1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
Guest
Posts: n/a
1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
Rachael wrote:
> Firstly, my apologies to subscribers to this newsgroup, with one exception,
> for this getting off topic.
Why bother apologizing? It seems rather stupid to engage in a
flamewar and bother to pretend that you are sorry for doing it.
> My dear eight legged one, I can only repeat *your* bleating.......
That's very nice imagery. But I can tell that repeating it has made
you no closer to comprehending it.
> > Then she killfiled me, and announced it to the
> > world.
>
> You are the one who insists on clarity of meaning and berates those of us
> who, in your opinion, transgress.
More wonderful, and completely baseless, imagery. The fact that *you*
failed to comprehend the meaning of my comments in no way suggests
that they were unclear.
> Bluster and guff about semantics all you
> like, you can't have it both ways.
I am certainly not trying. While I do insist on clarity, I also
refuse to dumb down my comments to the lowest common denominator, on
the off chance that some poor soul might not "get it."
> The above is perfectly clear and concise.
It most certainly is. And I meant it exactly as it was written. Now,
for those who *infer* something from what is *not* written, I have no
help.
> It conveys both your naiivety and grandiose mentality very clearly to me.
If indeed one is to make the unfounded assumption that I meant
something different from what was written, then indeed this strawman
might have substance. But it does not.
> Did you really think I would bother to even click a mouse button to get rid
> of your cluttering of this newsgroup?
I wouldn't dare to guess. I would, however, laugh heartily at those
who claim to click buttons, but then do not. "I'm not listening to
you any more, nyah, nyah, nyah!"
> Just because you are, don't assume
> that I am entirely dependent on software to pick out meaningful and relevant
> information from the background radiation.
That's another wonderfully constructed strawman. I don't use any
filters, but I'm sure that won't stop you from believing otherwise.
>> In a profit-driven world, they'd rather you
>>throw money at a problem to fix it, rather than put any real effort
>>into fixing their original mistake (which, BTW, would have to be
done
>>gratis, in all likelihood.)
>
> What is this bit of waffle about?
It's meaning is self-evident. Reading comprehension is obviously not
your strong suit.
> You are obviously not an engineer, nor do
> you have any notion of how to make a profit.
LOL. You haven't the slightest clue.
> I invite you to ask why I think
> this. Then again, please don't bother.
I'm sure you'd be wrong in any case. So far, you have not
disappointed in that regard.
> I must say I am intrigued as to what drives you to post to this newsgroup.
The sheer enjoyment of see your ilk and their thin-skinned whinings
makes it all worthwhile. That, and my serial Audi ownership. My love
of cars in general?
Mostly, I do it to annoy you.
> I've only been reading here a couple of years and admittedly only on and
> off, choosing topics that look interesting. Maybe I haven't looked hard
> enough or used the right search criteria, but I haven't yet seen a helpful,
> civil, amusing or relevant contribution from you.
I am so very sorry I don't live up to your standards. But here's
another free clue: Tough . I don't care at all that you don't
care for my postings. It's not my problem, and won't ever be my
problem. So, you can either get over it, or seeth with rage over the
injustice of it all.
> But as you (would like to)
> give the impression you are a grand master of USENET, I suppose it's
> acceptable to post such material as I have seen emanating from your hutch.
Or, because I can and want to. No other reason necessary.
> Thus, I won't try to be helpful or civil to you.
I'm simply devastated. I don't know how I'll manage without your
approval and support.
> This post isn't
> particularly amusing and it certainly isn't relevant to RF amplifiers.
Educate yourself on the meaning of "alt" in the USENET hierarchy.
> All I
> have seen so far is your attempt to take the p*ss out of another subscriber
> and making a tw*t of yourself because you failed to read their question
> properly.
And this effects you how? Nobody asked for you to stick in your
worthless opinions, and as far as that goes, your off-topic flames.
Hey, but if you are righteous, you can be a hypocrite, right? LOL.
> Elsewhere you chip in with more risible attempts at humour at
> someone else's expense, or so you seem to think.
And this effects you how?
> You poor boy.
Hmm, I have often considered my financial status as "comfortable," and
I stopped being a boy some years ago.
> Were you
> bullied at school?
Not that I recall. Your backhanded psychoanalysis should be more
properly reserved for someone who cannot begin to make the change she
seeks, but attempts to anyway.
> Was there some terrible accident when you were
> circumcised?
Ahhh, yes, the "short " gambit. The stuff of elementary school
taunts. You calling me "boy" becomes hilariously ironic...
> I really have to admire your tenacity especially since you apparently have
> only one hand free to type with.
And then, the masturbation gambit. At least you've graduated to high
school insults now. A bit of growth for you - I'm pleased.
> I just don't have the willpower,and I had
> better quit before I fall even further into the shadow of your masterful
> command of language and USENET etttiquette.
Watch out - Mr. Roberts might have a go at you for misspellingg
something.
Your sarcasm and wit have laid me low once more. What is a poor
fellow to do, in the face of such fierce and incisive commentary?
> Please be my guest and have the last word, I know it means so much to
> you......
Oh, I'm sure it's not the last I've heard from you. Like so many
others, your bruised ego will not allow me to have the last word.
It's too bad, really, that you decided to engage me in this fashion,
and then have to bow out, for the second time. Mostly, you should
just refrain from posting about me or my handle, and leave it alone.
Then, I won't be obligated to flame you like this.
Spider
> Firstly, my apologies to subscribers to this newsgroup, with one exception,
> for this getting off topic.
Why bother apologizing? It seems rather stupid to engage in a
flamewar and bother to pretend that you are sorry for doing it.
> My dear eight legged one, I can only repeat *your* bleating.......
That's very nice imagery. But I can tell that repeating it has made
you no closer to comprehending it.
> > Then she killfiled me, and announced it to the
> > world.
>
> You are the one who insists on clarity of meaning and berates those of us
> who, in your opinion, transgress.
More wonderful, and completely baseless, imagery. The fact that *you*
failed to comprehend the meaning of my comments in no way suggests
that they were unclear.
> Bluster and guff about semantics all you
> like, you can't have it both ways.
I am certainly not trying. While I do insist on clarity, I also
refuse to dumb down my comments to the lowest common denominator, on
the off chance that some poor soul might not "get it."
> The above is perfectly clear and concise.
It most certainly is. And I meant it exactly as it was written. Now,
for those who *infer* something from what is *not* written, I have no
help.
> It conveys both your naiivety and grandiose mentality very clearly to me.
If indeed one is to make the unfounded assumption that I meant
something different from what was written, then indeed this strawman
might have substance. But it does not.
> Did you really think I would bother to even click a mouse button to get rid
> of your cluttering of this newsgroup?
I wouldn't dare to guess. I would, however, laugh heartily at those
who claim to click buttons, but then do not. "I'm not listening to
you any more, nyah, nyah, nyah!"
> Just because you are, don't assume
> that I am entirely dependent on software to pick out meaningful and relevant
> information from the background radiation.
That's another wonderfully constructed strawman. I don't use any
filters, but I'm sure that won't stop you from believing otherwise.
>> In a profit-driven world, they'd rather you
>>throw money at a problem to fix it, rather than put any real effort
>>into fixing their original mistake (which, BTW, would have to be
done
>>gratis, in all likelihood.)
>
> What is this bit of waffle about?
It's meaning is self-evident. Reading comprehension is obviously not
your strong suit.
> You are obviously not an engineer, nor do
> you have any notion of how to make a profit.
LOL. You haven't the slightest clue.
> I invite you to ask why I think
> this. Then again, please don't bother.
I'm sure you'd be wrong in any case. So far, you have not
disappointed in that regard.
> I must say I am intrigued as to what drives you to post to this newsgroup.
The sheer enjoyment of see your ilk and their thin-skinned whinings
makes it all worthwhile. That, and my serial Audi ownership. My love
of cars in general?
Mostly, I do it to annoy you.
> I've only been reading here a couple of years and admittedly only on and
> off, choosing topics that look interesting. Maybe I haven't looked hard
> enough or used the right search criteria, but I haven't yet seen a helpful,
> civil, amusing or relevant contribution from you.
I am so very sorry I don't live up to your standards. But here's
another free clue: Tough . I don't care at all that you don't
care for my postings. It's not my problem, and won't ever be my
problem. So, you can either get over it, or seeth with rage over the
injustice of it all.
> But as you (would like to)
> give the impression you are a grand master of USENET, I suppose it's
> acceptable to post such material as I have seen emanating from your hutch.
Or, because I can and want to. No other reason necessary.
> Thus, I won't try to be helpful or civil to you.
I'm simply devastated. I don't know how I'll manage without your
approval and support.
> This post isn't
> particularly amusing and it certainly isn't relevant to RF amplifiers.
Educate yourself on the meaning of "alt" in the USENET hierarchy.
> All I
> have seen so far is your attempt to take the p*ss out of another subscriber
> and making a tw*t of yourself because you failed to read their question
> properly.
And this effects you how? Nobody asked for you to stick in your
worthless opinions, and as far as that goes, your off-topic flames.
Hey, but if you are righteous, you can be a hypocrite, right? LOL.
> Elsewhere you chip in with more risible attempts at humour at
> someone else's expense, or so you seem to think.
And this effects you how?
> You poor boy.
Hmm, I have often considered my financial status as "comfortable," and
I stopped being a boy some years ago.
> Were you
> bullied at school?
Not that I recall. Your backhanded psychoanalysis should be more
properly reserved for someone who cannot begin to make the change she
seeks, but attempts to anyway.
> Was there some terrible accident when you were
> circumcised?
Ahhh, yes, the "short " gambit. The stuff of elementary school
taunts. You calling me "boy" becomes hilariously ironic...
> I really have to admire your tenacity especially since you apparently have
> only one hand free to type with.
And then, the masturbation gambit. At least you've graduated to high
school insults now. A bit of growth for you - I'm pleased.
> I just don't have the willpower,and I had
> better quit before I fall even further into the shadow of your masterful
> command of language and USENET etttiquette.
Watch out - Mr. Roberts might have a go at you for misspellingg
something.
Your sarcasm and wit have laid me low once more. What is a poor
fellow to do, in the face of such fierce and incisive commentary?
> Please be my guest and have the last word, I know it means so much to
> you......
Oh, I'm sure it's not the last I've heard from you. Like so many
others, your bruised ego will not allow me to have the last word.
It's too bad, really, that you decided to engage me in this fashion,
and then have to bow out, for the second time. Mostly, you should
just refrain from posting about me or my handle, and leave it alone.
Then, I won't be obligated to flame you like this.
Spider
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
Do you know, after reading a couple of your recent posts I was actually
going to apologise and take it all back. But.....
> Why bother apologizing? It seems rather stupid to engage in a
> flamewar and bother to pretend that you are sorry for doing it.
Here you go again telling others what they think, mean, feel, etc. - such
breathtaking arrogance. My apology was genuine, but I'm sure most people
stopped following this thread some time ago. Anyway, no apologies to you;
you just invite such repartee and it helps to pass the time between Simpsons
episodes.
> That's very nice imagery. But I can tell that repeating it has made
> you no closer to comprehending it.
>
> > > Then she killfiled me, and announced it to the
> > > world.
>
> > The above is perfectly clear and concise.
>
> It most certainly is. And I meant it exactly as it was written. Now,
> for those who *infer* something from what is *not* written, I have no
> help.
Hoist by your own petard. Or are readers expected to insert the words
"claimed to have" and "subscribers to this newsgroup around the" in the
appropriate places by dint of some sort of Spider telepathy?
> > It conveys both your naiivety and grandiose mentality very clearly to
me.
>
> If indeed one is to make the unfounded assumption that I meant
> something different from what was written, then indeed this strawman
> might have substance. But it does not.
Whoooosh, hoist again.
> > Did you really think I would bother to even click a mouse button to get
rid
> > of your cluttering of this newsgroup?
>
> I wouldn't dare to guess. I would, however, laugh heartily at those
> who claim to click buttons, but then do not. "I'm not listening to
> you any more, nyah, nyah, nyah!"
It seemed to take you in pretty well didn't it? "Then she killfiled me, and
announced it to the world." - oh hang on, thought waves coming
through......"Then she went for a curry, and announced it to the cat."
> > Just because you are, don't assume
> > that I am entirely dependent on software to pick out meaningful and
relevant
> > information from the background radiation.
>
> That's another wonderfully constructed strawman. I don't use any
> filters, but I'm sure that won't stop you from believing otherwise.
Eh? I'm sure I have read another of your posts in which you actually listed
your search parameters. Oh, sorry, you're going to tell me Google (for
example) search parameters aren't the same as filters are they? Not that I
actually mentioned "filters" in the first place, that was your inference.
> >> In a profit-driven world, they'd rather you
> >>throw money at a problem to fix it, rather than put any real effort
> >>into fixing their original mistake (which, BTW, would have to be
> done
> >>gratis, in all likelihood.)
> It's meaning is self-evident. Reading comprehension is obviously not
> your strong suit.
Really? Who are "they" then? In the context of the post, "they" would be
professionals, or engineers (so often when large capital projects go wrong,
ignoramuses like you blame "the engineers"). But you seem blissfully
ignorant of the significance of context with respect to semantics, so it's
hard to tell just what you mean anymore. As for reading comprehension,
"pot - kettle - black" as someone else wrote about your posts; remember your
"5 cylinder" debacle?
> > You are obviously not an engineer, nor do
> > you have any notion of how to make a profit.
>
> LOL. You haven't the slightest clue.
Well actually, you handed out some excellent clues in that wonderfully
simplistic and generalising "they" statement.
> I'm sure you'd be wrong in any case. So far, you have not
> disappointed in that regard.
LOL. You haven't the slightest clue (as you have flattered me by taking on
board some of my vocabulary, I'll return the compliment). As it happens I am
an engineer, and so far, a profit maker too.
> > I must say I am intrigued as to what drives you to post to this
newsgroup.
>
> The sheer enjoyment of see your ilk and their thin-skinned whinings
> makes it all worthwhile. That, and my serial Audi ownership. My love
> of cars in general?
"...your ilk...?" Quite a rare usage, wonder where you got that from? And a
string of Audis? Me too, I'm on my fifth, well seventh if I count the one I
wrote off twice through overenthusiasm, and rebuilt. Have you worked out how
to open a bonnet (sorry - hood) yet? Please, please ask me what I know about
cars. Or gas turbines. Or steam turbines. Or fluid dynamics. Or structural
analysis. Or Lagrangian analysis of soil behaviour. Or, since my recent
career change, GSM, GPRS, even RF amplifiers (!). Oh, and raising a family
while doing this too. Getting the gist? Or would you like me to send you my
CV (that's curriculum vitae, not constant velocity or cheval vapeur - I
would hate to be unclear)?
> Mostly, I do it to annoy you.
Wow, I'm flattered, you go to this trouble just for me? Yeah, and that's
three things that annoy me now, mosquitos, dog pooh and Spider.
> I am so very sorry I don't live up to your standards. But here's
> another free clue: Tough . I don't care at all that you don't
> care for my postings. It's not my problem, and won't ever be my
> problem. So, you can either get over it, or seeth with rage over the
> injustice of it all.
No need to apologise. I wouldn't blame my neighbour's dog for shitting in
the park, it's a dog's nature. I blame your owner.
> > Thus, I won't try to be helpful or civil to you.
>
> I'm simply devastated. I don't know how I'll manage without your
> approval and support.
Ooh, is this irony? You'll manage, my kids did when they grew up.
> > This post isn't
> > particularly amusing and it certainly isn't relevant to RF amplifiers.
>
> Educate yourself on the meaning of "alt" in the USENET hierarchy.
Oh ok then, to quote a "newbie guide,"
(http://tgos.org/newbie/newsgroups3.html) "...in alt.*, ....[t]here are no
rules..." - except those Spider wishes to apply to others, e.g. "top
posting corrected," "full post fool," "off topic" etc. etc.
I would agree such "rules" are pretty reasonable and commonsense, and apply
well to any form of correspondence. You so vehemently cane others for
flouting them, yet seem unfettered by them yourself. You must surely expect
others to kick you back now and then; funny how you get so indignant when
they do. Ignorance is no excuse, but I claim mitigating circumstances - I am
a "newb" after all.
> And this effects you how? Nobody asked for you to stick in your
> worthless opinions, and as far as that goes, your off-topic flames.
"Pot - kettle - black" again. The correct usage is "affects" by the way,
more on this later. Such desperation in your words now.....
> Hey, but if you are righteous, you can be a hypocrite, right? LOL.
Desperation, "pot - kettle - black" again.
> > Elsewhere you chip in with more risible attempts at humour at
> > someone else's expense, or so you seem to think.
>
> And this effects you how?
And again! Well, to continue my previous analogy, coming across your posts
is a bit like stepping in that doggy pooh as one crosses the garden to smell
the roses. It's annoying but you take the risk when you step on the lawn,
you know you should have watched your step, and the dog can't help it,
that's life. As I said, I flame mutts like you mainly because you ask for it
and it fills the ad breaks. Oh and it's more fun than playing Freecell.
> > You poor boy.
>
> Hmm, I have often considered my financial status as "comfortable," and
> I stopped being a boy some years ago.
Oh dear, some lessons in reading compehension might not go amiss?
> > Were you
> > bullied at school?
>
> Not that I recall.
Oh dear oh dear, could it be repressed memories of bullying making you
behave this way?
> Your backhanded psychoanalysis should be more
> properly reserved for someone who cannot begin to make the change she
> seeks, but attempts to anyway.
Well, you have lost me here. I'm pretty good at cryptic crosswords, but I
admit defeat. Then again, maybe this really is just meaningless irrelevance.
> Ahhh, yes, the "short " gambit. The stuff of elementary school
> taunts. You calling me "boy" becomes hilariously ironic...
>
> And then, the masturbation gambit. At least you've graduated to high
> school insults now. A bit of growth for you - I'm pleased.
I had an inkling you would appreciate this kind of stuff, and make the
appropriate inferences from your life experience.
> > I just don't have the willpower,and I had
> > better quit before I fall even further into the shadow of your masterful
> > command of language and USENET etttiquette.
>
> Watch out - Mr. Roberts might have a go at you for misspellingg
> something.
Typographic errors are common and don't bother most people. Persistent
misspelling and incorrect usage betrays a lack of education, and certainly
shows it's not in your province to lecture others about semantics and plain
English. As you said, there's no time like the present - attend a night
school (if the 24-7 manager will give you the time off).
> Your sarcasm and wit have laid me low once more. What is a poor
> fellow to do, in the face of such fierce and incisive commentary?
The same as a rich, or comfortable fellow perhaps? Hang on, that's the wrong
meaning applied to "poor" isn't it? I just don't know, this context-free
"take whatever meaning suits Spider" English is difficult to grasp. I'll
take a stab at an answer to your question, which really is some of your own
advice. Accept that while you laugh at others flailing and floundering, in
this little pond you have long since sunk without trace; get over it and
move on with your bottom-dwelling.
> Oh, I'm sure it's not the last I've heard from you. Like so many
> others, your bruised ego will not allow me to have the last word.
Having an ego, especially one that can be bruised, is very much a male
preserve - bad luck.
> It's too bad, really, that you decided to engage me in this fashion,
> and then have to bow out, for the second time.
It's too bad? Sounds like you are disappointed that I found someone else to
play with. You really can't get my and several other posters' hints can you?
You may find the urge to chew this long dead piece of wood uncontrollable,
but it really is getting boring now. Still, if you really do enjoy being
publicly debagged and nobody else minds too much (feel free to pull me up
anybody) when I have a spare moment I'll give you another spin.
> Mostly, you should
> just refrain from posting about me or my handle, and leave it alone.
> Then, I won't be obligated to flame you like this.
What is it with you guys and "handles?" I can't say I'm really concerned
about people knowing my real name. Now, from what I have read in the newbie
guides, if one hasn't got the ***** to use one's real name [my
interpretation] one should choose a "handle" that conveys some meaning, some
aspect of one's character maybe. Spider? You eat flies? Beelzebubba@....? Do
you have donkey's legs like in the pictures? You certainly seem to have a
donkey's attributes up top, shame about the middle bit though. The most
basic of munged email adresses is fine for me. If I lived in the US and were
named John Lennon on the other hand.......
Anyway, one more time.....
> > Please be my guest and have the last word, I know it means so much to
> > you......
But if you do decide to leave now, watch the door doesn't trap your tail on
the way out.
going to apologise and take it all back. But.....
> Why bother apologizing? It seems rather stupid to engage in a
> flamewar and bother to pretend that you are sorry for doing it.
Here you go again telling others what they think, mean, feel, etc. - such
breathtaking arrogance. My apology was genuine, but I'm sure most people
stopped following this thread some time ago. Anyway, no apologies to you;
you just invite such repartee and it helps to pass the time between Simpsons
episodes.
> That's very nice imagery. But I can tell that repeating it has made
> you no closer to comprehending it.
>
> > > Then she killfiled me, and announced it to the
> > > world.
>
> > The above is perfectly clear and concise.
>
> It most certainly is. And I meant it exactly as it was written. Now,
> for those who *infer* something from what is *not* written, I have no
> help.
Hoist by your own petard. Or are readers expected to insert the words
"claimed to have" and "subscribers to this newsgroup around the" in the
appropriate places by dint of some sort of Spider telepathy?
> > It conveys both your naiivety and grandiose mentality very clearly to
me.
>
> If indeed one is to make the unfounded assumption that I meant
> something different from what was written, then indeed this strawman
> might have substance. But it does not.
Whoooosh, hoist again.
> > Did you really think I would bother to even click a mouse button to get
rid
> > of your cluttering of this newsgroup?
>
> I wouldn't dare to guess. I would, however, laugh heartily at those
> who claim to click buttons, but then do not. "I'm not listening to
> you any more, nyah, nyah, nyah!"
It seemed to take you in pretty well didn't it? "Then she killfiled me, and
announced it to the world." - oh hang on, thought waves coming
through......"Then she went for a curry, and announced it to the cat."
> > Just because you are, don't assume
> > that I am entirely dependent on software to pick out meaningful and
relevant
> > information from the background radiation.
>
> That's another wonderfully constructed strawman. I don't use any
> filters, but I'm sure that won't stop you from believing otherwise.
Eh? I'm sure I have read another of your posts in which you actually listed
your search parameters. Oh, sorry, you're going to tell me Google (for
example) search parameters aren't the same as filters are they? Not that I
actually mentioned "filters" in the first place, that was your inference.
> >> In a profit-driven world, they'd rather you
> >>throw money at a problem to fix it, rather than put any real effort
> >>into fixing their original mistake (which, BTW, would have to be
> done
> >>gratis, in all likelihood.)
> It's meaning is self-evident. Reading comprehension is obviously not
> your strong suit.
Really? Who are "they" then? In the context of the post, "they" would be
professionals, or engineers (so often when large capital projects go wrong,
ignoramuses like you blame "the engineers"). But you seem blissfully
ignorant of the significance of context with respect to semantics, so it's
hard to tell just what you mean anymore. As for reading comprehension,
"pot - kettle - black" as someone else wrote about your posts; remember your
"5 cylinder" debacle?
> > You are obviously not an engineer, nor do
> > you have any notion of how to make a profit.
>
> LOL. You haven't the slightest clue.
Well actually, you handed out some excellent clues in that wonderfully
simplistic and generalising "they" statement.
> I'm sure you'd be wrong in any case. So far, you have not
> disappointed in that regard.
LOL. You haven't the slightest clue (as you have flattered me by taking on
board some of my vocabulary, I'll return the compliment). As it happens I am
an engineer, and so far, a profit maker too.
> > I must say I am intrigued as to what drives you to post to this
newsgroup.
>
> The sheer enjoyment of see your ilk and their thin-skinned whinings
> makes it all worthwhile. That, and my serial Audi ownership. My love
> of cars in general?
"...your ilk...?" Quite a rare usage, wonder where you got that from? And a
string of Audis? Me too, I'm on my fifth, well seventh if I count the one I
wrote off twice through overenthusiasm, and rebuilt. Have you worked out how
to open a bonnet (sorry - hood) yet? Please, please ask me what I know about
cars. Or gas turbines. Or steam turbines. Or fluid dynamics. Or structural
analysis. Or Lagrangian analysis of soil behaviour. Or, since my recent
career change, GSM, GPRS, even RF amplifiers (!). Oh, and raising a family
while doing this too. Getting the gist? Or would you like me to send you my
CV (that's curriculum vitae, not constant velocity or cheval vapeur - I
would hate to be unclear)?
> Mostly, I do it to annoy you.
Wow, I'm flattered, you go to this trouble just for me? Yeah, and that's
three things that annoy me now, mosquitos, dog pooh and Spider.
> I am so very sorry I don't live up to your standards. But here's
> another free clue: Tough . I don't care at all that you don't
> care for my postings. It's not my problem, and won't ever be my
> problem. So, you can either get over it, or seeth with rage over the
> injustice of it all.
No need to apologise. I wouldn't blame my neighbour's dog for shitting in
the park, it's a dog's nature. I blame your owner.
> > Thus, I won't try to be helpful or civil to you.
>
> I'm simply devastated. I don't know how I'll manage without your
> approval and support.
Ooh, is this irony? You'll manage, my kids did when they grew up.
> > This post isn't
> > particularly amusing and it certainly isn't relevant to RF amplifiers.
>
> Educate yourself on the meaning of "alt" in the USENET hierarchy.
Oh ok then, to quote a "newbie guide,"
(http://tgos.org/newbie/newsgroups3.html) "...in alt.*, ....[t]here are no
rules..." - except those Spider wishes to apply to others, e.g. "top
posting corrected," "full post fool," "off topic" etc. etc.
I would agree such "rules" are pretty reasonable and commonsense, and apply
well to any form of correspondence. You so vehemently cane others for
flouting them, yet seem unfettered by them yourself. You must surely expect
others to kick you back now and then; funny how you get so indignant when
they do. Ignorance is no excuse, but I claim mitigating circumstances - I am
a "newb" after all.
> And this effects you how? Nobody asked for you to stick in your
> worthless opinions, and as far as that goes, your off-topic flames.
"Pot - kettle - black" again. The correct usage is "affects" by the way,
more on this later. Such desperation in your words now.....
> Hey, but if you are righteous, you can be a hypocrite, right? LOL.
Desperation, "pot - kettle - black" again.
> > Elsewhere you chip in with more risible attempts at humour at
> > someone else's expense, or so you seem to think.
>
> And this effects you how?
And again! Well, to continue my previous analogy, coming across your posts
is a bit like stepping in that doggy pooh as one crosses the garden to smell
the roses. It's annoying but you take the risk when you step on the lawn,
you know you should have watched your step, and the dog can't help it,
that's life. As I said, I flame mutts like you mainly because you ask for it
and it fills the ad breaks. Oh and it's more fun than playing Freecell.
> > You poor boy.
>
> Hmm, I have often considered my financial status as "comfortable," and
> I stopped being a boy some years ago.
Oh dear, some lessons in reading compehension might not go amiss?
> > Were you
> > bullied at school?
>
> Not that I recall.
Oh dear oh dear, could it be repressed memories of bullying making you
behave this way?
> Your backhanded psychoanalysis should be more
> properly reserved for someone who cannot begin to make the change she
> seeks, but attempts to anyway.
Well, you have lost me here. I'm pretty good at cryptic crosswords, but I
admit defeat. Then again, maybe this really is just meaningless irrelevance.
> Ahhh, yes, the "short " gambit. The stuff of elementary school
> taunts. You calling me "boy" becomes hilariously ironic...
>
> And then, the masturbation gambit. At least you've graduated to high
> school insults now. A bit of growth for you - I'm pleased.
I had an inkling you would appreciate this kind of stuff, and make the
appropriate inferences from your life experience.
> > I just don't have the willpower,and I had
> > better quit before I fall even further into the shadow of your masterful
> > command of language and USENET etttiquette.
>
> Watch out - Mr. Roberts might have a go at you for misspellingg
> something.
Typographic errors are common and don't bother most people. Persistent
misspelling and incorrect usage betrays a lack of education, and certainly
shows it's not in your province to lecture others about semantics and plain
English. As you said, there's no time like the present - attend a night
school (if the 24-7 manager will give you the time off).
> Your sarcasm and wit have laid me low once more. What is a poor
> fellow to do, in the face of such fierce and incisive commentary?
The same as a rich, or comfortable fellow perhaps? Hang on, that's the wrong
meaning applied to "poor" isn't it? I just don't know, this context-free
"take whatever meaning suits Spider" English is difficult to grasp. I'll
take a stab at an answer to your question, which really is some of your own
advice. Accept that while you laugh at others flailing and floundering, in
this little pond you have long since sunk without trace; get over it and
move on with your bottom-dwelling.
> Oh, I'm sure it's not the last I've heard from you. Like so many
> others, your bruised ego will not allow me to have the last word.
Having an ego, especially one that can be bruised, is very much a male
preserve - bad luck.
> It's too bad, really, that you decided to engage me in this fashion,
> and then have to bow out, for the second time.
It's too bad? Sounds like you are disappointed that I found someone else to
play with. You really can't get my and several other posters' hints can you?
You may find the urge to chew this long dead piece of wood uncontrollable,
but it really is getting boring now. Still, if you really do enjoy being
publicly debagged and nobody else minds too much (feel free to pull me up
anybody) when I have a spare moment I'll give you another spin.
> Mostly, you should
> just refrain from posting about me or my handle, and leave it alone.
> Then, I won't be obligated to flame you like this.
What is it with you guys and "handles?" I can't say I'm really concerned
about people knowing my real name. Now, from what I have read in the newbie
guides, if one hasn't got the ***** to use one's real name [my
interpretation] one should choose a "handle" that conveys some meaning, some
aspect of one's character maybe. Spider? You eat flies? Beelzebubba@....? Do
you have donkey's legs like in the pictures? You certainly seem to have a
donkey's attributes up top, shame about the middle bit though. The most
basic of munged email adresses is fine for me. If I lived in the US and were
named John Lennon on the other hand.......
Anyway, one more time.....
> > Please be my guest and have the last word, I know it means so much to
> > you......
But if you do decide to leave now, watch the door doesn't trap your tail on
the way out.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
"Rachael" <rfearnhead@mybra.btinternet.com> wrote in message news:<blmjca$9s3$1@hercules.btinternet.com>...
> Do you know, after reading a couple of your recent posts I was actually
> going to apologise and take it all back. But.....
Of course you were. And pigs were going to fly, and milk and honey
pour from every rock.
LOL - tell me another fairy story. You seem full of them.
> > Why bother apologizing? It seems rather stupid to engage in a
> > flamewar and bother to pretend that you are sorry for doing it.
>
> Here you go again telling others what they think, mean, feel, etc.
Hardly. The word "seems" is your clue. Reading comprehension, again.
> - such
> breathtaking arrogance.
LOL. Irony.
> My apology was genuine
Sure, just like your "block sender" quip, and your "have the last
word" parting shot, etc, etc, etc.
> but I'm sure most people
> stopped following this thread some time ago.
Hurray! Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
> Anyway, no apologies to you;
> you just invite such repartee and it helps to pass the time between Simpsons
> episodes.
Three minutes for all this typing? Doubtful. But your postings do
have a Homerian quality. As in the character, not the epic
storyteller.
BTW, why on earth would you apologize to me? You're not nearly big
enough for that. We both know that for a fact.
> > That's very nice imagery. But I can tell that repeating it has made
> > you no closer to comprehending it.
> >
> > > > Then she killfiled me, and announced it to the
> > > > world.
>
> > > The above is perfectly clear and concise.
> >
> > It most certainly is. And I meant it exactly as it was written. Now,
> > for those who *infer* something from what is *not* written, I have no
> > help.
>
> Hoist by your own petard.
Wrong again.
> Or are readers expected to insert the words
> "claimed to have" and "subscribers to this newsgroup around the" in the
> appropriate places by dint of some sort of Spider telepathy?
Anyone with an ounce of sence could see that your first insertion was
unnecessary at the time, and that the second is redundant. But thank
you for admitting that you inferred something that was not actually
present.
> > > It conveys both your naiivety and grandiose mentality very clearly to
> me.
> >
> > If indeed one is to make the unfounded assumption that I meant
> > something different from what was written, then indeed this strawman
> > might have substance. But it does not.
>
> Whoooosh, hoist again.
Hardly, again. You seem to have difficulty with the simple fact that
you WANTED me to believe that a.a.audi was "the whole world," rather
get it from context or just plain common sense. Your interpretation
doesn't make sense. Sucks to be you.
> > > Did you really think I would bother to even click a mouse button to get
> rid
> > > of your cluttering of this newsgroup?
> >
> > I wouldn't dare to guess. I would, however, laugh heartily at those
> > who claim to click buttons, but then do not. "I'm not listening to
> > you any more, nyah, nyah, nyah!"
>
> It seemed to take you in pretty well didn't it?
Ahhh, yes. The "but, but, but - I was *trolling* you" strategy.
Flailers always seek this one when cornered. Classic.
> "Then she killfiled me, and
> announced it to the world." - oh hang on, thought waves coming
> through......"Then she went for a curry, and announced it to the cat."
Certainly I took you at your word that you actually did a "block
sender" on me, like you claimed. I will admit that I did not for a
moment believe that you were so small as to use it merely as a parting
shot. My mistake.
> > > Just because you are, don't assume
> > > that I am entirely dependent on software to pick out meaningful and
> relevant
> > > information from the background radiation.
> >
> > That's another wonderfully constructed strawman. I don't use any
> > filters, but I'm sure that won't stop you from believing otherwise.
>
> Eh? I'm sure I have read another of your posts in which you actually listed
> your search parameters.
Context, my dear, context. I do not filter out other USENET users or
posts. The rest of your comments are non sequitur. Not using some
sort of parametric search is nigh on useless for finding specific
information. Like going to a library and picking a book at random,
hoping to find the Clausius-Clapyron equation.
> > >> In a profit-driven world, they'd rather you
> > >>throw money at a problem to fix it, rather than put any real effort
> > >>into fixing their original mistake (which, BTW, would have to be
> done
> > >>gratis, in all likelihood.)
>
> > It's meaning is self-evident. Reading comprehension is obviously not
> > your strong suit.
>
> Really? Who are "they" then?
Read the title of this thread. Got clue?
> But you seem blissfully
> ignorant of the significance of context with respect to semantics, so it's
> hard to tell just what you mean anymore.
LOL. For someone who has snipped the context, that is a hilariously
ironic statement. Tell me another - you crack me up.
> As for reading comprehension,
> "pot - kettle - black" as someone else wrote about your posts; remember your
> "5 cylinder" debacle?
Yes, and it seems that you missed the point. More irony, LOL! Keep
it coming, this is great.
> > > You are obviously not an engineer, nor do
> > > you have any notion of how to make a profit.
> >
> > LOL. You haven't the slightest clue.
>
> Well actually, you handed out some excellent clues in that wonderfully
> simplistic and generalising "they" statement.
Then you read the "clues" you got wrong. If you didn't get the right
answer from the "clues," then you really didn't get a clue to begin
with, ehh?
> > I'm sure you'd be wrong in any case. So far, you have not
> > disappointed in that regard.
>
> LOL. You haven't the slightest clue (as you have flattered me by taking on
> board some of my vocabulary, I'll return the compliment). As it happens I am
> an engineer, and so far, a profit maker too.
I'm so very impressed. So, when you go to a professional stereo
install place, and they keep trying to sell you part after bit after
service in order to cure a problem they created in the first place,
how are my comments out of place? I don't know how the 3rd party
folks do it in GB, but around these parts, the monkeys that get paid
minimum wage to do these sorts of things are doing it at the behest of
their managers, and the sheeple customers often times go along. For
reference, see the original post in this thread.
> > > I must say I am intrigued as to what drives you to post to this
> newsgroup.
> >
> > The sheer enjoyment of see your ilk and their thin-skinned whinings
> > makes it all worthwhile. That, and my serial Audi ownership. My love
> > of cars in general?
>
> "...your ilk...?"
Yes, the whining, insecure, irascible folk who have nothing better to
do than **** and moan about someone else's postings, when they have
absolutely ZERO power to change anything.
Your ilk.
> Quite a rare usage, wonder where you got that from?
From reading, no doubt. You should try it some time - it expands your
mind wonderfully. Well, maybe not *your* mind, per se.
> And a
> string of Audis? Me too, I'm on my fifth, well seventh if I count the one I
> wrote off twice through overenthusiasm, and rebuilt.
I find them to be wonderful, robust and pleasurable beasts. And here
in the U.S., the lingering stain of the "unintended acceleration"
hack-job keeps resale prices low, such that Audis are cheap to
acquire. A win/win for the consumer.
And AWD is nice when it snows - which it does here in the wintertime.
> Have you worked out how
> to open a bonnet (sorry - hood) yet?
Hmm, is that that big, flat bit in the front? Well, if I could ever
find the release...
[male-like chest-pounding snipped]
> Getting the gist?
The "my brain is bigger than yours" newbie thrashing that emanates
from those desperate to establish bona fides.
I am underwhelmed by your CV.
> > Mostly, I do it to annoy you.
>
> Wow, I'm flattered, you go to this trouble just for me?
Oh, yes indeed, *just* for you.
> Yeah, and that's
> three things that annoy me now, mosquitos, dog pooh and Spider.
Don't let that lack of a clue hold you back, now...
> > I am so very sorry I don't live up to your standards. But here's
> > another free clue: Tough . I don't care at all that you don't
> > care for my postings. It's not my problem, and won't ever be my
> > problem. So, you can either get over it, or seeth with rage over the
> > injustice of it all.
>
> No need to apologise.
Sarcasm is lost on you as well? Not surprised in the least...
> I wouldn't blame my neighbour's dog for shitting in
> the park, it's a dog's nature. I blame your owner.
Slavery was abolished over here quite some time ago. I find it odd
that you advocate such a thing. Most civilized folks do not.
> > > Thus, I won't try to be helpful or civil to you.
> >
> > I'm simply devastated. I don't know how I'll manage without your
> > approval and support.
>
> Ooh, is this irony?
No. But thanks for trying - there may be hope for you yet.
> You'll manage, my kids did when they grew up.
That's quite difficult to believe, having an insecure, whiny mother as
they do. I'm guessing they couldn't wait to get out of the house and
be free of your complaining. Just a guess, based on your petulant
prose in a.a.audi.
> > > This post isn't
> > > particularly amusing and it certainly isn't relevant to RF amplifiers.
> >
> > Educate yourself on the meaning of "alt" in the USENET hierarchy.
>
> Oh ok then, to quote a "newbie guide,"
> (http://tgos.org/newbie/newsgroups3.html) "...in alt.*, ....[t]here are no
> rules..." - except those Spider wishes to apply to others, e.g. "top
> posting corrected," "full post fool," "off topic" etc. etc.
I am not free to order my posts in a logical fashion? Or express my
opinion? It is hilarious, though, how you complain about my posts
being off-topic or irrelevant, when yours are not any better. Just a
silly hypocrite.
Just to be clear - I recognize that I can in no way change the posting
behavior of others. So, in this case, I cannot "apply" rules to
anyone. Wishing to do so would be simply stupid. Besides, I am not
the one making a case for muzzling anyone's style.
> I would agree such "rules" are pretty reasonable and commonsense, and apply
> well to any form of correspondence.
And yet you ignore them yourself. I love how you flamers just love to
berate others for what you yourself are oh, so willing to do.
> You so vehemently cane others for
> flouting them, yet seem unfettered by them yourself.
I don't top-post, and I rarely full-quote. I only use the words
off-topic to describe the crap like this - usually to those who whine
about my posts being off-topic (in an ironically off-topic fashion, I
might add.)
So, you can try and reimage my ideas that way, but a cursory
inspection of my posts will reveal it for what it really is - grasping
at straws to save face.
> You must surely expect
> others to kick you back now and then
Kick back? Yes. But when they "kick first," I'm not going to let it
lie. You are the one initiating these exchanges, not I. I sure as
hell am not going to let you flame without flaming in return.
> funny how you get so indignant when
> they do.
Funny how you try to reimage it as me firing the opening salvo.
Here's another free clue, dimwit: I only very rarely flame first.
> Ignorance is no excuse, but I claim mitigating circumstances - I am
> a "newb" after all.
Here's some free advice: if you do not wish to be involved in a
flamewar, don't start one.
> > And this effects you how? Nobody asked for you to stick in your
> > worthless opinions, and as far as that goes, your off-topic flames.
>
> "Pot - kettle - black" again.
Hardly. again.
Since you were the one that initiated the exchanges between us, for
you to criticize my behavior is sheer hypocrisy. Pointing that out is
not. Try again?
> The correct usage is "affects" by the way,
> more on this later. Such desperation in your words now.....
When all else is lost, a grammar flame always works. Yup, you got me
there. I feel badly about it, too - so much so that I'll just have to
yawn.
> > Hey, but if you are righteous, you can be a hypocrite, right? LOL.
>
> Desperation, "pot - kettle - black" again.
You are the one attacking me on these points, not the other way
around. I never claimed any moral high ground, so trying to paint me
with that brush is just plain, oh, what is the word? Desperation.
LOL.
> > > Elsewhere you chip in with more risible attempts at humour at
> > > someone else's expense, or so you seem to think.
> >
> > And this effects you how?
>
> And again! Well, to continue my previous analogy, coming across your posts
> is a bit like stepping in that doggy pooh as one crosses the garden to smell
> the roses.
And to make your analogy actually correct, it would read more like
this:
"...coming across your posts is a bit like walking out in the garden
and finding doggy pooh to step in, and then whining endlessly about
the soiled shoe. What roses?"
You flamed me. And now you whine about it, like you are some innocent
victim. ROTFL - you morons are all the same.
> It's annoying but you take the risk when you step on the lawn,
> you know you should have watched your step, and the dog can't help it,
> that's life.
Well, now you have an analogy that works. But if you have eyes, there
is no reason to step in any crap - you just steer around it. Unless,
of course, you *want* to step in it. Maybe it won't mess up your shoe
this time, even though it has on every previous occasion.
While I must admit that I am amused by being referred to as "doggy
pooh," and actually using the term myself, the simple fact remains:
you are the one who chose to engage in this exchange, and the one
before. You initiated both, and you controlled the content of your
comments. To somehow pretend that it was unavoidable, or to actively
blame me for your choices, is simply and wonderfully stupid.
> As I said, I flame mutts like you mainly because you ask for it
> and it fills the ad breaks.
Ahh, so you seek out people to flame. And that puts you on the moral
high ground how?
You are nothing better than what you criticize.
> > > You poor boy.
> >
> > Hmm, I have often considered my financial status as "comfortable," and
> > I stopped being a boy some years ago.
>
> Oh dear, some lessons in reading compehension might not go amiss?
Lessons in wit gone amiss? LOL.
> > > Were you
> > > bullied at school?
> >
> > Not that I recall.
>
> Oh dear oh dear, could it be repressed memories of bullying making you
> behave this way?
Are you an engineer, or a psychoanalyst? If your engineering skills
are on par with your psychoanalytical skills, I sincerely hope the
safety of the public is in no way dependent on your work.
But since you are grasping at straws here, I will help you: no, I was
never bullied.
> > Your backhanded psychoanalysis should be more
> > properly reserved for someone who cannot begin to make the change she
> > seeks, but attempts to anyway.
>
> Well, you have lost me here.
That is not a surprise. You have not shown yourself to be anything
more than a harpy on a computer. Subtle clues are lost on those such
as you.
Since you cannot change my posting style, why try?
> > Ahhh, yes, the "short " gambit. The stuff of elementary school
> > taunts. You calling me "boy" becomes hilariously ironic...
> >
> > And then, the masturbation gambit. At least you've graduated to high
> > school insults now. A bit of growth for you - I'm pleased.
>
> I had an inkling you would appreciate this kind of stuff
Appreciate? No. Recognize as pathetic? Sure.
> and make the
> appropriate inferences from your life experience.
My USENET experience has been that when one runs out of meaningful
topics for discussion, the discussion seems to degrade into quips on
sexual inadequacy, partners, equipment, etc. Like I said - pathetic.
> > > I just don't have the willpower,and I had
> > > better quit before I fall even further into the shadow of your masterful
> > > command of language and USENET etttiquette.
> >
> > Watch out - Mr. Roberts might have a go at you for misspellingg
> > something.
>
> Typographic errors are common and don't bother most people.
Depends. How wound up are you, and how desperate are you to make a
point? Grammar, spelling and useage flamers are the lowest of the
lot. Directly followed by the punctuation *****.
> > Your sarcasm and wit have laid me low once more. What is a poor
> > fellow to do, in the face of such fierce and incisive commentary?
>
> The same as a rich, or comfortable fellow perhaps? Hang on, that's the wrong
> meaning applied to "poor" isn't it?
Ahh, touche! [claps]
> I just don't know, this context-free
> "take whatever meaning suits Spider" English is difficult to grasp.
Oh, bet then you spoil it with such a low comment. Boo!
> I'll
> take a stab at an answer to your question, which really is some of your own
> advice.
[Psst! It was a rhetorical question draped in sarcasm.]
> > Oh, I'm sure it's not the last I've heard from you. Like so many
> > others, your bruised ego will not allow me to have the last word.
>
> Having an ego, especially one that can be bruised, is very much a male
> preserve - bad luck.
And yet, my prediction was right on the mark. You're defensive,
grasping at straws and reimaging to try and be witty, or cutting, or
both - and succeeding not at all.
> > It's too bad, really, that you decided to engage me in this fashion,
> > and then have to bow out, for the second time.
>
> It's too bad?
Yes, for you.
> Sounds like you are disappointed that I found someone else to
> play with.
Doesn't matter to me one way or another. If you stopped posting
tomorrow, who would care, really? The same question is answered in
the same way when posed to me, of course.
> You really can't get my and several other posters' hints can you?
Sure I can. I just ignore them as hilariously stupid.
> You may find the urge to chew this long dead piece of wood uncontrollable,
> but it really is getting boring now.
And yet you spent all this time and effort trying to produce some
emotional affect. [sic]
> Still, if you really do enjoy being
> publicly debagged and nobody else minds too much (feel free to pull me up
> anybody) when I have a spare moment I'll give you another spin.
Spin is the right word, for certain. Spin is about all you can do,
since you have neither the brains nor the material to effect [sic] me
in any way.
> > Mostly, you should
> > just refrain from posting about me or my handle, and leave it alone.
> > Then, I won't be obligated to flame you like this.
>
> What is it with you guys and "handles?" I can't say I'm really concerned
> about people knowing my real name.
In all seriousness, if you had experienced what I did at the hands of
a inbalanced person, you'd not use your real name either.
But I have explained that elsewhere, and won't rehash it now. Suffice
it to say, I have no problems with handles at all. The bonus? At
least you know that I am using a pseudonym. If I were to use the name
"Marcus Altnes" you wouldn't know anything of the sort.
> The most
> basic of munged email adresses is fine for me. If I lived in the US and were
> named John Lennon on the other hand.......
I had a spamtrap too. Didn't help against a human with bad
intentions.
> > > Please be my guest and have the last word, I know it means so much to
> > > you......
>
> But if you do decide to leave now, watch the door doesn't trap your tail on
> the way out.
You are responding to your own writings? And you call me arrogant.
LOL.
I look forward to your next whiny rant.
Spider
> Do you know, after reading a couple of your recent posts I was actually
> going to apologise and take it all back. But.....
Of course you were. And pigs were going to fly, and milk and honey
pour from every rock.
LOL - tell me another fairy story. You seem full of them.
> > Why bother apologizing? It seems rather stupid to engage in a
> > flamewar and bother to pretend that you are sorry for doing it.
>
> Here you go again telling others what they think, mean, feel, etc.
Hardly. The word "seems" is your clue. Reading comprehension, again.
> - such
> breathtaking arrogance.
LOL. Irony.
> My apology was genuine
Sure, just like your "block sender" quip, and your "have the last
word" parting shot, etc, etc, etc.
> but I'm sure most people
> stopped following this thread some time ago.
Hurray! Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
> Anyway, no apologies to you;
> you just invite such repartee and it helps to pass the time between Simpsons
> episodes.
Three minutes for all this typing? Doubtful. But your postings do
have a Homerian quality. As in the character, not the epic
storyteller.
BTW, why on earth would you apologize to me? You're not nearly big
enough for that. We both know that for a fact.
> > That's very nice imagery. But I can tell that repeating it has made
> > you no closer to comprehending it.
> >
> > > > Then she killfiled me, and announced it to the
> > > > world.
>
> > > The above is perfectly clear and concise.
> >
> > It most certainly is. And I meant it exactly as it was written. Now,
> > for those who *infer* something from what is *not* written, I have no
> > help.
>
> Hoist by your own petard.
Wrong again.
> Or are readers expected to insert the words
> "claimed to have" and "subscribers to this newsgroup around the" in the
> appropriate places by dint of some sort of Spider telepathy?
Anyone with an ounce of sence could see that your first insertion was
unnecessary at the time, and that the second is redundant. But thank
you for admitting that you inferred something that was not actually
present.
> > > It conveys both your naiivety and grandiose mentality very clearly to
> me.
> >
> > If indeed one is to make the unfounded assumption that I meant
> > something different from what was written, then indeed this strawman
> > might have substance. But it does not.
>
> Whoooosh, hoist again.
Hardly, again. You seem to have difficulty with the simple fact that
you WANTED me to believe that a.a.audi was "the whole world," rather
get it from context or just plain common sense. Your interpretation
doesn't make sense. Sucks to be you.
> > > Did you really think I would bother to even click a mouse button to get
> rid
> > > of your cluttering of this newsgroup?
> >
> > I wouldn't dare to guess. I would, however, laugh heartily at those
> > who claim to click buttons, but then do not. "I'm not listening to
> > you any more, nyah, nyah, nyah!"
>
> It seemed to take you in pretty well didn't it?
Ahhh, yes. The "but, but, but - I was *trolling* you" strategy.
Flailers always seek this one when cornered. Classic.
> "Then she killfiled me, and
> announced it to the world." - oh hang on, thought waves coming
> through......"Then she went for a curry, and announced it to the cat."
Certainly I took you at your word that you actually did a "block
sender" on me, like you claimed. I will admit that I did not for a
moment believe that you were so small as to use it merely as a parting
shot. My mistake.
> > > Just because you are, don't assume
> > > that I am entirely dependent on software to pick out meaningful and
> relevant
> > > information from the background radiation.
> >
> > That's another wonderfully constructed strawman. I don't use any
> > filters, but I'm sure that won't stop you from believing otherwise.
>
> Eh? I'm sure I have read another of your posts in which you actually listed
> your search parameters.
Context, my dear, context. I do not filter out other USENET users or
posts. The rest of your comments are non sequitur. Not using some
sort of parametric search is nigh on useless for finding specific
information. Like going to a library and picking a book at random,
hoping to find the Clausius-Clapyron equation.
> > >> In a profit-driven world, they'd rather you
> > >>throw money at a problem to fix it, rather than put any real effort
> > >>into fixing their original mistake (which, BTW, would have to be
> done
> > >>gratis, in all likelihood.)
>
> > It's meaning is self-evident. Reading comprehension is obviously not
> > your strong suit.
>
> Really? Who are "they" then?
Read the title of this thread. Got clue?
> But you seem blissfully
> ignorant of the significance of context with respect to semantics, so it's
> hard to tell just what you mean anymore.
LOL. For someone who has snipped the context, that is a hilariously
ironic statement. Tell me another - you crack me up.
> As for reading comprehension,
> "pot - kettle - black" as someone else wrote about your posts; remember your
> "5 cylinder" debacle?
Yes, and it seems that you missed the point. More irony, LOL! Keep
it coming, this is great.
> > > You are obviously not an engineer, nor do
> > > you have any notion of how to make a profit.
> >
> > LOL. You haven't the slightest clue.
>
> Well actually, you handed out some excellent clues in that wonderfully
> simplistic and generalising "they" statement.
Then you read the "clues" you got wrong. If you didn't get the right
answer from the "clues," then you really didn't get a clue to begin
with, ehh?
> > I'm sure you'd be wrong in any case. So far, you have not
> > disappointed in that regard.
>
> LOL. You haven't the slightest clue (as you have flattered me by taking on
> board some of my vocabulary, I'll return the compliment). As it happens I am
> an engineer, and so far, a profit maker too.
I'm so very impressed. So, when you go to a professional stereo
install place, and they keep trying to sell you part after bit after
service in order to cure a problem they created in the first place,
how are my comments out of place? I don't know how the 3rd party
folks do it in GB, but around these parts, the monkeys that get paid
minimum wage to do these sorts of things are doing it at the behest of
their managers, and the sheeple customers often times go along. For
reference, see the original post in this thread.
> > > I must say I am intrigued as to what drives you to post to this
> newsgroup.
> >
> > The sheer enjoyment of see your ilk and their thin-skinned whinings
> > makes it all worthwhile. That, and my serial Audi ownership. My love
> > of cars in general?
>
> "...your ilk...?"
Yes, the whining, insecure, irascible folk who have nothing better to
do than **** and moan about someone else's postings, when they have
absolutely ZERO power to change anything.
Your ilk.
> Quite a rare usage, wonder where you got that from?
From reading, no doubt. You should try it some time - it expands your
mind wonderfully. Well, maybe not *your* mind, per se.
> And a
> string of Audis? Me too, I'm on my fifth, well seventh if I count the one I
> wrote off twice through overenthusiasm, and rebuilt.
I find them to be wonderful, robust and pleasurable beasts. And here
in the U.S., the lingering stain of the "unintended acceleration"
hack-job keeps resale prices low, such that Audis are cheap to
acquire. A win/win for the consumer.
And AWD is nice when it snows - which it does here in the wintertime.
> Have you worked out how
> to open a bonnet (sorry - hood) yet?
Hmm, is that that big, flat bit in the front? Well, if I could ever
find the release...
[male-like chest-pounding snipped]
> Getting the gist?
The "my brain is bigger than yours" newbie thrashing that emanates
from those desperate to establish bona fides.
I am underwhelmed by your CV.
> > Mostly, I do it to annoy you.
>
> Wow, I'm flattered, you go to this trouble just for me?
Oh, yes indeed, *just* for you.
> Yeah, and that's
> three things that annoy me now, mosquitos, dog pooh and Spider.
Don't let that lack of a clue hold you back, now...
> > I am so very sorry I don't live up to your standards. But here's
> > another free clue: Tough . I don't care at all that you don't
> > care for my postings. It's not my problem, and won't ever be my
> > problem. So, you can either get over it, or seeth with rage over the
> > injustice of it all.
>
> No need to apologise.
Sarcasm is lost on you as well? Not surprised in the least...
> I wouldn't blame my neighbour's dog for shitting in
> the park, it's a dog's nature. I blame your owner.
Slavery was abolished over here quite some time ago. I find it odd
that you advocate such a thing. Most civilized folks do not.
> > > Thus, I won't try to be helpful or civil to you.
> >
> > I'm simply devastated. I don't know how I'll manage without your
> > approval and support.
>
> Ooh, is this irony?
No. But thanks for trying - there may be hope for you yet.
> You'll manage, my kids did when they grew up.
That's quite difficult to believe, having an insecure, whiny mother as
they do. I'm guessing they couldn't wait to get out of the house and
be free of your complaining. Just a guess, based on your petulant
prose in a.a.audi.
> > > This post isn't
> > > particularly amusing and it certainly isn't relevant to RF amplifiers.
> >
> > Educate yourself on the meaning of "alt" in the USENET hierarchy.
>
> Oh ok then, to quote a "newbie guide,"
> (http://tgos.org/newbie/newsgroups3.html) "...in alt.*, ....[t]here are no
> rules..." - except those Spider wishes to apply to others, e.g. "top
> posting corrected," "full post fool," "off topic" etc. etc.
I am not free to order my posts in a logical fashion? Or express my
opinion? It is hilarious, though, how you complain about my posts
being off-topic or irrelevant, when yours are not any better. Just a
silly hypocrite.
Just to be clear - I recognize that I can in no way change the posting
behavior of others. So, in this case, I cannot "apply" rules to
anyone. Wishing to do so would be simply stupid. Besides, I am not
the one making a case for muzzling anyone's style.
> I would agree such "rules" are pretty reasonable and commonsense, and apply
> well to any form of correspondence.
And yet you ignore them yourself. I love how you flamers just love to
berate others for what you yourself are oh, so willing to do.
> You so vehemently cane others for
> flouting them, yet seem unfettered by them yourself.
I don't top-post, and I rarely full-quote. I only use the words
off-topic to describe the crap like this - usually to those who whine
about my posts being off-topic (in an ironically off-topic fashion, I
might add.)
So, you can try and reimage my ideas that way, but a cursory
inspection of my posts will reveal it for what it really is - grasping
at straws to save face.
> You must surely expect
> others to kick you back now and then
Kick back? Yes. But when they "kick first," I'm not going to let it
lie. You are the one initiating these exchanges, not I. I sure as
hell am not going to let you flame without flaming in return.
> funny how you get so indignant when
> they do.
Funny how you try to reimage it as me firing the opening salvo.
Here's another free clue, dimwit: I only very rarely flame first.
> Ignorance is no excuse, but I claim mitigating circumstances - I am
> a "newb" after all.
Here's some free advice: if you do not wish to be involved in a
flamewar, don't start one.
> > And this effects you how? Nobody asked for you to stick in your
> > worthless opinions, and as far as that goes, your off-topic flames.
>
> "Pot - kettle - black" again.
Hardly. again.
Since you were the one that initiated the exchanges between us, for
you to criticize my behavior is sheer hypocrisy. Pointing that out is
not. Try again?
> The correct usage is "affects" by the way,
> more on this later. Such desperation in your words now.....
When all else is lost, a grammar flame always works. Yup, you got me
there. I feel badly about it, too - so much so that I'll just have to
yawn.
> > Hey, but if you are righteous, you can be a hypocrite, right? LOL.
>
> Desperation, "pot - kettle - black" again.
You are the one attacking me on these points, not the other way
around. I never claimed any moral high ground, so trying to paint me
with that brush is just plain, oh, what is the word? Desperation.
LOL.
> > > Elsewhere you chip in with more risible attempts at humour at
> > > someone else's expense, or so you seem to think.
> >
> > And this effects you how?
>
> And again! Well, to continue my previous analogy, coming across your posts
> is a bit like stepping in that doggy pooh as one crosses the garden to smell
> the roses.
And to make your analogy actually correct, it would read more like
this:
"...coming across your posts is a bit like walking out in the garden
and finding doggy pooh to step in, and then whining endlessly about
the soiled shoe. What roses?"
You flamed me. And now you whine about it, like you are some innocent
victim. ROTFL - you morons are all the same.
> It's annoying but you take the risk when you step on the lawn,
> you know you should have watched your step, and the dog can't help it,
> that's life.
Well, now you have an analogy that works. But if you have eyes, there
is no reason to step in any crap - you just steer around it. Unless,
of course, you *want* to step in it. Maybe it won't mess up your shoe
this time, even though it has on every previous occasion.
While I must admit that I am amused by being referred to as "doggy
pooh," and actually using the term myself, the simple fact remains:
you are the one who chose to engage in this exchange, and the one
before. You initiated both, and you controlled the content of your
comments. To somehow pretend that it was unavoidable, or to actively
blame me for your choices, is simply and wonderfully stupid.
> As I said, I flame mutts like you mainly because you ask for it
> and it fills the ad breaks.
Ahh, so you seek out people to flame. And that puts you on the moral
high ground how?
You are nothing better than what you criticize.
> > > You poor boy.
> >
> > Hmm, I have often considered my financial status as "comfortable," and
> > I stopped being a boy some years ago.
>
> Oh dear, some lessons in reading compehension might not go amiss?
Lessons in wit gone amiss? LOL.
> > > Were you
> > > bullied at school?
> >
> > Not that I recall.
>
> Oh dear oh dear, could it be repressed memories of bullying making you
> behave this way?
Are you an engineer, or a psychoanalyst? If your engineering skills
are on par with your psychoanalytical skills, I sincerely hope the
safety of the public is in no way dependent on your work.
But since you are grasping at straws here, I will help you: no, I was
never bullied.
> > Your backhanded psychoanalysis should be more
> > properly reserved for someone who cannot begin to make the change she
> > seeks, but attempts to anyway.
>
> Well, you have lost me here.
That is not a surprise. You have not shown yourself to be anything
more than a harpy on a computer. Subtle clues are lost on those such
as you.
Since you cannot change my posting style, why try?
> > Ahhh, yes, the "short " gambit. The stuff of elementary school
> > taunts. You calling me "boy" becomes hilariously ironic...
> >
> > And then, the masturbation gambit. At least you've graduated to high
> > school insults now. A bit of growth for you - I'm pleased.
>
> I had an inkling you would appreciate this kind of stuff
Appreciate? No. Recognize as pathetic? Sure.
> and make the
> appropriate inferences from your life experience.
My USENET experience has been that when one runs out of meaningful
topics for discussion, the discussion seems to degrade into quips on
sexual inadequacy, partners, equipment, etc. Like I said - pathetic.
> > > I just don't have the willpower,and I had
> > > better quit before I fall even further into the shadow of your masterful
> > > command of language and USENET etttiquette.
> >
> > Watch out - Mr. Roberts might have a go at you for misspellingg
> > something.
>
> Typographic errors are common and don't bother most people.
Depends. How wound up are you, and how desperate are you to make a
point? Grammar, spelling and useage flamers are the lowest of the
lot. Directly followed by the punctuation *****.
> > Your sarcasm and wit have laid me low once more. What is a poor
> > fellow to do, in the face of such fierce and incisive commentary?
>
> The same as a rich, or comfortable fellow perhaps? Hang on, that's the wrong
> meaning applied to "poor" isn't it?
Ahh, touche! [claps]
> I just don't know, this context-free
> "take whatever meaning suits Spider" English is difficult to grasp.
Oh, bet then you spoil it with such a low comment. Boo!
> I'll
> take a stab at an answer to your question, which really is some of your own
> advice.
[Psst! It was a rhetorical question draped in sarcasm.]
> > Oh, I'm sure it's not the last I've heard from you. Like so many
> > others, your bruised ego will not allow me to have the last word.
>
> Having an ego, especially one that can be bruised, is very much a male
> preserve - bad luck.
And yet, my prediction was right on the mark. You're defensive,
grasping at straws and reimaging to try and be witty, or cutting, or
both - and succeeding not at all.
> > It's too bad, really, that you decided to engage me in this fashion,
> > and then have to bow out, for the second time.
>
> It's too bad?
Yes, for you.
> Sounds like you are disappointed that I found someone else to
> play with.
Doesn't matter to me one way or another. If you stopped posting
tomorrow, who would care, really? The same question is answered in
the same way when posed to me, of course.
> You really can't get my and several other posters' hints can you?
Sure I can. I just ignore them as hilariously stupid.
> You may find the urge to chew this long dead piece of wood uncontrollable,
> but it really is getting boring now.
And yet you spent all this time and effort trying to produce some
emotional affect. [sic]
> Still, if you really do enjoy being
> publicly debagged and nobody else minds too much (feel free to pull me up
> anybody) when I have a spare moment I'll give you another spin.
Spin is the right word, for certain. Spin is about all you can do,
since you have neither the brains nor the material to effect [sic] me
in any way.
> > Mostly, you should
> > just refrain from posting about me or my handle, and leave it alone.
> > Then, I won't be obligated to flame you like this.
>
> What is it with you guys and "handles?" I can't say I'm really concerned
> about people knowing my real name.
In all seriousness, if you had experienced what I did at the hands of
a inbalanced person, you'd not use your real name either.
But I have explained that elsewhere, and won't rehash it now. Suffice
it to say, I have no problems with handles at all. The bonus? At
least you know that I am using a pseudonym. If I were to use the name
"Marcus Altnes" you wouldn't know anything of the sort.
> The most
> basic of munged email adresses is fine for me. If I lived in the US and were
> named John Lennon on the other hand.......
I had a spamtrap too. Didn't help against a human with bad
intentions.
> > > Please be my guest and have the last word, I know it means so much to
> > > you......
>
> But if you do decide to leave now, watch the door doesn't trap your tail on
> the way out.
You are responding to your own writings? And you call me arrogant.
LOL.
I look forward to your next whiny rant.
Spider
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
"Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:73da2590.0310041242.ce1ed80@posting.google.co m...
> "Rachael" <rfearnhead@mybra.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:<blmjca$9s3$1@hercules.btinternet.com>...
> and yada yada yada
<snip>
Children, please..
Missing the subject line in a reply is a fairly easy mistake to make, Google
is useful but doesn't necessarily impart a deal of confidence - even the
best names in manuals and site design can make quite serious errors[1],
making Usenet kinda useful! And, of course, that intercooler stuff is in
another thread, on another froup[2]
Let's get back to cars.. it's a shame to see car nuts beating each other up.
Politicians, that's different. And possibly lawyers.
Hmm. Best stop there, methinks ;o)
--
Hairy One Kenobi
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this opinion do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of the highly-opinionated person expressing the opinion
in the first place. So there!
[1] Especially anything with "Haynes" in the title, and where, sitting on
the floor surrounded by grubby bits of metal, and wondering where that damn
circlip pinged to, the manual states "reassembly is simply the reverse of
disassembly". /How/ exactly do you take a club hammer and "undrift"
something?!?
[2] And Rachael's answer was pretty much there (from what I've seen - I'm
not a regular there), if from a more scientific viewpoint than is the norm
in some of these discussions. Personally, the merest mention of Reynold's
Number triggered a Pavolovian desire for a beer.. ;o)
news:73da2590.0310041242.ce1ed80@posting.google.co m...
> "Rachael" <rfearnhead@mybra.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:<blmjca$9s3$1@hercules.btinternet.com>...
> and yada yada yada
<snip>
Children, please..
Missing the subject line in a reply is a fairly easy mistake to make, Google
is useful but doesn't necessarily impart a deal of confidence - even the
best names in manuals and site design can make quite serious errors[1],
making Usenet kinda useful! And, of course, that intercooler stuff is in
another thread, on another froup[2]
Let's get back to cars.. it's a shame to see car nuts beating each other up.
Politicians, that's different. And possibly lawyers.
Hmm. Best stop there, methinks ;o)
--
Hairy One Kenobi
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this opinion do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of the highly-opinionated person expressing the opinion
in the first place. So there!
[1] Especially anything with "Haynes" in the title, and where, sitting on
the floor surrounded by grubby bits of metal, and wondering where that damn
circlip pinged to, the manual states "reassembly is simply the reverse of
disassembly". /How/ exactly do you take a club hammer and "undrift"
something?!?
[2] And Rachael's answer was pretty much there (from what I've seen - I'm
not a regular there), if from a more scientific viewpoint than is the norm
in some of these discussions. Personally, the merest mention of Reynold's
Number triggered a Pavolovian desire for a beer.. ;o)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
"Hairy One Kenobi" <abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:<T8Jfb.5877$RU4.57273@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net>...
> <snip>
>
> Children, please..
This is usually one of the ideas I rebel against - the idea that
anyone can assert parental influence via electronic media, with no
hope of enforcement.
> Missing the subject line in a reply is a fairly easy mistake to make, Google
> is useful but doesn't necessarily impart a deal of confidence - even the
> best names in manuals and site design can make quite serious errors
Indeed. But that does not in any way imply that USENET should be the
very first stop a person should make. Considering the way BS flies in
newsgroups (like engine type and configuration of the TT-S,
ferinstance), I would suggest that USENET should be used judiciously,
at best.
> Let's get back to cars.. it's a shame to see car nuts beating each other up.
> Politicians, that's different. And possibly lawyers.
>
> Hmm. Best stop there, methinks ;o)
Awww, why not move right to religious zealots? Sexual orientation?
LOL.
In any case - Harry, you have been quite polite in this post, and I
will be polite right back:
I will respectfully decline your implied request. I reserve the right
to post in a manner that I see fit, and recognize the rights of others
to do the same. I refuse to be a punching bag for those who feel
inferior, have thin skins, or are generally pissy about anything that
doesn't meet their standards. I have always maintained that people
read and respond with 100% free will, and thus have the ultimate
responsibility for what they read and write in USENET. I thank you
for your concern, and I do actually understand your POV, and accept it
as the preferred "way."
Regards,
Bob (Spider)
> <snip>
>
> Children, please..
This is usually one of the ideas I rebel against - the idea that
anyone can assert parental influence via electronic media, with no
hope of enforcement.
> Missing the subject line in a reply is a fairly easy mistake to make, Google
> is useful but doesn't necessarily impart a deal of confidence - even the
> best names in manuals and site design can make quite serious errors
Indeed. But that does not in any way imply that USENET should be the
very first stop a person should make. Considering the way BS flies in
newsgroups (like engine type and configuration of the TT-S,
ferinstance), I would suggest that USENET should be used judiciously,
at best.
> Let's get back to cars.. it's a shame to see car nuts beating each other up.
> Politicians, that's different. And possibly lawyers.
>
> Hmm. Best stop there, methinks ;o)
Awww, why not move right to religious zealots? Sexual orientation?
LOL.
In any case - Harry, you have been quite polite in this post, and I
will be polite right back:
I will respectfully decline your implied request. I reserve the right
to post in a manner that I see fit, and recognize the rights of others
to do the same. I refuse to be a punching bag for those who feel
inferior, have thin skins, or are generally pissy about anything that
doesn't meet their standards. I have always maintained that people
read and respond with 100% free will, and thus have the ultimate
responsibility for what they read and write in USENET. I thank you
for your concern, and I do actually understand your POV, and accept it
as the preferred "way."
Regards,
Bob (Spider)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
"Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:73da2590.0310051045.55e008ff@posting.google.c om...
> "Hairy One Kenobi" <abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:<T8Jfb.5877$RU4.57273@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net>...
> > <snip>
<snip>
> I will respectfully decline your implied request. I reserve the right
> to post in a manner that I see fit, and recognize the rights of others
> to do the same. I refuse to be a punching bag for those who feel
> inferior, have thin skins, or are generally pissy about anything that
> doesn't meet their standards. I have always maintained that people
> read and respond with 100% free will, and thus have the ultimate
> responsibility for what they read and write in USENET. I thank you
> for your concern, and I do actually understand your POV, and accept it
> as the preferred "way."
Fair enough - the only problem with ignoring netiquette is a tendency to get
kill-filed..
H1K (just pointing it out, not doing it..)
news:73da2590.0310051045.55e008ff@posting.google.c om...
> "Hairy One Kenobi" <abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:<T8Jfb.5877$RU4.57273@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net>...
> > <snip>
<snip>
> I will respectfully decline your implied request. I reserve the right
> to post in a manner that I see fit, and recognize the rights of others
> to do the same. I refuse to be a punching bag for those who feel
> inferior, have thin skins, or are generally pissy about anything that
> doesn't meet their standards. I have always maintained that people
> read and respond with 100% free will, and thus have the ultimate
> responsibility for what they read and write in USENET. I thank you
> for your concern, and I do actually understand your POV, and accept it
> as the preferred "way."
Fair enough - the only problem with ignoring netiquette is a tendency to get
kill-filed..
H1K (just pointing it out, not doing it..)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
"Hairy One Kenobi" <abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:<6T8gb.6660$RU4.63032@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net>...
> "Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:73da2590.0310051045.55e008ff@posting.google.c om...
>
> <snip>
>
> > I will respectfully decline your implied request. I reserve the right
> > to post in a manner that I see fit, and recognize the rights of others
> > to do the same. I refuse to be a punching bag for those who feel
> > inferior, have thin skins, or are generally pissy about anything that
> > doesn't meet their standards. I have always maintained that people
> > read and respond with 100% free will, and thus have the ultimate
> > responsibility for what they read and write in USENET. I thank you
> > for your concern, and I do actually understand your POV, and accept it
> > as the preferred "way."
>
> Fair enough - the only problem with ignoring netiquette is a tendency to get
> kill-filed..
Yes, that is a risk. But I do not take my postings seriously enough
to consider that a problem. I support each individual's right to read
or not read as s/he desires. And if that means I end up in a killfile
or three, then so be it. In fact, I encourage folks to killfile me,
if that's what it takes to get them to not read my posts.
Thank you for your reply.
Regards,
Spider
> "Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:73da2590.0310051045.55e008ff@posting.google.c om...
>
> <snip>
>
> > I will respectfully decline your implied request. I reserve the right
> > to post in a manner that I see fit, and recognize the rights of others
> > to do the same. I refuse to be a punching bag for those who feel
> > inferior, have thin skins, or are generally pissy about anything that
> > doesn't meet their standards. I have always maintained that people
> > read and respond with 100% free will, and thus have the ultimate
> > responsibility for what they read and write in USENET. I thank you
> > for your concern, and I do actually understand your POV, and accept it
> > as the preferred "way."
>
> Fair enough - the only problem with ignoring netiquette is a tendency to get
> kill-filed..
Yes, that is a risk. But I do not take my postings seriously enough
to consider that a problem. I support each individual's right to read
or not read as s/he desires. And if that means I end up in a killfile
or three, then so be it. In fact, I encourage folks to killfile me,
if that's what it takes to get them to not read my posts.
Thank you for your reply.
Regards,
Spider
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
"Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:73da2590.0310060829.16d0ead4@posting.google.c om...
> "Hairy One Kenobi" <abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:<6T8gb.6660$RU4.63032@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net>...
> > "Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:73da2590.0310051045.55e008ff@posting.google.c om...
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > I will respectfully decline your implied request. I reserve the right
> > > to post in a manner that I see fit, and recognize the rights of others
> > > to do the same. I refuse to be a punching bag for those who feel
> > > inferior, have thin skins, or are generally pissy about anything that
> > > doesn't meet their standards. I have always maintained that people
> > > read and respond with 100% free will, and thus have the ultimate
> > > responsibility for what they read and write in USENET. I thank you
> > > for your concern, and I do actually understand your POV, and accept it
> > > as the preferred "way."
> >
> > Fair enough - the only problem with ignoring netiquette is a tendency to
get
> > kill-filed..
>
> Yes, that is a risk. But I do not take my postings seriously enough
> to consider that a problem. I support each individual's right to read
> or not read as s/he desires. And if that means I end up in a killfile
> or three, then so be it. In fact, I encourage folks to killfile me,
> if that's what it takes to get them to not read my posts.
The problem is that generally, if it continues for long enough, people will
complain to your ISP and you find that you'll lose your account. I doubt
its worth it over such a trivial matter.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
"Graham" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:<blso5s$fnik1$1@ID-158414.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> "Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:73da2590.0310060829.16d0ead4@posting.google.c om...
> >
> > Yes, that is a risk. But I do not take my postings seriously enough
> > to consider that a problem. I support each individual's right to read
> > or not read as s/he desires. And if that means I end up in a killfile
> > or three, then so be it. In fact, I encourage folks to killfile me,
> > if that's what it takes to get them to not read my posts.
>
> The problem is that generally, if it continues for long enough, people will
> complain to your ISP and you find that you'll lose your account. I doubt
> its worth it over such a trivial matter.
If that was much of a probability, I would concur. Because the alt.*
groups of the hierarchy are much looser in their "posting rules," it
is difficult to violate one of their charters. You really have to
work at it!
There is a fellow who posts to sci.environment - Mike Vandeman. His
vocal, extremist stances on wilderness access issues are roundly
crossposted and his writings are almost universally reviled. And yet
he hasn't lost his ISP. His posting rarely fail to generate flames
and then degenerate into pissing matches, but yet he retains his
access via pacbell.net. The bar is really high for alt.* groups -
physical threats, SPAMming, and the like would probably get you
cancelled. Anything less? Not very likely.
Spider
> "Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:73da2590.0310060829.16d0ead4@posting.google.c om...
> >
> > Yes, that is a risk. But I do not take my postings seriously enough
> > to consider that a problem. I support each individual's right to read
> > or not read as s/he desires. And if that means I end up in a killfile
> > or three, then so be it. In fact, I encourage folks to killfile me,
> > if that's what it takes to get them to not read my posts.
>
> The problem is that generally, if it continues for long enough, people will
> complain to your ISP and you find that you'll lose your account. I doubt
> its worth it over such a trivial matter.
If that was much of a probability, I would concur. Because the alt.*
groups of the hierarchy are much looser in their "posting rules," it
is difficult to violate one of their charters. You really have to
work at it!
There is a fellow who posts to sci.environment - Mike Vandeman. His
vocal, extremist stances on wilderness access issues are roundly
crossposted and his writings are almost universally reviled. And yet
he hasn't lost his ISP. His posting rarely fail to generate flames
and then degenerate into pissing matches, but yet he retains his
access via pacbell.net. The bar is really high for alt.* groups -
physical threats, SPAMming, and the like would probably get you
cancelled. Anything less? Not very likely.
Spider
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 1997 A4 - No Radio Reception after "professional" After market install
"Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:73da2590.0310070744.2566a23b@posting.google.c om...
> "Graham" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:<blso5s$fnik1$1@ID-158414.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> > "Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:73da2590.0310060829.16d0ead4@posting.google.c om...
> > >
> > > Yes, that is a risk. But I do not take my postings seriously enough
> > > to consider that a problem. I support each individual's right to read
> > > or not read as s/he desires. And if that means I end up in a killfile
> > > or three, then so be it. In fact, I encourage folks to killfile me,
> > > if that's what it takes to get them to not read my posts.
> >
> > The problem is that generally, if it continues for long enough, people
will
> > complain to your ISP and you find that you'll lose your account. I
doubt
> > its worth it over such a trivial matter.
>
> If that was much of a probability, I would concur. Because the alt.*
> groups of the hierarchy are much looser in their "posting rules," it
> is difficult to violate one of their charters. You really have to
> work at it!
>
> There is a fellow who posts to sci.environment - Mike Vandeman. His
> vocal, extremist stances on wilderness access issues are roundly
> crossposted and his writings are almost universally reviled. And yet
> he hasn't lost his ISP. His posting rarely fail to generate flames
> and then degenerate into pissing matches, but yet he retains his
> access via pacbell.net. The bar is really high for alt.* groups -
> physical threats, SPAMming, and the like would probably get you
> cancelled. Anything less? Not very likely.
Incorrect.
Chances are, either the abuse team are otherwise occupied/useless, the
Charter allows idiots to post, or noone who knows how a killfile works is
bothered to do something "scary".
Type "altavoz" into Deja/Google Groups for an example of what /used/ to
happen when someone peed-off a sufficient number of people..[1]
--
Hairy One Kenobi
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this opinion do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of the highly-opinionated person expressing the opinion
in the first place. So there!
[1] Don't worry - no concrete pollution in lakes ;o)
news:73da2590.0310070744.2566a23b@posting.google.c om...
> "Graham" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:<blso5s$fnik1$1@ID-158414.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> > "Spider" <beelzebubba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:73da2590.0310060829.16d0ead4@posting.google.c om...
> > >
> > > Yes, that is a risk. But I do not take my postings seriously enough
> > > to consider that a problem. I support each individual's right to read
> > > or not read as s/he desires. And if that means I end up in a killfile
> > > or three, then so be it. In fact, I encourage folks to killfile me,
> > > if that's what it takes to get them to not read my posts.
> >
> > The problem is that generally, if it continues for long enough, people
will
> > complain to your ISP and you find that you'll lose your account. I
doubt
> > its worth it over such a trivial matter.
>
> If that was much of a probability, I would concur. Because the alt.*
> groups of the hierarchy are much looser in their "posting rules," it
> is difficult to violate one of their charters. You really have to
> work at it!
>
> There is a fellow who posts to sci.environment - Mike Vandeman. His
> vocal, extremist stances on wilderness access issues are roundly
> crossposted and his writings are almost universally reviled. And yet
> he hasn't lost his ISP. His posting rarely fail to generate flames
> and then degenerate into pissing matches, but yet he retains his
> access via pacbell.net. The bar is really high for alt.* groups -
> physical threats, SPAMming, and the like would probably get you
> cancelled. Anything less? Not very likely.
Incorrect.
Chances are, either the abuse team are otherwise occupied/useless, the
Charter allows idiots to post, or noone who knows how a killfile works is
bothered to do something "scary".
Type "altavoz" into Deja/Google Groups for an example of what /used/ to
happen when someone peed-off a sufficient number of people..[1]
--
Hairy One Kenobi
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this opinion do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of the highly-opinionated person expressing the opinion
in the first place. So there!
[1] Don't worry - no concrete pollution in lakes ;o)
