Fogel's bullying and stalking -- who's next? [Archive]

Andre Jute

12-31-1969, 07:00 PM

Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
> broken spoke causing a crash.
>
> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

.... and again, Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
harassment by Creepy Carl?

Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
Google takeout.

What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
Google. Ugh!

Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.

It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
poor Press.

Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
stalking of his betters.

Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
insincerity and deceit?

Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes

Michael Press

01-04-1970, 02:50 AM

In article
<99387cf3-9ddb-4e20-9d44-11230a02c809@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
Andre Jute <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote:

> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> poor Press.

Newsflash! I am PNG with Carl Fogel. Get your facts straight.

--
Michael Press

Tom Sherman

01-04-1970, 02:50 AM

Andre Jute wrote:
> Carl Fogel writes:
>
>> Dear Jobst,
>>
>> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
>> broken spoke causing a crash.
>>
>> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
> ... and again, Carl Fogel writes:
>
>> Dear Jobst,
>>
>> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
>> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
> Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
> harassment by Creepy Carl?
>
> Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
> link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
> Google takeout.
>

To be fair, Jobst Brandt has done the same type of "I don't believe you"
assertions:
<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/36bd0b78374325ed?dmode=source>.

Full discussion at:
<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/20eda4cad8eab035/d6642df7d6276606?hl=en&tvc=1&q=sherman+slab+faulting#d6642df7d6276606>.

> What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
> know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
> restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
> Google. Ugh!
>
> Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
> by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
> all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
> work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
> already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
> Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.
>
> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> poor Press.
>
> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
> stalking of his betters.
>
> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
> insincerity and deceit?
>
Well, to honest, only after Mr. Fogel revealed his dark side in the the
"John Kerry: Nice wheels" thread.

> Andre Jute
> A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes
>

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

dabac

01-04-1970, 02:50 AM

Andre Jute Wrote:
> ...my "crime" was being "flamboyant"! ..

Well, but you are, to a certain extent.

Whether that is a crime or not I guess is in the eye of the beholder.

So maybe Fogel didn't treat you quite right in that speed record
thread, but any sympathy you might have earned by that is wearing thin
indeed by the name-calling, penis size innuendos and whatnot you're now
preaching in post after post.

I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
I'd rather not killfile you just yet.

I hope you realize that I'm not actively defending Fogel either, but
let's face it, by now you're either you're preaching to the choir, or
your words are falling on deaf ears.
This "creepy Carl", "Krygo-Fogel" and all that other rhetoric that is
as childish as inventive isn't getting you anywhere. It's boring and if
anything it 's putting you in a bad light.

--
dabac

Tom Sherman

01-04-1970, 02:51 AM

Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <99387cf3-9ddb-4e20-9d44-11230a02c809@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> Andre Jute <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
>> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
>> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
>> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
>> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
>> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
>> poor Press.
>
> Newsflash! I am PNG with Carl Fogel. Get your facts straight.
>
This must have happened in private conversation or when I was away from
the newsgroup, since I have no recollection of the incident.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Ryan Cousineau

01-04-1970, 02:51 AM

In article <rubrum-EE5467.16041512022008@news.sf.sbcglobal.net>,
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> wrote:

> In article
> <99387cf3-9ddb-4e20-9d44-11230a02c809@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> Andre Jute <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> > or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> > Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> > Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> > therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> > except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> > poor Press.
>
> Newsflash! I am PNG with Carl Fogel. Get your facts straight.

Oh, come on Michael, we would be honored if you would join the
crypto-Fogelite spaniel brigade. We get all the best titles.

One of us! One of us!

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:51 AM

On Feb 13, 12:04 am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article
> <99387cf3-9ddb-4e20-9d44-11230a02c...@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> > or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> > Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> > Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> > therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> > except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> > poor Press.
>
> Newsflash! I am PNG with Carl Fogel. Get your facts straight.
> --
> Michael Press

Okay, Michael Press, you're a Portable Network Graphic for Carl Fogel.
We can all see that. Nobody is arguing with you about it.

Andre Jute
Always best to humour a fellow who is fruitier than two Dundee cakes

Andre Jute wrote:
> Carl Fogel writes:
>
>> Dear Jobst,
>>
>> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
>> broken spoke causing a crash.
>>
>> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
> ... and again, Carl Fogel writes:
>
>> Dear Jobst,
>>
>> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
>> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
> Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
> harassment by Creepy Carl?
>
> Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
> link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
> Google takeout.
>

To be fair, Jobst Brandt has done the same type of "I don't believe
you"
assertions:
<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/36bd0b78374325ed?
dmode=source>.

Full discussion at:
<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/
20eda4cad8eab035/d6642df7d6276606?hl=en&tvc=1&q=sherman+slab
+faulting#d6642df7d6276606>.

> What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
> know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
> restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
> Google. Ugh!
>
> Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
> by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
> all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
> work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
> already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
> Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.
>
> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> poor Press.
>
> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
> stalking of his betters.
>
> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
> insincerity and deceit?
>
Well, to honest, only after Mr. Fogel revealed his dark side in the
the
"John Kerry: Nice wheels" thread.

> Andre Jute
> A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes
>

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

01-04-1970, 02:52 AM

Tom Sherman writes:

>>> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
>>> broken spoke causing a crash.

>>> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.

>>> Cheers,

>>> Dear Jobst,

>>> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
>>> more confused about the chronology and the details.

>>> Cheers,

>>> Carl Fogel

>> Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
>> harassment by Creepy Carl?

>> Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
>> link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
>> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
>> prospect of contributors and originators being dumbed down by zero-
>> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
>> Google takeout.

> To be fair, Jobst Brandt has done the same type of "I don't believe you"
> assertions:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/36bd0b78374325ed?dmode=source

There is a great difference between the cited exchange and that of CF.
I said I did not believe the scenario of the source you cited, not
that I didn't believe you. I hope you can see the difference.

> Full discussion at:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/20eda4cad8eab035/d6642df7d6276606?hl=en&tvc=1&q=sherman+slab+faulting#d6642df7d6276606

>> What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
>> know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
>> restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
>> Google. Ugh!

>> Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
>> by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
>> all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
>> work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
>> already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
>> Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.

>> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
>> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
>> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
>> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
>> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
>> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowski and Cousineau and
>> poor Press.

>> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
>> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
>> stalking of his betters.

>> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
>> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
>> insincerity and deceit?

> Well, to honest, only after Mr. Fogel revealed his dark side in the the
> "John Kerry: Nice wheels" thread.

He hasn't changed since first appearing on RBT, only his wording has
become more acrid. No longer do we plow through a heap of rhetorical
questions, but rather run head-on into insults.

Jobst Brandt

Michael Press

01-04-1970, 02:52 AM

In article <fotju2$r71$2@registered.motzarella.org>,
Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote:

> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <99387cf3-9ddb-4e20-9d44-11230a02c809@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> > Andre Jute <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> >> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> >> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> >> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> >> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> >> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> >> poor Press.
> >
> > Newsflash! I am PNG with Carl Fogel. Get your facts straight.
> >
> This must have happened in private conversation or when I was away from
> the newsgroup, since I have no recollection of the incident.

I want to help you out, but I choose to delay, lest
Andre Jute get any help delivering himself from the
quagmire he rode himself into.

--
Michael Press

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:52 AM

On Feb 13, 2:24 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <rubrum-EE5467.16041512022...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net>,
> Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <99387cf3-9ddb-4e20-9d44-11230a02c...@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> > Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> > > or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> > > Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> > > Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> > > therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> > > except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> > > poor Press.
>
> > Newsflash! I am PNG with Carl Fogel. Get your facts straight.
>
> Oh, come on Michael, we would be honored if you would join the
> crypto-Fogelite

Krygo-Fogel. Fascist conspiracies always show first the name of the
fellow who'll take the fall when the plot is exposed: "I never knew
what that dumb Polack was doing. I never authorized it. I was only
following orders from the voices in my head." Can't you just hear
Creepy Carl intoning that worn excuse in his scaley voice?

>spaniel brigade.

You're not a "brigade of spaniels", you're not even a "leash of
spaniels" (that would be an insult to the elegant bolzoi I once had
two leashes of -- a gentleman never has only one leash). You're a yap
of spaniels.

>We get all the best titles.

If you think being called "a yap of spaniels" is flattering, go for
it, boy.

> One of us! One of us!

Out him. What's Mickey Press hiding in the cupboard for? He should be
proud to belong to your street corner gang. He clearly doesn't have
any other opportunities to misspend his life.

Tell me, Cousineau, do you have a single serious contribution to make
to a serious discussion of a serious assault on free speech mounted by
Fogel for despicable reasons over a period of years now?

Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
> broken spoke causing a crash.
>
> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

.... and again, Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
harassment by Creepy Carl?

Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
Google takeout.

What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
Google. Ugh!

Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.

It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
poor Press.

Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
stalking of his betters.

Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
insincerity and deceit?

Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:52 AM

Michael Press

01-04-1970, 02:52 AM

In article
<rcousine-61207E.18241612022008@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]>,
Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <rubrum-EE5467.16041512022008@news.sf.sbcglobal.net>,
> Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <99387cf3-9ddb-4e20-9d44-11230a02c809@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> > Andre Jute <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> > > or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> > > Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> > > Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> > > therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> > > except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> > > poor Press.
> >
> > Newsflash! I am PNG with Carl Fogel. Get your facts straight.
>
> Oh, come on Michael, we would be honored if you would join the
> crypto-Fogelite spaniel brigade. We get all the best titles.

I wish. The best title was awarded by James Harris to
the hive of parasites hoodwinking the world and suppressing
James's mathematical work that threatens to end society as
we know it.

> One of us! One of us!

Mr. Cousineau, members of the Acadamy, ladies and
gentleman, thank you for this signal honour. Thank you
very much. I could not have done it without the support
of my family and my parent's confidence in me. You like
me. You really like me. And remember, as my Pappy told
me. Never marry a virgin. If she ain't good enough for
her kin, she ain't good enough for you.

Say goodnight, Gracie.

--
Michael Press

Michael Press

01-04-1970, 02:52 AM

In article
<000a8489-5a38-4485-89e5-bc3436c441c9@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
Andre Jute <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Feb 13, 12:04 am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <99387cf3-9ddb-4e20-9d44-11230a02c...@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> > Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> > > or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> > > Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> > > Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> > > therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> > > except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> > > poor Press.
> >
> > Newsflash! I am PNG with Carl Fogel. Get your facts straight.
>
> Okay, Michael Press, you're a Portable Network Graphic for Carl Fogel.
> We can all see that. Nobody is arguing with you about it.

What does my mental/emotional/spiritual/psychological
state have to do with it? You are still arguing with
it. And you do not yet have your facts straight.

--
Michael Press

Tom Sherman

01-04-1970, 02:52 AM

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> Tom Sherman writes:
>
>>>> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
>>>> broken spoke causing a crash.
>
>>>> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>
>>>> Cheers,
>
>>>> Dear Jobst,
>
>>>> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
>>>> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>
>>>> Cheers,
>
>>>> Carl Fogel
>
>>> Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
>>> harassment by Creepy Carl?
>
>>> Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
>>> link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
>>> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
>>> prospect of contributors and originators being dumbed down by zero-
>>> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
>>> Google takeout.
>
>
>> To be fair, Jobst Brandt has done the same type of "I don't believe you"
>> assertions:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/36bd0b78374325ed?dmode=source
>
> There is a great difference between the cited exchange and that of CF.
> I said I did not believe the scenario of the source you cited, not
> that I didn't believe you. I hope you can see the difference.
>
I believe Jobst Brandt's statement above, but from the context of the
original discussion the meaning was not clear, at least to me.

>> Full discussion at:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/20eda4cad8eab035/d6642df7d6276606?hl=en&tvc=1&q=sherman+slab+faulting#d6642df7d6276606
>
>>> What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
>>> know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
>>> restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
>>> Google. Ugh!
>
>>> Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
>>> by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
>>> all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
>>> work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
>>> already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
>>> Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.
>
>>> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
>>> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
>>> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
>>> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
>>> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
>>> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowski and Cousineau and
>>> poor Press.
>
>>> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
>>> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
>>> stalking of his betters.
>
>>> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
>>> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
>>> insincerity and deceit?
>
>> Well, to honest, only after Mr. Fogel revealed his dark side in the the
>> "John Kerry: Nice wheels" thread.
>
> He hasn't changed since first appearing on RBT, only his wording has
> become more acrid. No longer do we plow through a heap of rhetorical
> questions, but rather run head-on into insults.
>
The less desirable behavior of Mr. Fogel does seem a lot more prominent
now, but that may be due to heightened observed awareness.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:52 AM

Andre Jute wrote:
> >> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
> >> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
> >> stalking of his betters.
> >> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
> >> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
> >> insincerity and deceit?

Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Well, to honest, only after Mr. Fogel revealed his dark side in the the
> > "John Kerry: Nice wheels" thread.

Jobst Brandt wrote:
> He hasn't changed since first appearing on RBT, only his wording has
> become more acrid. *No longer do we plow through a heap of rhetorical
> questions, but rather run head-on into insults.

It's not surprising that Fogel should be getting desperate and
careless. If you accept my analysis (below) of Fogel's likely
motivation, he can see as well as we can that years of diligent
backstabbing has not stretched his MiniFogel, nor have years of
clowning in the dusty patents gathered more than a small group of
obviously undiscriminating acolytes. Worst of all, years of assiduous
backstabbing have not resulted in Fogel being able to decide who can
be a member of RBT -- I've just flicked off Fogel and his gang with
open contempt without a single poster outside Fogel's gang raising the
mildest protest-- but people like you have *not* skulked off in
exasperation, which is probably the best Fogel could hope for. Fogel
may have dreamed of more "dominance"; these wannabe net-fuehrers
follow a pattern, so Fogel is dully predictable to the end. For
instance, one little Fogel-type scumball I have experience of, a
certain Michael LeFever, a winder of transformers for tube amplifiers,
would orchestrate his gang to force his "enemies" into the most
humiliating about-turns and apologies for not "respecting" LaFever. I
broke his gang and his business when they tried the same nonsense on
me; that's why Barone is so bitter: he ran with that gang and was
mildly scorched when I breathed on them.

Andre Jute
Master psychologist

*******

Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
> broken spoke causing a crash.
>
> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

... and again, Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
harassment by Creepy Carl?

Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
Google takeout.

What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
Google. Ugh!

Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.

It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
poor Press.

Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
stalking of his betters.

Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
insincerity and deceit?

Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes

Clive George

01-04-1970, 02:53 AM

"Andre Jute" <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:917510c9-e4ac-4e6b-b245-7f7b3c27653c@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
> Google takeout.

If you're genuinely frightened by that, then I suggest you invest in more
soft cushions and avoid usenet. Possibly tinfoil hats too.

clive

Tom Sherman

01-04-1970, 02:53 AM

Clive George wrote:
> "Andre Jute" <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:917510c9-e4ac-4e6b-b245-7f7b3c27653c@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
>> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
>> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
>> Google takeout.
>
> If you're genuinely frightened by that, then I suggest you invest in
> more soft cushions and avoid usenet. Possibly tinfoil hats too.
>
I think the context of Andre Jute's post is clear that he is not
referring to some personal terror, but rather an effect that degrades
the quality of postings on the newsgroup.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Clive George

01-04-1970, 02:53 AM

"Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fotpsm$ist$2@registered.motzarella.org...
> Clive George wrote:
>> "Andre Jute" <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:917510c9-e4ac-4e6b-b245-7f7b3c27653c@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
>>> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
>>> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
>>> Google takeout.
>>
>> If you're genuinely frightened by that, then I suggest you invest in more
>> soft cushions and avoid usenet. Possibly tinfoil hats too.
>>
> I think the context of Andre Jute's post is clear that he is not referring
> to some personal terror, but rather an effect that degrades the quality of
> postings on the newsgroup.

My comment stands. Carl's signal to noise seems to be above Andre's, other
issues notwithstanding.

cheers,
clive

still just me

01-04-1970, 02:53 AM

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:58:14 -0600, Tom Sherman
<sunsetss0003@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote:

>I think the context of Andre Jute's post is clear that he is not
>referring to some personal terror, but rather an effect that degrades
>the quality of postings on the newsgroup.

For which he may be singularly responsible.

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:53 AM

On Feb 13, 4:07*am, "Clive George" <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:fotpsm$ist$2@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> > Clive George wrote:
> >> "Andre Jute" <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>news:917510c9-e4ac-4e6b-b245-7f7b3c27653c@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com....
>
> >>> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
> >>> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
> >>> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
> >>> Google takeout.
>
> >> If you're genuinely frightened by that, then I suggest you invest in more
> >> soft cushions and avoid usenet. Possibly tinfoil hats too.
>
> > I think the context of Andre Jute's post is clear that he is not referring
> > to some personal terror, but rather an effect that degrades the quality of
> > postings on the newsgroup.
>
> My comment stands. Carl's signal to noise seems to be above Andre's, other
> issues notwithstanding.
>
> cheers,
> clive

Wahl, Clive, you have a contribution to make, or you just want to
whine from the sidelines that all these words hurt your head? Seems to
me half youR posts whine about what I do, and the other half of your
posts whine about what I didn't do. You're a fine one to talk about
SNR!

Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
> broken spoke causing a crash.
>
> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

... and again, Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
harassment by Creepy Carl?

Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
Google takeout.

What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
Google. Ugh!

Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.

It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
poor Press.

Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
stalking of his betters.

Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
insincerity and deceit?

Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:53 AM

Clive George <clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:fotpsm$ist$2@registered.motzarella.org...
> > Clive George wrote:
> >> "Andre Jute" <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:917510c9-e4ac-4e6b-b245-7f7b3c27653c@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >>> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
> >>> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
> >>> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
> >>> Google takeout.
> >>
> >> If you're genuinely frightened by that, then I suggest you invest in more
> >> soft cushions and avoid usenet. Possibly tinfoil hats too.
> >>
> > I think the context of Andre Jute's post is clear that he is not referring
> > to some personal terror, but rather an effect that degrades the quality of
> > postings on the newsgroup.

"Degrades" is right. Carl Fogel's attempts to limit what can be said
on RBT, and how it can be said, are direct assaults on free speech.
Free speech is the basis of democratic liberty and well worth
defending against the enemies of society who attempt insidiously to
undermine it.

I imagine Clive George understands that (he'd have to be
extraordinarily stupid not to get it by now) but, as he has no answers
to our indictment of Carl Fogel, tries instead to personalize the
matter as some kind of a contest between Creepy Carl and me:
>
> My comment stands. Carl's signal to noise seems to be above Andre's, other
> issues notwithstanding.

This is an invalid excuse for Creepy Carl's behaviour that we have
heard before and the answer is the same: The clown is called in to
entertain the duller children; that doesn't give the clown the right
to censor the adults.

> cheers,
> clive

It's Carl Fogel's anti-social noise which concerns us here:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
> broken spoke causing a crash.
>
> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

.... and again, Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
harassment by Creepy Carl?

Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
Google takeout.

What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
Google. Ugh!

Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.

It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
poor Press.

Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
stalking of his betters.

Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
insincerity and deceit?

Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes

Michael Press

01-04-1970, 02:53 AM

In article
<0d0f55c5-910b-429d-9b1f-33bc3303e196@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Andre Jute <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote:

> lowest common denominator

What is a lowest common denominator?

--
Michael Press

Jay Beattie

01-04-1970, 02:53 AM

On Feb 12, 8:10*pm, Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Andre Jute wrote:
> > >> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
> > >> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
> > >> stalking of his betters.
> > >> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
> > >> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
> > >> insincerity and deceit?
> Tom Sherman wrote:
> > > Well, to honest, only after Mr. Fogel revealed his dark side in the the
> > > "John Kerry: Nice wheels" thread.
> Jobst Brandt wrote:
> > He hasn't changed since first appearing on RBT, only his wording has
> > become more acrid. *No longer do we plow through a heap of rhetorical
> > questions, but rather run head-on into insults.
>
> It's not surprising that Fogel should be getting desperate and
> careless. If you accept my analysis (below) of Fogel's likely
> motivation, he can see as well as we can that years of diligent
> backstabbing has not stretched his MiniFogel, nor have years of
> clowning in the dusty patents gathered more than a small group of
> obviously undiscriminating acolytes. Worst of all, years of assiduous
> backstabbing have not resulted in Fogel being able to decide who can
> be a member of RBT -- I've just flicked off Fogel and his gang with
> open contempt without a single poster outside Fogel's gang raising the
> mildest protest-- but people like you have *not* skulked off in
> exasperation, which is probably the best Fogel could hope for. *Fogel
> may have dreamed of more "dominance"; these wannabe net-fuehrers
> follow a pattern, so Fogel is dully predictable to the end. For
> instance, one little Fogel-type scumball I have experience of, a
> certain Michael LeFever, a winder of transformers for tube amplifiers,
> would orchestrate his gang to force his "enemies" into the most
> humiliating about-turns and apologies for not "respecting" LaFever. I
> broke his gang and his business when they tried the same nonsense on
> me; that's why Barone is so bitter: he ran with that gang and was
> mildly scorched when I breathed on them.
>
> Andre Jute
> Master psychologist

Are you Lemony Snicket? -- Jay Beattie.

Pat

01-04-1970, 02:54 AM

>
> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
> --
> dabac

Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.

Pat in TX
>

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:54 AM

dabac <dabac.34pr2z@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:

> Andre Jute Wrote:
> > ...my "crime" was being "flamboyant"! ..
>
> Well, but you are, to a certain extent.
>
> Whether that is a crime or not I guess is in the eye of the beholder.
>
> So maybe Fogel didn't treat you quite right in that speed record
> thread, but any sympathy you might have earned by that is wearing thin
> indeed by the name-calling, penis size innuendos and whatnot you're now
> preaching in post after post.
>
> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
>
> I hope you realize that I'm not actively defending Fogel either, but
> let's face it, by now you're either you're preaching to the choir, or
> your words are falling on deaf ears.
> This "creepy Carl", "Krygo-Fogel" and all that other rhetoric that is
> as childish as inventive isn't getting you anywhere. It's boring and if
> anything it 's putting you in a bad light.

But, my dear fellow, the "cocks on the table style" is carefully
chosen to infuriate the mentalities of dubious intelligence who are
Fogel's only apologists; they've been shocked into denial. Of course
it will rub intelligent people like you raw. I assumed that all
posters who are neither partisan nor interested in the important (but
to most abstract) matter of free speech had long since killfiled these
threads. I have no desire to offend the innocent (they can look up the
archive when they too fall victim to Fogel). But you must admit that
the chosen method has instantly encapsulated the malicious damage
Fogel does and exposed the core of his apologists, and their vapid
reason almost as quickly.

This isn't about me being "flamboyant", this is about Carl Fogel by
his bullying and netstalking prohibiting a free exchange of
information and ideas on RBT. If I were an intellectual of the limp
persuasion, you would never have heard from me again after Creepy
Carl's first unprovoked attack on me (1). Ask yourself how many people
with something worthwhile to say that you want to read take one look
at Creepy Carl's assaults on a respected elder like Jobst Brandt, and
give RBT a big miss without ever making a single post.

Andre Jute
A gentleman offends no one unintentionally -- Donald Sutherland

(1) I just came to RBT for a little expert information, a hit and run
affair, no intention of staying. Ironic then that I was already on my
way out of the door when Fogel was dumb enough to attack me in an
attempt to drive me out. How counterproductive can even a foolish
little man be?

*****

Here is just a tiny part of Carl Fogel's assault on a better man than
he is:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Please share with us a link to whatever you found about a pre-1900
> broken spoke causing a crash.
>
> If you don't have a source, please quit being silly.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

.... and again, Carl Fogel writes:

> Dear Jobst,
>
> Are you just making this stuff up as you go along? You seem more and
> more confused about the chronology and the details.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
harassment by Creepy Carl?

Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
Google takeout.

What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
Google. Ugh!

Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.

It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
poor Press.

Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
stalking of his betters.

Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
insincerity and deceit?

Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes

Ozark Bicycle

01-04-1970, 02:54 AM

On Feb 13, 7:27*am, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
> > I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
> > attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
> > riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
> > I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
> > --
> > dabac
>
> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
>

Doncha just love it when some dickwad makes a big deal of telling the
world that they killfiled someone?

IMO, just killfile whomever you can't deal with and STFU.

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:54 AM

On Feb 13, 1:27*pm, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
> > I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
> > attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
> > riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
> > I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
> > --
> > dabac
>
> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
>
> Pat in TX
>
>

Dear General Santa Ana,

RE: THE ALAMO

I have killfiled you and your army. We therefore have no further need
to defend the Alamo.

So there!

Yours abjectly.

Pat in TX
Crossbred with shorthorn SurrenderFroggie <tm> cattle from France

Tom Sherman

01-04-1970, 02:54 AM

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> On Feb 13, 7:27 am, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
>>> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
>>> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
>>> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
>>> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
>>> --
>>> dabac
>> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
>> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
>> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
>>
>
> Doncha just love it when some dickwad makes a big deal of telling the
> world that they killfiled someone?
>
> IMO, just killfile whomever you can't deal with and STFU.

People who kill-file another poster should refrain on commenting on that
poster.

Hey, I am agreeing with both Ozark Bicycle and Ed Dolan in one post! ;)

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

01-04-1970, 02:54 AM

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:01:09 -0800 (PST), Ozark Bicycle wrote:

> On Feb 13, 7:27*am, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
>>> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
>>> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
>>> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
>>> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
>>> --
>>> dabac
>>
>> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
>> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
>> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
>>
>
> Doncha just love it when some dickwad makes a big deal of telling the
> world that they killfiled someone?
>

Like Bill Sornson does?

Bill Sornson

01-04-1970, 02:57 AM

Michael Press wrote:

> I want to help you out, but I choose to delay, lest
> Andre Jute get any help delivering himself from the
> quagmire he rode himself into.

Take my preposition...please!

Bill Sornson

01-04-1970, 02:57 AM

Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <0d0f55c5-910b-429d-9b1f-33bc3303e196@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> Andre Jute <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> lowest common denominator
>
> What is a lowest common denominator?

One below the second-lowest denominator.

HTH!

Jay Beattie

01-04-1970, 02:57 AM

On Feb 13, 4:54*pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > On Feb 13, 7:27 am, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
> >>> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
> >>> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
> >>> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider..
> >>> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
> >>> --
> >>> dabac
> >> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
> >> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
> >> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
>
> > Doncha just love it when some dickwad makes a big deal of telling the
> > world that they killfiled someone?
>
> > IMO, just killfile whomever you can't deal with and STFU.
>
> People who kill-file another poster should refrain on commenting on that
> poster.
>
> Hey, I am agreeing with both Ozark Bicycle and Ed Dolan in one post! ;)

You bought the LSD, didn't you? We told you not to do that!

Hey, I'm over here.

No here.

Over here. Tom, Tom, look at me. Can you hear me? What are you
laughing about? No, I'm not hungry and don't want to go to the Waffle
House.

Can someone please call his parents.

-- Jay Beattie.

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 02:57 AM

On Feb 14, 1:35*am, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
> On Feb 12, 8:10*pm, Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Andre Jute wrote:
> > > >> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
> > > >> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
> > > >> stalking of his betters.
> > > >> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
> > > >> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
> > > >> insincerity and deceit?
> > Tom Sherman wrote:
> > > > Well, to honest, only after Mr. Fogel revealed his dark side in the the
> > > > "John Kerry: Nice wheels" thread.
> > Jobst Brandt wrote:
> > > He hasn't changed since first appearing on RBT, only his wording has
> > > become more acrid. *No longer do we plow through a heap of rhetorical
> > > questions, but rather run head-on into insults.
>
> > It's not surprising that Fogel should be getting desperate and
> > careless. If you accept my analysis (below) of Fogel's likely
> > motivation, he can see as well as we can that years of diligent
> > backstabbing has not stretched his MiniFogel, nor have years of
> > clowning in the dusty patents gathered more than a small group of
> > obviously undiscriminating acolytes. Worst of all, years of assiduous
> > backstabbing have not resulted in Fogel being able to decide who can
> > be a member of RBT -- I've just flicked off Fogel and his gang with
> > open contempt without a single poster outside Fogel's gang raising the
> > mildest protest-- but people like you have *not* skulked off in
> > exasperation, which is probably the best Fogel could hope for. *Fogel
> > may have dreamed of more "dominance"; these wannabe net-fuehrers
> > follow a pattern, so Fogel is dully predictable to the end. For
> > instance, one little Fogel-type scumball I have experience of, a
> > certain Michael LeFever, a winder of transformers for tube amplifiers,
> > would orchestrate his gang to force his "enemies" into the most
> > humiliating about-turns and apologies for not "respecting" LaFever. I
> > broke his gang and his business when they tried the same nonsense on
> > me; that's why Barone is so bitter: he ran with that gang and was
> > mildly scorched when I breathed on them.
>
> > Andre Jute
> > Master psychologist
>
> Are you Lemony Snicket? -- Jay Beattie.

Sorry for the delay in replying. I had to go look up Lemony Snicket
myself because my google-gofer-fogel was hiding under a desk again.
No, I'm not Lemony Snicket. Unfortunate events don't happen to me, I
merely observe that they happen to those who displease me. The Zulu
witch doctor under whom I apprenticed called me his most promising
pupil ever.

Andre Jute
Zero street cred (who's Britney Spears again, and why?) but maximum
mojo
Visit Andre's books at:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/THE%20WRITER%20Andre%20Jute.html

Tom Sherman

01-04-1970, 02:57 AM

Jay Beattie wrote:
> On Feb 13, 4:54 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>> On Feb 13, 7:27 am, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
>>>>> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
>>>>> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
>>>>> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
>>>>> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
>>>>> --
>>>>> dabac
>>>> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
>>>> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
>>>> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
>>> Doncha just love it when some dickwad makes a big deal of telling the
>>> world that they killfiled someone?
>>> IMO, just killfile whomever you can't deal with and STFU.
>> People who kill-file another poster should refrain on commenting on that
>> poster.
>>
>> Hey, I am agreeing with both Ozark Bicycle and Ed Dolan in one post! ;)
>
> You bought the LSD, didn't you? We told you not to do that!
>
Well, I may be doing some work on LSD (cue up Aliotta, Haynes and Jeremiah).

> Hey, I'm over here.
>
> No here.
>
> Over here. Tom, Tom, look at me. Can you hear me? What are you
> laughing about? No, I'm not hungry and don't want to go to the Waffle
> House.
>
What is a "Waffle House"?

> Can someone please call his parents.
>
They do not answer the phone:
<http://photo.ringo.com/151/151297435RL849980787.jpg>.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Jay Beattie

01-04-1970, 02:57 AM

On Feb 13, 6:18*pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote:
> Jay Beattie wrote:
> > On Feb 13, 4:54 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>> On Feb 13, 7:27 am, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
> >>>>> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
> >>>>> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
> >>>>> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
> >>>>> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> dabac
> >>>> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
> >>>> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
> >>>> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
> >>> Doncha just love it when some dickwad makes a big deal of telling the
> >>> world that they killfiled someone?
> >>> IMO, just killfile whomever you can't deal with and STFU.
> >> People who kill-file another poster should refrain on commenting on that
> >> poster.
>
> >> Hey, I am agreeing with both Ozark Bicycle and Ed Dolan in one post! ;)
>
> > You bought the LSD, didn't you? *We told you not to do that!
>
> Well, I may be doing some work on LSD (cue up Aliotta, Haynes and Jeremiah).
>
> > Hey, I'm over here.
>
> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *No here.
>
> > Over here. *Tom, Tom, look at me. *Can you hear me? *What are you
> > laughing about? *No, I'm not hungry and don't want to go to the Waffle
> > House.
>
> What is a "Waffle House"?

Here: http://www.wafflehouse.com/ More generally, the Waffle House
refers to any all night breakfast joint populated mostly by people
coming off a drug high -- often located near a college campus.

> > Can someone please call his parents.
>
> They do not answer the phone:
> <http://photo.ringo.com/151/151297435RL849980787.jpg>.

You should buy them a Blue Tooth phone. -- Jay Beattie.

A Muzi

01-04-1970, 02:57 AM

-snip setup for Jay's 'most humorous post this week' entry-

>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
>>> Hey, I am agreeing with both Ozark Bicycle and Ed Dolan in one post! ;)

> Jay Beattie wrote:
>> You bought the LSD, didn't you? We told you not to do that!
>> Hey, I'm over here.
>> No here.
>> Over here. Tom, Tom, look at me. Can you hear me? What are you
>> laughing about? No, I'm not hungry and don't want to go to the Waffle
>> House.

Tom Sherman wrote:
> What is a "Waffle House"?

George Webb of the South
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Harry Brogan

01-04-1970, 02:58 AM

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:26:35 -0800 (PST), Jay Beattie
<jbeattie@lindsayhart.com> wrote:

>On Feb 13, 6:18*pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
>wrote:
>> Jay Beattie wrote:
>> > On Feb 13, 4:54 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>> >>> On Feb 13, 7:27 am, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
>> >>>>> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
>> >>>>> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
>> >>>>> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> dabac
>> >>>> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
>> >>>> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
>> >>>> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
>> >>> Doncha just love it when some dickwad makes a big deal of telling the
>> >>> world that they killfiled someone?
>> >>> IMO, just killfile whomever you can't deal with and STFU.
>> >> People who kill-file another poster should refrain on commenting on that
>> >> poster.
>>
>> >> Hey, I am agreeing with both Ozark Bicycle and Ed Dolan in one post! ;)
>>
>> > You bought the LSD, didn't you? *We told you not to do that!
>>
>> Well, I may be doing some work on LSD (cue up Aliotta, Haynes and Jeremiah).
>>
>> > Hey, I'm over here.
>>
>> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *No here.
>>
>> > Over here. *Tom, Tom, look at me. *Can you hear me? *What are you
>> > laughing about? *No, I'm not hungry and don't want to go to the Waffle
>> > House.
>>
>> What is a "Waffle House"?
>
>Here: http://www.wafflehouse.com/ More generally, the Waffle House
>refers to any all night breakfast joint populated mostly by people
>coming off a drug high -- often located near a college campus.

You are about half correct. The Waffle Houses I know of are located
off of interstates or close to large traffic density areas.
>
>> > Can someone please call his parents.
>>
>> They do not answer the phone:
>> <http://photo.ringo.com/151/151297435RL849980787.jpg>.
>
>You should buy them a Blue Tooth phone. -- Jay Beattie.

Paul M. Hobson

01-04-1970, 02:59 AM

>> On Feb 13, 6:18 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> What is a "Waffle House"?

> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:26:35 -0800 (PST), Jay Beattie
> <jbeattie@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
>> Here: http://www.wafflehouse.com/ More generally, the Waffle House
>> refers to any all night breakfast joint populated mostly by people
>> coming off a drug high -- often located near a college campus.

Harry Brogan wrote:
> You are about half correct. The Waffle Houses I know of are located
> off of interstates or close to large traffic density areas.

Indeed. Once you get get going down any interstate in GA, there is *at*
*least* one Waffle House at every exit. I explained this to a partner
of a collaborating firm while I was an intern and driving her through
the night to Augusta, GA to drop off some proposals. At every exit, she
said, "Look there's another Waffle House." I stopped explaining to her
that I was being literal when I said "every exit" after about the 10th time.

Now that you can't smoke in restaurants in GA[1], I enjoy my waffle with
butter and two egg and cheese sandwiches with mayo a Tabasco sauce much
more.

\\paul
[1] Oh please let bars be next!
--
Paul M. Hobson
..:change the ph to f to reply:.

Jay Beattie

01-04-1970, 02:59 AM

On Feb 14, 3:34*am, Harry Brogan <hbroga...@NOSPAM.YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:26:35 -0800 (PST), Jay Beattie
>
>
>
>
>
> <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 13, 6:18*pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> >wrote:
> >> Jay Beattie wrote:
> >> > On Feb 13, 4:54 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >> >>> On Feb 13, 7:27 am, "Pat" <ch...@clock.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>> I did enjoy reading about your gadget-laden bike, and your relaxed
> >> >>>>> attitude to bike riding. It was interesting technology, another view on
> >> >>>>> riding and it made a nice point about getting a bike to suit the rider.
> >> >>>>> I'd rather not killfile you just yet.
> >> >>>>> --
> >> >>>>> dabac
> >> >>>> Oh, I killfiled him a long time ago. His obsessive "I'm right and you're a
> >> >>>> creep with a little penis!" stuff wore thinner than thin a long time ago.
> >> >>>> He has nothing I want to hear about or read about.
> >> >>> Doncha just love it when some dickwad makes a big deal of telling the
> >> >>> world that they killfiled someone?
> >> >>> IMO, just killfile whomever you can't deal with and STFU.
> >> >> People who kill-file another poster should refrain on commenting on that
> >> >> poster.
>
> >> >> Hey, I am agreeing with both Ozark Bicycle and Ed Dolan in one post! ;)
>
> >> > You bought the LSD, didn't you? *We told you not to do that!
>
> >> Well, I may be doing some work on LSD (cue up Aliotta, Haynes and Jeremiah).
>
> >> > Hey, I'm over here.
>
> >> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *No here.
>
> >> > Over here. *Tom, Tom, look at me. *Can you hear me? *What are you
> >> > laughing about? *No, I'm not hungry and don't want to go to the Waffle
> >> > House.
>
> >> What is a "Waffle House"?
>
> >Here:http://www.wafflehouse.com/*More generally, the Waffle House
> >refers to any all night breakfast joint populated mostly by people
> >coming off a drug high -- often located near a college campus.
>
> You are about half correct. *The Waffle Houses I know of are located
> off of interstates or close to large traffic density areas.

You are so lucky to have real Waffle Houses! I was using the term in
the generic sense of the all night breakfast joint. In San Jose,
where I went to college, we actually detoxed at a variety of
restaraunts and sometimes at Original Joes when we had the money. It
was a late night Italian restaurant where the waiters wore tuxedos --
cash only, and a pretty funny crew after about 1:00 AM. -- Jay Beattie.

Tom Nakashima

01-04-1970, 03:00 AM

"Jay Beattie" <jbeattie@lindsayhart.com> wrote in message news:40af464a-
You are so lucky to have real Waffle Houses! I was using the term in
the generic sense of the all night breakfast joint. In San Jose,
where I went to college, we actually detoxed at a variety of
restaraunts and sometimes at Original Joes when we had the money. It
was a late night Italian restaurant where the waiters wore tuxedos --
cash only, and a pretty funny crew after about 1:00 AM. -- Jay Beattie.

Hey,
I don't want to hear anything bad about OJ's,
I still eat there....they still wear tuxs'....one of the bussboys got
promoted
to waiter after 44 years of service.
-tom

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 03:00 AM

On Feb 14, 4:33*pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:

> You are so lucky to have real Waffle Houses! *I was using the term in
> the generic sense of the all night breakfast joint. *In San Jose,
> where I went to college, we actually detoxed at a variety of
> restaraunts and sometimes at Original Joes when we had the money. *It
> was a late night Italian restaurant where the waiters wore tuxedos --
> cash only, and a pretty funny crew after about 1:00 AM. -- Jay Beattie.

When I was a student those of us who would close the nightclubs in
Cape Town all kept paraffin tins cut open at the top in the boots
(trunks to Americans) of our cars. A paraffin tin for you unfortunate
city-bred boys is about a foot square and two high. At dawn we'd leave
the night club and drive out to Hout Bay, the southern most tip of
Africa, where the cold Agulhas Stream meets the warm Indian Ocean.
There we would strip down, boys and girls, and dive for lobster. You
would keep your fingers clear of the claws and carry it to the
paraffin tin full of boiling seawater and chuck it in. One of the
girls usually brought eggs and olive oil and I would whip up a fresh
mayonnaise to the Mahon recipe. (I still like cooking:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/FOOD.html ) That cold water sobered
us up right suddenly... Years later I bought the land we dived off and
built a holiday house a bit back; it was the southernmost house on the
African continent, but you shouldn't imagine a sunny place: the mists
of the mighty cold and hot oceans clashing swirled all the time; it
was a proper house for a poet.

Andre Jute
Nostalgic for nippers

A Muzi

01-04-1970, 03:00 AM

-snip-
> Andre Jute
> A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes

Get a clue; try Hayek not Keynes.
I heartily suggest "Road to Serfdom"
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

01-04-1970, 03:00 AM

"Andre Jute" <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3eac5575-19a7-4ac7-ae23-affe269e630e@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Clive George <clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> "Degrades" is right. Carl Fogel's attempts to limit what can be said
> on RBT, and how it can be said, are direct assaults on free speech.
> Free speech is the basis of democratic liberty and well worth
> defending against the enemies of society who attempt insidiously to
> undermine it.
>
> I imagine Clive George understands that (he'd have to be
> extraordinarily stupid not to get it by now) but, as he has no answers
> to our indictment of Carl Fogel, tries instead to personalize the
> matter as some kind of a contest between Creepy Carl and me:
>>
>> My comment stands. Carl's signal to noise seems to be above Andre's,
>> other
>> issues notwithstanding.
>
> It's Carl Fogel's anti-social noise which concerns us here:
>
>>
> Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
> harassment by Creepy Carl?
>
> Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
> link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
> Google takeout.
>
> What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
> know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
> restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
> Google. Ugh!
>
> Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
> by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
> all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
> work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
> already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
> Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.
>
> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> poor Press.
>
> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
> stalking of his betters.
>
> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
> insincerity and deceit?
>
> Andre Jute
> A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes
>
I don't understand your attacks on Carl Fogel, he obviously has forgotten
more about bikes than you will ever know. It seems like jealously to me.
Why don't you just get a life, and back off, I think most of the people on
this list are tired of your ranting and bull****.

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 03:00 AM

On Feb 14, 5:55*pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> -snip-
>
> > Andre Jute
> > A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes
>
> Get a clue; try Hayek not Keynes.
> I heartily suggest "Road to Serfdom"
> --
> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

You're misrepresenting me, Andrew. I am not a keynesian. I was a
monetarist of the Chicago School stripe before you ever heard of
economics. However, being an anti-keynesian doesn't mean that one
cannot appreciate that Keynes was a cultured man with a fine wit, of
which the above is an excellent example.

But thank you for the tip; I've had the clue you're trying to give me
for well over forty years.

Our converse would be depressingly crude if every time some poster
quoted some feller who said something clever the rest of us
automatically assumed that the poster was in one hundred per cent
agreement with the one from whom he takes a tiny quote.

Andre Jute
Friedmanite from when Keynesianism was all the rage

Peter Cole

01-04-1970, 03:00 AM

A Muzi wrote:
> -snip-
>> Andre Jute
>> A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes
>
> Get a clue; try Hayek not Keynes.
> I heartily suggest "Road to Serfdom"

From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom

John Maynard Keynes read The Road to Serfdom and said of it: "In my
opinion it is a grand book...Morally and philosophically I find myself
in agreement with virtually the whole of it: and not only in agreement
with it, but in deeply moved agreement". Having said that, Keynes did
not think Hayek's philosophy was of practical use; this was explained
later in the same letter, through the following comment and prophecy:
"What we need therefore, in my opinion, is not a change in our economic
programmes, which would only lead in practice to disillusion with the
results of your philosophy; but perhaps even the contrary, namely, an
enlargement of them. Your greatest danger is the probable practical
failure of the application of your philosophy in the United States."

Prophetic words.

Ozark Bicycle

01-04-1970, 03:01 AM

On Feb 14, 3:13*pm, "DI" <di9...@cox.net> wrote:
> "Andre Jute" <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:3eac5575-19a7-4ac7-ae23-affe269e630e@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Clive George <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > "Degrades" is right. Carl Fogel's attempts to limit what can be said
> > on RBT, and how it can be said, are direct assaults on free speech.
> > Free speech is the basis of democratic liberty and well worth
> > defending against the enemies of society who attempt insidiously to
> > undermine it.
>
> > I imagine Clive George understands that (he'd have to be
> > extraordinarily stupid not to get it by now) but, as he has no answers
> > to our indictment of Carl Fogel, tries instead to personalize the
> > matter as some kind of a contest between Creepy Carl and me:
>
> >> My comment stands. Carl's signal to noise seems to be above Andre's,
> >> other
> >> issues notwithstanding.
>
> > It's Carl Fogel's anti-social noise which concerns us here:
>
> > Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
> > harassment by Creepy Carl?
>
> > Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
> > link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
> > That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
> > prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
> > achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
> > Google takeout.
>
> > What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
> > know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
> > restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
> > Google. Ugh!
>
> > Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
> > by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
> > all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
> > work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
> > already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
> > Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.
>
> > It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> > or Tom *or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> > Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> > Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> > therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> > except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> > poor Press.
>
> > Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
> > Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
> > stalking of his betters.
>
> > Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
> > Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
> > insincerity and deceit?
>
> > Andre Jute
> > A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes
>
> I don't understand your attacks on Carl Fogel,

You're not too bright, eh?

> he obviously has forgotten
> more about bikes than you will ever know.

Fogel knows very little about bicycles. Any monkey with an ISP can
scrouge around Google in the fashion of Fogel.

>It seems like jealously to me.

Geez......get some new material.

> Why don't you just get a life, and back off, I think most of the people on
> this list are tired of your ranting and bull****.

Why don't you just speak for yourself, twit?

Andre Jute

01-04-1970, 03:01 AM

On Feb 14, 9:13 pm, "DI" <di9...@cox.net> wrote:
> "Andre Jute" <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:3eac5575-19a7-4ac7-ae23-affe269e630e@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Clive George <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > "Degrades" is right. Carl Fogel's attempts to limit what can be said
> > on RBT, and how it can be said, are direct assaults on free speech.
> > Free speech is the basis of democratic liberty and well worth
> > defending against the enemies of society who attempt insidiously to
> > undermine it.
>
> > I imagine Clive George understands that (he'd have to be
> > extraordinarily stupid not to get it by now) but, as he has no answers
> > to our indictment of Carl Fogel, tries instead to personalize the
> > matter as some kind of a contest between Creepy Carl and me:
>
> >> My comment stands. Carl's signal to noise seems to be above Andre's,
> >> other
> >> issues notwithstanding.
>
> > It's Carl Fogel's anti-social noise which concerns us here:
>
> > Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
> > harassment by Creepy Carl?
>
> > Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
> > link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
> > That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
> > prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
> > achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
> > Google takeout.
>
> > What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
> > know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
> > restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
> > Google. Ugh!
>
> > Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
> > by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
> > all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
> > work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
> > already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
> > Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.
>
> > It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
> > or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
> > Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
> > Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
> > therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
> > except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
> > poor Press.
>
> > Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
> > Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
> > stalking of his betters.
>
> > Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
> > Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
> > insincerity and deceit?
>
> > Andre Jute
> > A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes
>
> I don't understand your attacks on Carl Fogel, he obviously has forgotten
> more about bikes than you will ever know. It seems like jealously to me.
> Why don't you just get a life, and back off, I think most of the people on
> this list are tired of your ranting and bull****.

It's not rocket science, sonny. No likee, no readee. Save your blood
pressure. Now let's look at the several errors of logic and
understanding in each of your sentences:

> I don't understand your attacks on Carl Fogel,

Oh dear, you're not too bright, are you? What the devil do think you
quoted above except a list of reasons to kick Creepy Carl in the
goolies?

But I haven't made any attacks on Creepy Carl yet. I have merely
reported vicious attacks Creepy Carl made on others, including me, in
the last fortnight. When I do attack Creepy Carl, everyone will know
about it because you will be screeching in outrage at the unfairness
of it. If you had screeched instead at the unfairness of Creepy Carl
Fogel's attacks on others, or on me, you would now be spared this
unpleasantness.

> he obviously has forgotten
> more about bikes than you will ever know.

That hasn't been demonstrated. But, even if true, how does knowing a
little or a lot about bikes excuse Creepy Carl Fogel's vicious attacks
on his intellectual superiors?

I fail to see how a jumped-up librarian like Creepy Carl is of any
practical use to me. What I want is not what some joker googled -- I
can do that -- but the genuine experience gained in a lot of seasons
riding a lot more miles than I ever will.

> It seems like jealously to me.

Sure, Creepy Carl's attacks are motivated by jealousy, by fear of more
intelligent people outshining him. That is one reason he plays to a
gallery of not very intelligent hangers-on, you for instance. That is
also the reason Creepy Carl attacks people with some achievement, or
who are brighter and smarter than he is and merely look like they
could threaten his position.

But what could Creepy Carl possibly have that would inspire jealousy
in me? Do you actually know who I am? What could Creepy possibly have
that would inspire jealousy in any of the others he has attacked over
the years? They all seem to me to be smarter and more accomplished
than Creepy Carl, and some of them are distinguished, one in at least
two fields. No, it is not hard to prove to anyone of intelligence that
the jealousy is practiced by Creepy Carl, not his victims.

> Why don't you just get a life,

I have a life, thanks. Among other things what intellectuals like me
do, both for a living and as a moral duty (and some of the more
flamboyant -- heh-heh -- types for a little gladiatorial excitement),
is to step on the enemies of society. When Creepy Carl Fogel presumed
to tell me what I can say and how I can say it, he declared himself an
enemy of free speech and therefore of society. He has a long, long
record of similar crimes against decency; in the material you quoted I
demonstrate an incident in which Creepy Carl despicably tries to bully
a respected cyclist into silence. If you want to tolerate scum like
Carl Fogel, that's your affair, but don't get in my way when I decide
not to.

>and back off,

All you clowns have to brag about is your googling, and you can't even
do that right. Look me up again, idiot.

>I think

I've ignored your earlier mails because I don't care **** what you
think. If you are under any illusion on that count, this post should
disabuse you. The most interesting thing about you is not what you
think, but what you have to think with, and consequently how long
before Darwinism overtakes someone as profoundly stupid as you.

> most of the people on
> this list are tired of your ranting and bull****

You want to run in a popularity contest, go for it, sonny; I'll vote
for you, but then I once ran my pet chimpanzee MiniAndre for the
chairmanship of the Commodities Exchange. Of course, anyone who
permits a dumb jerk like you to speak for him isn't likely to be
someone whose opinion I would ever consider, never mind value.

Are we done now?

Andre Jute
Darwin's little helper

Tom Sherman

01-04-1970, 03:01 AM

"DI" (who?) anonymously snipes:
> "Andre Jute" <fiultra@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3eac5575-19a7-4ac7-ae23-affe269e630e@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> Clive George <clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Degrades" is right. Carl Fogel's attempts to limit what can be said
>> on RBT, and how it can be said, are direct assaults on free speech.
>> Free speech is the basis of democratic liberty and well worth
>> defending against the enemies of society who attempt insidiously to
>> undermine it.
>>
>> I imagine Clive George understands that (he'd have to be
>> extraordinarily stupid not to get it by now) but, as he has no answers
>> to our indictment of Carl Fogel, tries instead to personalize the
>> matter as some kind of a contest between Creepy Carl and me:
>>> My comment stands. Carl's signal to noise seems to be above Andre's,
>>> other
>>> issues notwithstanding.
>> It's Carl Fogel's anti-social noise which concerns us here:
>>
>> Is this mindless harassment by Creepy Carl, or is it mindless
>> harassment by Creepy Carl?
>>
>> Are we truly now at the point where if one cannot point to a Google
>> link, whatever one says is open to attack by some nobody on the net?
>> That is rule by the lowest common denominator, a genuinely frightening
>> prospect of contributors and originalors being dumbed down by zero-
>> achievement jerks like Carl Fogel whose only party trick is going for
>> Google takeout.
>>
>> What we have here is Carl Fogel, who cannot cook, who doesn't even
>> know how to peel potatoes -- but he wants to set himself up as a
>> restaurant critic because someone showed him how to look up recipes on
>> Google. Ugh!
>>
>> Fogel's motive is clear. Fogel knows he is a nobody. Fogel thinks that
>> by tearing down an achiever, his own little fogel will grow bigger. We
>> all know that such do-it-yourself virtual penis-enhancement doesn't
>> work, that Fogel is doomed to further shrinkage because many of us
>> already see right through him. But Fogel's attempt to denigrate Jobst
>> Brandt, a bigger man in every respect, pollutes the atmosphere on RBT.
>>
>> It should also be clear from Fogel's history that if it weren't Jobst
>> or Tom or Alan or Oz (or me, for that matter) in the sights of
>> Fogel's blunderbuss, someone else articulate and intelligent would be
>> Fogel's target; in Fogel's eyes we are all bigger men than he is, and
>> therefore to be brought down (my "crime" was being "flamboyant"!),
>> except uncritically adoring spaniels like Krygowksi and Cousineau and
>> poor Press.
>>
>> Someone was complaining only days ago about a brain drain from RBT.
>> Look no further for the reason than Fogel's malicious and destructive
>> stalking of his betters.
>>
>> Does anyone else find the "Dear X" and "Cheers" bookends to Carl
>> Fogel's vicious posts eerily nauseating in their pure slithering
>> insincerity and deceit?
>>
>> Andre Jute
>> A little, a very little thought will suffice -- Maynard Keynes
>>
> I don't understand your attacks on Carl Fogel, he obviously has forgotten
> more about bikes than you will ever know. It seems like jealously to me.
> Why don't you just get a life, and back off, I think most of the people on
> this list are tired of your ranting and bull****.
>
I suppose "DI" is just fine when he/she is accused of lying.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful