Nuxx:49b3917a-c64a-4ecb-9fef-40dba81873f3@y10g2000prc.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!y10g2000prc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <49b3917a-c64a-4ecb-9fef-40dba81873f3@y10g2000prc.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.config,uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: URC/URCM potential FAQ on helmets Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 05:56:16 -0700 (PDT) References:        <1c7d9ffc-8550-4aba-8900-dcb542961ef7@y9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> <3a24a47f-6a92-4538-be53-cf46f286ea99@e21g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>  Lines: 52 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.156.150.242 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1244897777 9782 127.0.0.1 (13 Jun 2009 12:56:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 12:56:17 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: y10g2000prc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.156.150.242; 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: 3949 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.config:53479 uk.rec.cycling:5299

On Jun 13, 1:33=A0pm, jms  wrote: > On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 03:01:43 -0700 (PDT), Nuxx Bar > > > >  wrote: > >On Jun 13, 9:38=A0am, Simon Brooke  wrote: > >> On 12 June, 16:29, PhilO  wrote: > > >> > ... Judith M Smith ... is not an > >> > authoritative source for anything =A0- and should not be> treated as= if it is. > > >> > > It is very biased, prone to exaggeration, and putting ... spin on > >> > > simple facts - in some cases it is plain wrong. > > >> > Post now corrected > > >> I have to say that /if/ there's a moderated group and /if/ I'm > >> involved in moderation, anyone who 'corrects' anyone else's post in > >> this way, on any subject, will be unlikely to have their views heard. > >> It ain't funny, it ain't clever, it ain't witty, it ain't post-modern. > >> It is the worst sort of craven and dishonest abuse, to deliberately > >> misrepresent what someone else has said. > > >> If you believe your opponent is mendacious or disingenuous in their > >> post, then the correct response is to quote relevant parts of their > >> post WITHOUT amending it, and then go on to explain in what way you > >> believe they are misleading. Two lies do not equal truth. > > >Alan Braggins, one of the proposed "moderators", did the exact same > >thing in reply to one of my posts just 4 days ago: > > >http://groups.google.com/group/uk.rec.cycling/browse_frm/thread/3f3ad... > > >I assume that you'll be asking for him not to be a "moderator", or at > >the very least admonishing him? > > >(I put "moderator" in quotes as in the case of URCM it's not really > >about moderation, it's about censorship of certain points of view, > >which is only being dressed up as moderation because otherwise it > >wouldn't be possible to create such a group on usenet.) > > You could make a formal complaint to the provider of his news service > via: > =A0 postmas...@chiark.greenend.org.uk > > I believe the postmaster may be a Mr Ian Jackson who sometimes posts > here; I am sure that he will deal with the matter in a professional > way.

Thanks; I'm considering my options.