Nuxx:Df17ea72-05bb-4e15-a1ea-cf6825e7ac8d@h11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!h11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: uk.rec.cycling.moderated prediction Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:09:28 -0700 (PDT) References: <1j3k153.1yppdwb1yevqv4N%real-not-anti-spam-address@apple-juice.co.uk> <96cdfc9c-9561-401b-b2a7-925c4e6cd01e@c14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> Lines: 40 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.153.43.65 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1248894568 27032 127.0.0.1 (29 Jul 2009 19:09:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:09:28 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: h11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.153.43.65; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.12) Gecko/2009070611 Firefox/3.0.12 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3205 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:721129

On Jul 28, 4:32=A0pm, Toom Tabard  wrote: > On 28 July, 08:19, real-not-anti-spam-addr...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. > > > > Procida) wrote: > > The new group, once created, will cease to be necessary. > > > The vast majority of normal people will prefer to use it. That means > > that the trolls and nutcases won't have an audience. Though they reply > > to each other at present, it's only worth it for them because they can > > do it in front of normal people. > > > Once the normal people have left, they'll just have the same old other > > trolls and nutcases to perform before, and where's the fun in that? > > > So they will eventually leave too (unless an endless supply of crackpot= s > > with extremist views can be found to keep things fresh, but I don't > > think there is one for cycling). > > > Daniele > > Another way of looking at it is that those promoting the moderated > group may actually be the 'nutcases' with 'extremist views' who want > to go off and form their own little coven whether they can reinforce > and remain secure in their own little world of quaint pseudo science > and irrational cod statistical twaddle on issues of helmets, high-viz, > safety, and the balanced interests of all road users. In their own > little group they'll be free from having their simplistic views > challenged by those who have a wider perspective and who rationally > comment on the issues and persistently challenge their > 'certainties' ?? ;-)

Right on. The truth, as ever, hurts for some round here (as is confirmed by the fact that someone has given your post the lowest star rating on Google Groups, but hasn't had the guts to reply to your post and say what was actually wrong with it...so, so typical of URC regulars, who have temper tantrums when people tell it how it is by posting awkward truths that cannot be argued with).