Nuxx:K6K3l.31600$AL7.8094@newsfe14.ams2

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!feeder.news-service.com!69.16.177.246.MISMATCH!cyclone03.ams.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!npeersf02.ams.highwinds-media.com!newsfe14.ams2.POSTED!7564ea0f!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: _  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Troll Drawings Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:38:17 +0000 References:         <222sk4106tmg9itd87v7v7072bm1m2lb72@4ax.com>     Lines: 56 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To:  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.21.204.127 X-Complaints-To: http://netreport.virginmedia.com X-Trace: newsfe14.ams2 1229942314 82.21.204.127 (Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:38:34 UTC) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:38:34 UTC Organization: virginmedia.com Bytes: 3848 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:681588

Chris Malcolm wrote: > _  wrote: > >> _ wrote: >>> On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 13:18:13 +0000, Rob Ward wrote: >>> >>> Google groups shows exactly *one* post from >>> "robert.ward@sparrow.invalid.demon.co.uk". >>> >>> A cynic might suspect (given the style, topic, newgroup, and previous >>> sudden appearances and disappearances of such "unique" posters) that this >>> is yet another nymshift by the troll. > >> How, precisely, would that make the questions raised 'different'? If >> they are valid points, and on first blush they certainly *appear* so, >> there is no relevance on the person who raised them! Oh no, hang on, I >> forgot. Its a case of 'Your opinions are not valid purely on the premise >> that I dont like you'. > >> Lemme tell you something - do with it what you will. I have *definitely* >> lowered my estimation of cycling and cyclists as a result of reading >> this group the last couple of months. > > "I"? > >> I've no doubt that has translated >> into giving cyclists less consideration when I come across them on the >> roads. > > "I"? > >> I'd *imagine*, but wouldn't wish to speak for them, that the same >> scenario is occurring to Nugent, Judith, and anyone else from 'outside' >> who happens to be reading here. > > "I"? > > But "I" is one of a very large gang of "people" who suddenly appear on > this newsgroup from nowhere, with no posting history, to make a > comment, and then immediately disappear again. The comments are of > same style and content as those of a notorious troll. > >> That alone should make any rational >> cyclist here think that they must be doing something wrong, > > As wrong as being silly enough to engage with "your" pathetic attempts > to resuscitate long dead arguments by pretending to be a new person? > > Despite your claims to logic you have failed to recognise that you're > employing arguments which depend on "I" being a real new > identity. It's very sad that the only way you can get people to pay > attention to you is by pretending to be someone else. > This would be an amazing insight, were it not for the fact that I'm neither Judith nor Nuxx. Chapman will confirm that for you if needed. So, now we've established that, how about answering the question?