Nuxx:64b63368-6d30-45a6-924b-721df694ab76@l2g2000vbn.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!l2g2000vbn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <64b63368-6d30-45a6-924b-721df694ab76@l2g2000vbn.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: The demise of the school run Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 12:10:29 -0700 (PDT) References: <518939de-0e4e-493f-bc4b-ca696a0e2cef@q12g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <9b7inpFo2lU1@mid.individual.net>  <944e2aad-4c25-4acd-abd4-034498db7939@c14g2000yqk.googlegroups.com> <07068a8a-9374-4eef-b753-557df0598f4c@q1g2000vbj.googlegroups.com>    Lines: 108 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 94.117.37.172 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1314127625 30498 127.0.0.1 (23 Aug 2011 19:27:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 19:27:05 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: l2g2000vbn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=94.117.37.172; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKRC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:6.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/6.0,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 7735 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:823268

On Aug 20, 5:56=A0pm, "Simon Mason"  wrote: > "Bertie Wooster"  wrote in message > > news:gokv47tka53tf94ga84atsaripac4u2ft3@4ax.com... > > > > > I had an interesting email regarding Nuxxy while on holiday, I'm > > inclined to believe that Simon has received the same or similar > > information. > > If it was during your holiday, then yes, it would seem so.

So nice to know that so many people care. Thanks to Judith to alerting me to this discussion.

Anyway, just to explain (since people seem to want to know) that I am taking a temporary (possibly permanent) and voluntary break from Usenet, because I have other (important) things on my plate, and I am sick of dealing with "cyclists can do no wrong and must never be restricted, while motorists can do no right and must always be restricted" types who wilfully disregard the facts whenever it suits them and who have the most outrageous double standards. Once you've seen a few of their posts, you've seen them all. In particular, Simon Mason's continued agenda-driven trolling by starting reams of anti- motorist threads in a futile attempt to "change URC back" has made the group practically unusable. He constantly repeats the same debunked nonsense and seems to be doing it just to get a rise out of normal people who don't share his car-hating leanings. I can't imagine that he actually believes a lot of the stuff he says, and if he does, then he's in real trouble.

I know that poor persecuted AN Other (you know, the car-hating nutter guy who wants to forcibly replace all motorists with cyclists even if that involves "temporarily" making the roads more dangerous) has been doing his usual abrasive, odious shit-stirring (it's just one reason why so many people hate him) by boasting to anyone who's bored enough to listen that he has reported me to the police for "harassment" of him, and he no doubt thinks that my recent absence from Usenet is a result of that, and that the police have had "words" with me. Well, I can categorically confirm that I have had NO contact whatsoever from the police. They haven't arrested me, they haven't come to see me, and they haven't even written to, phoned, or emailed me. (D'oh=85bummer for AN Other, eh? One minute he's basking in spiteful smugness, and now this bombshell=85looks like it's going to be a while longer until he can vanquish everyone he doesn't like from the Internet=85.)

Perhaps this lack of action from the police is because they use the usual definition of "harassment", and not the AN Other definition, i.e. "posting on the same newsgroup as me, disagreeing with my stated opinions, proving me wrong, and making me look like a hypocrite with a highly questionable and irresponsible agenda by pointing out that I wear a cycle helmet despite my stating that they don't improve safety". Apparently he printed out every single one of my Usenet postings (plus some I didn't make), whether or not they were anything to do with him, and submitted them as "evidence". Sad, isn't it? He sure is desperate to stop me from stating my opinions=85you can draw your own conclusions as to why. Anyway, hopefully he'll get done for wasting police time, but at any rate, I am happy that the police seemingly don't see things AN Other's way, and I'm sure other sane people are too. For a start, can you imagine how unreasonable and draconian the police would be towards motorists if they were all like AN Other=85? It makes me shudder just to think about it. And cyclists would literally be able to get away with anything, even more so than currently. His behaviour as a Wikipedia administrator shows how much he abuses authority when he gets it.

(BTW I wonder if it's harassment to put up an attack web page about someone and leave it there and keep updating it for years (lucky I took a copy before he hurriedly removed it recently!), send out defamatory emails about them for years, post as "Lou Knee" to call them a "piece of shit", constantly insult them without provocation for years, etc, etc=85? At any rate, that's not remotely how you'd expect a bona fide "victim" to behave towards their "stalker", is it?  Nor is this the first time by a long way that AN Other has played the innocent victim when he's at least as bad as anyone is, as those who have been around for a while will know, and this includes posters who generally agree with him on transport issues, like Ian Smith.)

Anyway, sincere thanks to JNugent for saying he hoped nothing bad had happened to me. I would also thank Simon Mason for saying the same thing, but I am not sure if he was being sarcastic or not: would you care to let me know please Simon? If you meant it then thank you to you also; if it was sarcastic then shame on you for stooping to AN Other's level (I wouldn't wish you any harm=85I would hope that no-one here except AN Other (the "Christian") would wish harm on others simply because of their opinions).

Right, I'm off again for the time being (though I may read replies to this thread, and may respond to them if any of them particularly merit it). If anyone wishes to email me then I'll be checking my "from" address from time to time, or if you want to get hold of me quicker then you can ask Judith to email me at the address I check more often (assuming that she's able and willing to do so of course!) But frankly, I can't imagine why most of you would want to contact me for any legitimate reason (although I will still probably reply to anyone except AN Other).

Oh, and if anyone says anything unpleasant about me then they shouldn't be surprised if Judith (or someone else) notifies me and I reappear as a result. So if you want the Nuxx Monster to stay away (not that anyone except AN Other and Squashme (on some days) actually does, according to my recent "Who Wants Me to Stop Posting?" thread) then don't say its name. You know, like the Devil, or Candyman, or something.

"Glorious rant" (=A9 2011 Crispy "Crisp Man" Crispin) over. Bye!