Nuxx:8d7f25b5-dec6-4f62-8f67-b789853d05d2@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <8d7f25b5-dec6-4f62-8f67-b789853d05d2@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling, uk.transport.london, uk.rec.driving Subject: Re: Bus Lanes: Proof Of What We All Knew Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 06:03:11 -0800 (PST) References: <3282357c-d7aa-4691-a331-97561dba1306@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com> <1ibqbdn.ypnx3c75rvb8N%notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com> Lines: 35 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.211.17.39 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1202047392 21351 127.0.0.1 (3 Feb 2008 14:03:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:03:12 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.211.17.39; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2747 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:638320

On Feb 3, 9:55 am, notmyaddress.1.ekulnam...@wronghead.com (Ekul Namsob) wrote: > Nuxx Bar  wrote: > > So there we have it. Conclusive proof that the extremist > > fundamentalist mentalist cycling freaks > > And there we have it. Conclusive proof that you are trolling. If you > would like to come back when you've calmed down enough to use rational > arguments rather than abuse, then perhaps you will get some more > meaningful responses. > > Ta ra, > Luke > > -- > Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in > exile in Lancashire 

Thanks for that. At least now you know not to read, or reply to, any more of my posts.

I made it quite clear that there are plenty of pleasant, well-meaning cyclists. My dissatisfaction was intended for those who have an inherently spiteful and intolerant attitude towards other modes of transport. Are you one of them? It would explain why you didn't like my post.

I think my arguments were perfectly rational, being based on experience on the Internet and the roads. Perhaps you should try to refute one or more of them rather than making hopelessly generalised complaints. But thereagain I would expect those sort of tactics from someone who refuses to admit that all regular, remotely competent drivers speed (or at any rate at least 99.9% of them).

Ta ra. You silly, silly boy.