Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 19:40:53 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

Further abuse of usenet may result in adding you to my killfile
list.

Oh, please.

You have been warned!!

Good-oh.

I bet that threat has made you **** your pants.

--
Adam

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 21:09:33 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 19:40:53 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

Further abuse of usenet may result in adding you to my killfile list.

Oh, please.

You have been warned!!

Good-oh.


Why reply then? Have you some kind of problem?

HN

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 21:11:27 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:

H. Neary wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 05:45:21 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"H. Neary" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:11:34 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:03:36 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

Incidentally the article referenced two actions poking
someone in a college as a punishment for mobile phone use,
and thumping in the testicles as a punishment for failing to
plug in a drill.

I would have considered both actions assault and reacted
accordingly.

I suspect, if this is true, and you actually did something
similar in your long and mysterious career, the people that had
to work with you thought you were an insufferable prig. And a
bit of ****, to boot.

No not really.

Started off as an apprentice, progressed through college to
become an engineer, did many, many college couses over the years
and finished at university [apart from the gross of repetitive
H&S courses that have to be taken now].

I was never ever poked prodded or physically molested at work or
college.

I work on civil construction sites quite often and remember only
two in the last ten years where those I dealt with were too thick
to express themselves in plain English.

Both sites had very serious shortcomings incidentally.

In fact I will always remember one in particular, because an
"Electrical Engineer" borrowed my DMM to check a relay and came up
with the little gem "do I use both leads to check this?"

Any assaults even on those sites would have resulted in instant
removal incidentally.

I fail to comprehend why you find it neccesary to resort to
personal attacks BTW.

You're confusing necessary with chooses to.

Does your inability to put your point across frustrate you so
much?

He puts his points across much better than you do and chooses to say
what he thinks about you.
Good on yer Rodders. You stick up for your betters.

When Adam posts his next pile of garbage I,ll put i a good word for
you if you wish.


You are well off topic BTW

If I was to punch both of you in the ******** at least Ron would have a
visible target.

It's Rodney Adam. I think that some poor moron that hero worships you
at least deserves your getting his name right.


BTW I did mention to Rodders that I would put in a good word. It may
keep the poor imbecile happy if you expess your gratitude for his
support regarding your recent sex assault.

HN

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 05:23:58 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:


Rodders me old chump.

As promised I tried to point out your good points to Adam.

Although his immediate reaction wasn't promising I think the poor
cretin will see you for what you are in good time.

HN

"H. Neary" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 20:19:26 +0100, "scorched" wrote:


"H. Neary" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:31:08 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 15:00:12 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

I fail to comprehend why you find it neccesary to resort to personal
attacks BTW.

You comprehend well enough.

Does your inability to put your point across frustrate you so much?

I'm not frustrated in the slightest and I believe you to be a tit.


I do not think that any part of a mammary gland can on it's own
produce the syntax that would engage a response from the lesser
orders.

You are well off topic, you are wasting bandwidth, and I think you are
using "tit" in a derogatory fashion.

Further abuse of usenet may result in adding you to my killfile list.

You have been warned!!

HN


Thank **** for that, you silly arse. Pulease put me on the list also.
Trainee trolls eh? I've ****em.


Why reply then? Have you some kind of problem?

I don't have a problem at all, but if you're genuinely not trying to troll,
how many teeth have you lost irl?
If zero you've been EXTREMELY lucky.

You are still off topic BTW

I don't give a ****, sorry Horace.

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
H. Neary wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 05:45:21 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"H. Neary" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:11:34 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:03:36 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

Incidentally the article referenced two actions poking
someone in a college as a punishment for mobile phone use,
and thumping in the testicles as a punishment for failing to
plug in a drill.

I would have considered both actions assault and reacted
accordingly.

I suspect, if this is true, and you actually did something
similar in your long and mysterious career, the people that had
to work with you thought you were an insufferable prig. And a
bit of ****, to boot.

No not really.

Started off as an apprentice, progressed through college to
become an engineer, did many, many college couses over the years
and finished at university [apart from the gross of repetitive
H&S courses that have to be taken now].

I was never ever poked prodded or physically molested at work or
college.

I work on civil construction sites quite often and remember only
two in the last ten years where those I dealt with were too thick
to express themselves in plain English.

Both sites had very serious shortcomings incidentally.

In fact I will always remember one in particular, because an
"Electrical Engineer" borrowed my DMM to check a relay and came up
with the little gem "do I use both leads to check this?"

Any assaults even on those sites would have resulted in instant
removal incidentally.

I fail to comprehend why you find it neccesary to resort to
personal attacks BTW.

You're confusing necessary with chooses to.

Does your inability to put your point across frustrate you so
much?

He puts his points across much better than you do and chooses to say
what he thinks about you.
Good on yer Rodders. You stick up for your betters.

When Adam posts his next pile of garbage I,ll put i a good word for
you if you wish.


You are well off topic BTW

If I was to punch both of you in the ******** at least Ron would have a
visible target.

hahahaahahahahh
Sunday night and a prick to play with, what more could you want.

H. Neary wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:45:49 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:

H. Neary wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:11:34 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:03:36 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

Incidentally the article referenced two actions poking
someone in a college as a punishment for mobile phone use,
and thumping in the testicles as a punishment for failing to
plug in a drill.

I would have considered both actions assault and reacted
accordingly.

I suspect, if this is true, and you actually did something
similar in your long and mysterious career, the people that had
to work with you thought you were an insufferable prig. And a
bit of ****, to boot.

No not really.

Started off as an apprentice, progressed through college to
become an engineer, did many, many college couses over the years
and finished at university [apart from the gross of repetitive
H&S courses that have to be taken now].

I was never ever poked prodded or physically molested at work or
college.

I work on civil construction sites quite often and remember only
two in the last ten years where those I dealt with were too thick
to express themselves in plain English.

Both sites had very serious shortcomings incidentally.

Having a **** like you on site is the most serious shortcoming a
site could have.
Adam I had high hopes for you. One of your posts (after my guidance)
did show promise. I'm dissapointed we are back with the naughty words
again.

Can we do better than the "C" word BTW you are getting a little
repetative you know.


Do you really want a list of every offensive word I have ever said?

--
Adam

On 10/06/2012 19:40 H. Neary wrote:

you are wasting bandwidth

But not as much as you and Rodders by consistently failing to trim posts.

--
F

ARWadsworth wrote:


Do you really want a list of every offensive word I have ever said?


You know more than one?


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

"H. Neary" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 21:09:33 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 19:40:53 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

Further abuse of usenet may result in adding you to my killfile list.

Oh, please.

You have been warned!!

Good-oh.


Why reply then?

Same reason you do presumably.

Have you some kind of problem?

No more than you do.

"H. Neary" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 21:11:27 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:

H. Neary wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 05:45:21 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"H. Neary" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:11:34 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:03:36 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

Incidentally the article referenced two actions poking
someone in a college as a punishment for mobile phone use,
and thumping in the testicles as a punishment for failing to
plug in a drill.

I would have considered both actions assault and reacted
accordingly.

I suspect, if this is true, and you actually did something
similar in your long and mysterious career, the people that had
to work with you thought you were an insufferable prig. And a
bit of ****, to boot.

No not really.

Started off as an apprentice, progressed through college to
become an engineer, did many, many college couses over the years
and finished at university [apart from the gross of repetitive
H&S courses that have to be taken now].

I was never ever poked prodded or physically molested at work or
college.

I work on civil construction sites quite often and remember only
two in the last ten years where those I dealt with were too thick
to express themselves in plain English.

Both sites had very serious shortcomings incidentally.

In fact I will always remember one in particular, because an
"Electrical Engineer" borrowed my DMM to check a relay and came up
with the little gem "do I use both leads to check this?"

Any assaults even on those sites would have resulted in instant
removal incidentally.

I fail to comprehend why you find it neccesary to resort to
personal attacks BTW.

You're confusing necessary with chooses to.

Does your inability to put your point across frustrate you so
much?

He puts his points across much better than you do and chooses to say
what he thinks about you.
Good on yer Rodders. You stick up for your betters.

When Adam posts his next pile of garbage I,ll put i a good word for
you if you wish.


You are well off topic BTW

If I was to punch both of you in the ******** at least Ron would have a
visible target.

It's Rodney Adam.

Wrong, as always.

reams of your pathetic excuse for a coal trail that any
2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs

H. Neary wrote
just the pathetic excuse for a coal trail that any
2 year old could leave for dead. All flushed where
it belongs.

On Jun 1, 10:32*pm, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
H. Neary wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 18:45:29 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:

1. Not doing the weekly vehicle checks [1] properly and letting
vans go out with bald tyres.

2. Putting 6.30am down on his time sheets instead of 8.00am -
Apprentices do not get paid travel time. Although to be fair one of
the electricians told him to put 6.30 on his sheets just to see him
get into trouble when he asked what time to put on the sheets.
(same apprentice also got a bollocking for doing the same a few
months ago)

3. Using "text speak" on his job report forms. I heard the words "I
do not want to read **** like that" shouted as he handed them in.

[1] All vehicle checks have a signed and dated form so we know who
checks which van each week.
I would suspect that any company not willing to pay it's employees for
their work, wouldn't be too keen on them "wasting time" on vehicle
checks. Have they been trained in the process BTW?

Yes. And most of them have their own cars.

Perhaps the person accepting the reports could be trained in the use
of English and anger management?

I do not shout at personnel, I do not resort to filth when
communicating and I always explain carefully if I think a higher level
of input to a task is needed.

Well I can ignore that ****ing waste of space advice.

Mind you, my company does pay for hours worked [unless salaried], and
we have a genuine "no blame" culture that seems to motivate the
workforce in a very positive way.

You would survive about 5 seconds on a building site.

Not a very introspective person are you.

On Jun 3, 2:55*pm, tony sayer wrote:

So how do the young learn anything useful if industry doesn't teach them
anything?.

They can't learn it all in school or tech college...

No problem. They don't need job skills to sign on. Not while there is
a limitless supply of eastern Europeans.

When their wages bill is large enough, I am sure there will be a
further supply from Asia.

On Jun 3, 8:15*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , ARWadsworth adamwadsworth@blue
yonder.co.uk scribeth thus









dennis@home wrote:
"tony sayer" wrote in message
...

Everyone is expected to know what is required of them and
perform accordingly.

Does this include apprentices?

We don't have them. Someone straight from full time education
would probably be allocated a position in "spreadsheet land"
before they went to site.

I never see youngsters on site. The last time I saw what I assumed
were apprentices, they were pulling cables through at a water
treatment works ten years back. They worked for a well known firm
of Welsh Electrical contractors. I remember them because of the
stupid infighting they had with each other, and even watched a
pair being seperated by their colleagues.

I don't think the company still employs such people. Behaviour
like that is not on, indeed on a recent FAT, I saw no one under
25 on their premises [Apart from the somewhat scenic receptionist
of course]. HN

So how do the young learn anything useful if industry doesn't teach
them anything?.

They can't learn it all in school or tech college...

Adam doesn't want to teach them anything..
If he did they would get his job.

I prefer to teach them to think for themselves. Something that we do not
often do these days.

Quite...

I set the apprentices tasks and challenges that mean they have to think for
themselves instead of me just wiping their arses. They do not like it. They
like to live in a world where they are protected by their Mother and have
everything done for them.

Indeed... Been there seen that..

If you see it every day then there has to be something seriously wrong
with the management.

On Jun 4, 10:01*am, Owain wrote:
On Jun 4, 7:53*am, "ARWadsworth" *wrote:

These are not degree material
apprentices.

Give it a few years ...

Actually disrespect will have quite a positive effect in such a period
but I doubt "higher learning" means the same thing to most of us.

On Jun 7, 2:12*pm, hugh ] wrote:

I've read in the press *this morning that the DG at the BBC has sent
round an e-mail despite the universal criticism of their jubilee
coverage - flotilla in particular - *saying what a splendid job everyone
had done.
There in lies the heart of the problem. Mustn't criticise the poor
little dears, you'll upset them and dent their self confidence, and it
starts at school.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/ju...=FBCNETTXT9038

Off on a side note:

I vaguely remember the tax law coming in about directors and the like
being taxed for use of a company car. No idea how many decades ago
that was.

Her Madge must have posted off quite a few large ones to her own tax
officers over the past few years. Or does it all end at retirement
age?

Exactly where does one go to see if she has paid tax?

H. Neary wrote:

However thick the dimwits that disagree with me are, I have never been
offensive, and indeed welcome any logical or moral argument that would
either support or detract from my point of view.

The fact that you post your off-topic drivel here is offensive.

In message , H. Neary
writes
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:11:34 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:03:36 +0100, H. Neary
wrote:

Incidentally the article referenced two actions poking someone in a
college as a punishment for mobile phone use, and thumping in the
testicles as a punishment for failing to plug in a drill.

I would have considered both actions assault and reacted accordingly.

I suspect, if this is true, and you actually did something similar in
your long and mysterious career, the people that had to work with you
thought you were an insufferable prig. And a bit of ****, to boot.

No not really.

Started off as an apprentice, progressed through college to become an
engineer, did many, many college couses over the years and finished at
university [apart from the gross of repetitive H&S courses that have
to be taken now].

I was never ever poked prodded or physically molested at work or
college.

I work on civil construction sites quite often and remember only two
in the last ten years where those I dealt with were too thick to
express themselves in plain English.

Both sites had very serious shortcomings incidentally.

In fact I will always remember one in particular, because an
"Electrical Engineer" borrowed my DMM to check a relay and came up
with the little gem "do I use both leads to check this?"

Any assaults even on those sites would have resulted in instant
removal incidentally.

I fail to comprehend why you find it neccesary to resort to personal
attacks BTW.

Does your inability to put your point across frustrate you so much?

HN



HN, are you Drivel in disguise?
--
hugh

In message

g, Steve Firth writes
H. Neary wrote:

However thick the dimwits that disagree with me are, I have never been
offensive, and indeed welcome any logical or moral argument that would
either support or detract from my point of view.

The fact that you post your off-topic drivel here is offensive.
And as you find it offensive it is de facto abusive, regardless of
whether or not the originator or the original target considered it or
meant it to be abusive.
--
hugh

In message , Tim
Streater writes
In article ,
H. Neary wrote:

I do not think that any part of a mammary gland can on it's own
produce the syntax that would engage a response from the lesser
orders.

Was that the grocer's apostrophe again?

Indeed it was - and from someone who lectures everyone else on the use
of the English language.
--
hugh

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 23:15:14 +0100, dave wrote:

A personal OT: I served a 5 year electrical apprecticeship in the 70's
(70s) with a very well know major industrial company. (Still going
today). During my 2nd year I was the victim of "a greasing". This
entailed being attacked by several other (older) apprentices, wrestled
to the floor in the machine shop, overalls pulled open and trousers
and underpants pulled down so the "senior" apprenctices could take
turns in rubbing copious amounts of grease onto ones genitals.
It was very degrading. I was quite a strong lad in my youth and it did
take more than five of them to do it - at one point I was faced with a
decision to either kill at least one of them with the length of steel
bar I had managed to grab or - well, not to.

I just felt sorry for them afterwards. Still do I suppose. And
disappointed. It's kind of like being betrayed, a super let-down.

Rite of passage; common in most engineering works at the time.
Anyone who didn't get their balls greased or something similar can't
call themselves a proper tradesman.

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 01:44:25 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

Rite of passage; common in most engineering works at the time.
Anyone who didn't get their balls greased or something similar can't
call themselves a proper tradesman.

Only a "rite of passage" if you know before hand that it is going to
happen at some point because you've seen it before and possibly
assisted. Afterwards the participants would supply clean clothes and
cover from the foreman as you spent a hour in the bogs cleaning
yourself up. Then all off down the pub to celebrate your joing of the
"club".

--
Cheers
Dave.

H. Neary wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:55:52 +0000 (UTC), Steve Firth
wrote:

H. Neary wrote:

However thick the dimwits that disagree with me are, I have never been
offensive, and indeed welcome any logical or moral argument that would
either support or detract from my point of view.

The fact that you post your off-topic drivel here is offensive.

This reply directly relates to the responses I have received. It is
within the thread and therefore "on topic".

Another I your long series of lies. You have complained that others who
replied to your posts were "off topic"if their post did not address the
subject of the thread. When you post nothing more than ad hominem and lies
you claim it is on topic. Unless you are a devotee of spit roasts you can't
have it both ways.

Waste bandwidth somewhere else you trolling plonker!!!

There's a troll here for sure. In the words of the National Lottery "it's
you!"

Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 01:44:25 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

Rite of passage; common in most engineering works at the time.
Anyone who didn't get their balls greased or something similar can't
call themselves a proper tradesman.

Only a "rite of passage" if you know before hand that it is going to
happen at some point because you've seen it before and possibly
assisted. Afterwards the participants would supply clean clothes and
cover from the foreman as you spent a hour in the bogs cleaning
yourself up. Then all off down the pub to celebrate your joing of the
"club".


What about engineers blue willy or a can of Ralgex down the pants?
--
Tim Watts

On Friday, June 8, 2012 9:25:24 PM UTC+1, H. Neary wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 08:09:51 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Jun 2, 12:19*pm, Clive George wrote:
On 02/06/2012 07:09, ARWadsworth wrote:

You shouldn't. Foul language and shouting betrays a lack of education
and an inability to communicate.

So how do you give out a bollocking then?

It's possible to do it without swearing or shouting, and indeed can be
more menacing that way. The quick shout can be more appropriate though..

Sometimes it's quicker to communicate in the nativi langauge of the
individual concerned.

Methinks if you examine the post's so far,your idea of required
communications skills may be restricted to pokes, grunts and
assaulting genitalia. For the average human though, gifted with an odd
bit of linguistic ability physical contact or even shouting is not
actually neccesary.

Hope this helps

For that you have to assume that the person has at least average human abilities which includes linguistic ability. Otherwise you could put the light on a realise you've been asking a brick to connect the power lead to the wall socket.

And I know about teaching, working at a university ;-)


HN

On Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:10:16 PM UTC+1, Tim Watts wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 01:44:25 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

Rite of passage; common in most engineering works at the time.
Anyone who didn't get their balls greased or something similar can't
call themselves a proper tradesman.

Only a "rite of passage" if you know before hand that it is going to
happen at some point because you've seen it before and possibly
assisted. Afterwards the participants would supply clean clothes and
cover from the foreman as you spent a hour in the bogs cleaning
yourself up. Then all off down the pub to celebrate your joing of the
"club".


What about engineers blue willy or a can of Ralgex down the pants?

I didn't know you had a choice ;-)

--
Tim Watts

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:10:16 PM UTC+1, Tim Watts wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 01:44:25 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

Rite of passage; common in most engineering works at the time.
Anyone who didn't get their balls greased or something similar can't
call themselves a proper tradesman.

Only a "rite of passage" if you know before hand that it is going to
happen at some point because you've seen it before and possibly
assisted. Afterwards the participants would supply clean clothes and
cover from the foreman as you spent a hour in the bogs cleaning
yourself up. Then all off down the pub to celebrate your joing of the
"club".


What about engineers blue willy or a can of Ralgex down the pants?

I didn't know you had a choice ;-)

I didn't personally get molested but when I arrived with my lil toolbox I
was asked if I'd had all my tools skimmed yet.
I said no, not yet, whereupon every single tool was skimmed down the full
length of the shop.

Another trick - there were a few bunsen burners around the place for making
tea etc. The rubber gas feed ran under one of the lads benches. Anytime
someone tried to light a fag he'd just squeeze the pipe.

Another guy built a beatiful wooden toolbox, no really, a work of art.
Before the owner arrived one morning they'd cut out a tenon saw and laid it
on the toolbox. It looked exactly as though some ******* had half sawn
through his pride & joy.

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 18:45:30 +0100, "scorched" wrote:

Another guy built a beatiful wooden toolbox, no really, a work of art.
Before the owner arrived one morning they'd cut out a tenon saw and laid it
on the toolbox. It looked exactly as though some ******* had half sawn
through his pride & joy.

One workshop I was in, one lad filled a pair of overalls with
cardboard and left the legs (and boots, that was the best bit)
sticking out from under a jacked-up car next to the office. It was
funny as **** seeing the office staff step carefully over the legs as
they came and went.

During the teabreak I hotwired /extended the ignition kinglead from a
neighbouring car to the one George was working on. Gave him a few jags
before he sussed it. All I used was auto wire, not HT cable.