My contributions to this NG are entirely technical except when I assert the right to reply to attacks, especially when those attacks are a gratuitous, unsolicited and infantile outburst as is yours below.
If you think that there is a call to keep this NG to matters of technical interest, then I exhort you to think again about your infantile style, as below. It is you and your ilk who are destroying this NG and not those of us who make a stand for civil and polite behaviour.
This discussion started with a childish tirade, a temper tantrum in fact, originated by Mr.Reay and cross-posted to a number of NG. I assert my right to reply to any aspect of the continuing attack by replying in all the groups in which the thread originated.
"When has anybody ever attacked me in uk.railway?" I draw your attention to the gratuitous attacks by Mr.Reay on my stance for public safety in this very NG a few weeks ago, attacks that are a continuation of his infantile campaign over the last year. Why did this thread that started with a gratuitous outburst from Mr.Reay appear in uk.railway? Why, because in the very first posting Mr.Reay posted it to uk.railway, illustrating another answer to your question about when have I ever been attacked in uk.railway.
Why did Mr.Reay start off this thread in uk.railway? That is a question that you must put to Mr.Reay himself. I suggest to you that your complaint lies with Mr.Reay, and not with me. I am doing no more than to assert my right to reply to gratuitous, unsolicited and childish attacks, of which your own posting quoted below is a prime example ("tit"? "wanker"?).
Your resp> > My contributions to this NG are entirely technical except when
You have a rather silly and childish turn-of-phrase which would seem to give the lie to your claim that your motivation is to purge the NG of outbursts of the very style that you illustrate below.
There is only one manner in which to conduct a debate, and that is a civil and polite manner; a manner which you would do well to learn.
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 15:41:09 -0000, "Rich Mackin" Gave us:
I would suggest a complaint against Mr. Bean, since it was he that replaced your group into the follow ups after your first request to discount it from the thread.
I would find and use that post as the basis for the complaint.
I would make an exact such complaint again if he replaces it again in the future, after it has been intentionally removed and requested to be discounted by members of the group. I would suggest that all annoyed by this thread make the same complaint, based on the same criteria. Or the little bat's turd could simply comply with your desires.
Whatever reason you have for your emotional distress, please stick to the truth.
You do yourself no favours by your rather silly and childish outburst, as below.
As to "causing problems in your group", do you not think, perhaps, that problems are only caused when emotionally disturbed people such as yourself launch themselves in a sea of vitriol, as you do below?
RVMJ 99g wrote in news:tnsi00da272e81kovlb3q5c3fbijji8rou@
4ax.com:
[Follow-ups set]
RVMJ,
I think that the majority of posters in uk.r.a agree with your "I for one don't agree that Mr Reay's contributions comprise 'rather silly and childish outbursts'". I also think that there is a great deal of support for your view that references to Brian's (or any other) children are totally reprehensible.
You lose the argument instantly by hurling a tirade of insults (not profanities) at others. Just by refusing to acknowledge your identity and use a name that is an anagram of Mr Reay's name indicates that it is you who is the wrongdoer by attempting provocation. Of course, I may be wrong regarding the facts. But in light of the evidence we have all seen on this newsgroup, it is you who incites anger and upset. I have been a participant in this NG for over 1 year and in all cases, it is always Airy R. Bean who posts rude, unhelpful and potentially upsetting statements. An argument was never won by name calling (even in the playground). Airy R. Bean likes to have a high opinion of himself (nothing wrong with that), but fails to back this up by his poor behaviour indicating that he is the opposite of what he would like to be.
If Airy R. Bean was the president of USA, we'd be in the middle of a very serious war with Pakistan or India with the immediate threat of nuclear strikes... Lets just be thankful that he is only priviledged to make anonymous postings to an insignificant radio newsgroup and nothing more.......
Such a shame to see a man reduced to this...........
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.