote:
In
Mr wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:45:07 -0000, wrote:

In
Mr wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

GUFFAW

It is.

DOUBLE GUFFAW

Perhaps even...

Yes.

GUFFAW SQUARED

How cruel of you. We ought to believe his IQ is what he says it is as
much as we believe what he asserts about his name being "Macaw."

Oh, that's not what is causing me to guffaw.

--
Internet was down last night. Turns out I have two kids. They seem
pretty well-behaved

"Jamie Kahn Genet" wrote in message
ek.nz...

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re
seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing
one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH.
Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather
than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If
you think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without
one is ok too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember?
:-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with
the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

No, it is not. You lack logic and reasoning abilities required to have
such an IQ.
--
If you're not part of the Solution, then you're part of the Problem.
ha ha he he

On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 02:18:50 -0000, AV3 wrote:

On 2/2/16, 17:56, Lewis wrote:
In
Mr wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:45:07 -0000, wrote:

In
Mr wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

GUFFAW

It is.

DOUBLE GUFFAW

Perhaps even...

Yes.

GUFFAW SQUARED

How cruel of you. We ought to believe his IQ is what he says it is as
much as we believe what he asserts about his name being "Macaw."

I never said that was my name. I have however taken several IQ tests and they always arrive around 135.

--
"Sir, your daughter says she loves me, she can't live without me, and wants to marry me."
"And you're asking my permission to marry her?"
"No, I'm asking you to make her leave me the hell alone!!"

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 22:56:40 -0000, Lewis wrote:

In message
Mr Macaw wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:45:07 -0000, Lewis wrote:

In message
Mr Macaw wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

GUFFAW

It is.

DOUBLE GUFFAW

Perhaps even...

Yes.

GUFFAW SQUARED

That is utterly impossible. You cannot form laughter into geometric shapes.

--
"Sir, your daughter says she loves me, she can't live without me, and wants to marry me."
"And you're asking my permission to marry her?"
"No, I'm asking you to make her leave me the hell alone!!"

On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 12:27:11 -0000, Lewis wrote:

In message
AV3 wrote:
On 2/2/16, 17:56, Lewis wrote:
In
Mr wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:45:07 -0000, wrote:

In
Mr wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If you
think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without one is ok
too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

GUFFAW

It is.

DOUBLE GUFFAW

Perhaps even...

Yes.

GUFFAW SQUARED

How cruel of you. We ought to believe his IQ is what he says it is as
much as we believe what he asserts about his name being "Macaw."

Oh, that's not what is causing me to guffaw.

Being a snob? Most people just giggle or laugh.

--
"When one engine fails on a twin-engine aeroplane you always have enough power left to get you to the scene of the crash."

On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 06:37:22 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing
one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH. Cheers, --
tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather than
later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If
you think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without
one is ok too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone with the
mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

No, it is not. You lack logic and reasoning abilities required to have
such an IQ.

I have a lot of logic and reasoning. I don't think on emotions like most.

--
Due to financial constraints, the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off until further notice.

Mr Macaw wrote:

I never said that was my name. I have however taken several IQ tests and
they always arrive around 135.

Insecure much? :-D
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 06:37:22 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 05:15:02 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 03:58:35 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:16:32 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

Mr Macaw wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 23:39:37 -0000, Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:

tlvp wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:16:49 -0000, Mr Macaw wrote, re
seatbelts:

... nasty crashes ... since those don't happen often
(especially in town driving), there's no point in wearing
one ...

... until just as a nasty crash takes place :-) . HTH.
Cheers, -- tlvp

Hopefully natural selection will do it's thing sooner rather
than later :-)

At town speeds it isn't nasty.

That must be why people die from crashes in town.

How much worse do you think a 70mph crash is than a 30mph one? If
you think 70mph with a seatbelt is ok, you must think 30mph without
one is ok too.

Why does any of that matter? You're a special snowflake, remember? :-)

Why am I trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone
with the mental age of 12?

I'm of above average intelligence, so this amuses me :-)

My IQ is 135. Seriously.

No, it is not. You lack logic and reasoning abilities required to have
such an IQ.

I have a lot of logic and reasoning. I don't think on emotions like most.

No. You're simply not very bright, as evidenced by your interactions
here.
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Mr Macaw wrote:

I have however taken several IQ tests and they always arrive around 135.

So have I; but I don't go around boasting about it... IQ tests should be
taken with a big grain of salt anyway.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

In message
Jolly Roger wrote:
Mr Macaw wrote:

I have however taken several IQ tests and they always arrive around 135.

So have I; but I don't go around boasting about it... IQ tests should be
taken with a big grain of salt anyway.

Short version: anyone who boast about his IQ is a moron. Or a autistic
savant, I suppose.

--
May you live in interesting times

On 02/07/2016 05:59 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
Mr Macaw wrote:

I have however taken several IQ tests and they always arrive around 135.

So have I; but I don't go around boasting about it... IQ tests should be
taken with a big grain of salt anyway.

Hmph. I always used a #2 pencil.


--
Cheers, Bev
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity
is not thus handicapped."
-- Elbert Hubbard, American author