Nuxx:12a0395b-bd52-4eda-884e-70543c0095ed@g37g2000yqn.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!g37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <12a0395b-bd52-4eda-884e-70543c0095ed@g37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: uk.rec.cycling.moderated Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:56:03 -0700 (PDT) References:   <9luq159m8q35t1va1hgvb3dmd6613smadh@4ax.com>  Lines: 33 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.156.251.27 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1243450564 16129 127.0.0.1 (27 May 2009 18:56:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 18:56:04 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: g37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.156.251.27; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.10) Gecko/2009042316 Firefox/3.0.10 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2933 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:704686

On May 27, 7:21=A0pm, Keith T  wrote: > jms wrote: > > > This is the unnecessary sniping which takes place all of the time in > > urc. > > > I would suggest that Guy Chapman has also adequately demonstrated in > > one simple post his unsuitability as a moderator. > > 'Nuff said

Keith, I don't think you've really grasped the unwritten URC "rules" yet. You're supposed to come on here and take the "side" of the "regulars". Thereafter, whenever you comment you are supposed to defend the "regulars" no matter what they say, and have a go at the "trolls" no matter what *they* say. Presumably you have witnessed this behaviour countless times already (c.f. the ludicrous and pathetic defending of Chapman even when he is quite obviously wrong/ lying/etc, and the abject and petty refusal to ever concede that anything I/Judith/etc say is right, even when it's entirely apparent).

You seem to have got into this rather peculiar habit of actually analysing what people say with reference to the facts and passing comment based on what they have said, rather than who they are and what "side" they're on. I can assure you that this approach will not go down well with the "moderators", and if you carry on defending "trolls" or opposing "regulars", you will find yourself on the "trolls" list before you can say "car-hater".

Just a bit of friendly advice; I hope for your sake that you take it on board. (Paradoxically, taking this advice on board would involve replying and saying what a load of crap it was, because of course one of the "trolls" posted it....)