Nuxx:0c8b809f-69f3-44de-be0c-3edf3e7a02b9@i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <0c8b809f-69f3-44de-be0c-3edf3e7a02b9@i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.moderation Subject: Re: URCM rejection 000002 Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:02:52 -0700 (PDT) References: <6tjc16dv6t10730blrt1adu2d5q8abpjck@4ax.com>      <87pb2gF97gU3@mid.individual.net> Lines: 42 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1276635772 26073 127.0.0.1 (15 Jun 2010 21:02:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:02:52 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.3) Gecko/20100401 Firefox/3.6.3 GTB7.0 ( .NET CLR 3.5.30729) GTBA,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3718 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.moderation:31304

On Jun 15, 1:47=A0pm, Simon Brooke  wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:01:57 +0000, Jon Ribbens wrote: > > On 2010-06-15, Geoff Berrow  wrote: > >> (can I just point out that I am neutral on helmets - I believe it > >> should be down to individual choice) > > > I suspect many of the combatants would consider that not to be a neutra= l > > position ;-) > > I think you'd be straining to name three. JMS, Nuxxy, and ...?

What unmitigated bollocks. As it happens I do consider that a neutral position, which is more than can be said for the psycholists and their "Anyone who isn't implacably opposed to helmets is discouraging cycling" nonsense (which of course they say because of their determination to minimise restrictions on cyclists and maximise restrictions on motorists in order to force modal shift, no matter how bad or numerous the negative consequences are...callous bastards).

Anyway since you "don't read URC", and I've never posted to URCM on the subject of helmets (obviously I'd be censored), how do you know what I think about helmets? Or are you just behaving like a typical URCM moderator and imagining that "the enemy" all have the same unallowable opinions about everything?

Simon, don't you ever get tired of being a URCM moderator, what with constantly having to pretend that you're not censoring particular truths/opinions/posters when you and everyone else know perfectly well that that's exactly what you're doing? Aren't you fed up with coming up with feeble excuses? Doesn't having to tell borderline lies all the time get you down after a while? Hasn't it taken its toll to discover the hard way what an arrogant dick non-Chief Moderator Ian Jackson is? Wouldn't it be easier to either run URCM as a newsgroup should be run (e.g. ULM), or take it to a private mailing list if it's really so important to protect clique members from being challenged and being reminded of facts that they fervently wish weren't facts?

(BTW is anyone else finding that this thread isn't appearing on their news server? Is it something Tom Crispin did in his OP?  There he goes again, just making trouble for the sake of it....)