2 year suspension for Bastanelli

[Aaron Burr]

Marta Bastianelli, world road champion, officially has just been suspended 2
years by the CONI (national olympic committee Italian) after a positive
check last July, Marta had been suspended for the Italian selection of the
Olympic Games in Bejing.

http://www.tsr.ch/tsr/index.html?siteSect=800002&sid=9707228&cKey=1221234372000

Aaron

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 16, 3:56*pm, Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Bruce wrote:
> > ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>
> >> As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded, perhaps
> >> you can tell me where these are posted. *Are you quite sure they don't
> >> exist only in your mind?
>
> > I am aware of all internet traditions.
>
> You weren't aware of Goatse until I graced your presence with it.
>
> You're still unaware of the great internet tradition of the Lemonparty.

Damn, dude. I was unaware of lemonparty until about 5 minutes ago...

-rj

[bjw@mambo.ucolick.org]

On Sep 14, 2:08*pm, "Aaron Burr" <Aa...@alexanderhamilton.com> wrote:
> Marta Bastianelli, world road champion, officially has just been suspended 2
> years by the CONI (national olympic committee Italian) after a positive
> check last July, Marta had been suspended for the Italian selection of the
> Olympic Games in Bejing.
>
> http://www.tsr.ch/tsr/index.html?siteSect=800002&sid=9707228&cKey=122...
>
> Aaron

Hi, Bruce.

Ben

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 14, 4:17*pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwei...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2:08*pm, "Aaron Burr" <Aa...@alexanderhamilton.com> wrote:
>
> > Marta Bastianelli, world road champion, officially has just been suspended 2
> > years by the CONI (national olympic committee Italian) after a positive
> > check last July, Marta had been suspended for the Italian selection of the
> > Olympic Games in Bejing.
>
> >http://www.tsr.ch/tsr/index.html?siteSect=800002&sid=9707228&cKey=122...
>
> > Aaron
>
> Hi, Bruce.
>
> Ben

I was just about to ask him why he's posting under Black Bart AND this
name.

The earlier Aaron Burr posts were a tip-off, but the spelling was too
good. But this post cinches it.

-rj

[Bob Schwartz]

ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> I was just about to ask him why he's posting under Black Bart AND this
> name.
>
> The earlier Aaron Burr posts were a tip-off, but the spelling was too
> good. But this post cinches it.

You guys don't get it. If there were more creepy guys posting stuff
to the newsgroup we'd certainly increase participation among women.

Bob Schwartz

[Aaron Burr]

"Bob Schwartz" <bob.schwartz@REMOVEsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:SItzk.246$hc1.159@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>> I was just about to ask him why he's posting under Black Bart AND this
>> name.
>>
>> The earlier Aaron Burr posts were a tip-off, but the spelling was too
>> good. But this post cinches it.
>
> You guys don't get it. If there were more creepy guys posting stuff
> to the newsgroup we'd certainly increase participation among women.
>
> Bob Schwartz

You mean less creeps like you, and more anonymous people posting content
without playing grab ass.

[Bob Schwartz]

Aaron Burr wrote:
> "Bob Schwartz" <bob.schwartz@REMOVEsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:SItzk.246$hc1.159@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
>> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>>> I was just about to ask him why he's posting under Black Bart AND this
>>> name.
>>>
>>> The earlier Aaron Burr posts were a tip-off, but the spelling was too
>>> good. But this post cinches it.
>> You guys don't get it. If there were more creepy guys posting stuff
>> to the newsgroup we'd certainly increase participation among women.
>>
>> Bob Schwartz
>
> You mean less creeps like you, and more anonymous people posting content
> without playing grab ass.

Dumbass,

That's what's creepy. The fact that you can't stay anonymous, even
when you're trying.

Bob Schwartz

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 15, 10:19*am, "Aaron Burr" <Aa...@alexanderhamilton.com> wrote:

> more anonymous people posting content
> without playing grab ass.

What a peculiar choice of words.

-Benjamin Franklin

[Donald Munro]

Aaron Burr wrote:
> You mean less creeps like you, and more anonymous people posting content
> without playing grab ass.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxpblnsJEWM>

[Robert]

"Bob Schwartz" <bob.schwartz@REMOVEsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:eSvzk.353$be.171@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...

> Dumbass,
>
> That's what's creepy. The fact that you can't stay anonymous, even
> when you're trying.
>
> Bob Schwartz

I am anonymous idiot, out of thousands of lurkers and posters here, you are
1 of only a handful of people stalking me. Get a new life Bob, 15 years of
rbr has turned you into a social deviant. Getting your kicks out of trashing
riders like Tyler Hamilton is pathetic as well.

[Bob Schwartz]

Robert wrote:
> "Bob Schwartz" <bob.schwartz@REMOVEsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:eSvzk.353$be.171@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>> Dumbass,
>>
>> That's what's creepy. The fact that you can't stay anonymous, even
>> when you're trying.
>>
>> Bob Schwartz
>
> I am anonymous idiot, out of thousands of lurkers and posters here, you are
> 1 of only a handful of people stalking me. Get a new life Bob, 15 years of
> rbr has turned you into a social deviant. Getting your kicks out of trashing
> riders like Tyler Hamilton is pathetic as well.

Dumbass,

You're wrong on several counts. RBR did not turn me into a
social deviant. I've always been a social deviant. So many
people here lack basic self awareness. That's when things
really get creepy.

And I've been posting here for 20 years, not 15. I think
Kunich is the only one that has been pissing away time down
this rat hole for an equivalent amount of time. Of course,
Les is in his own class with respect to that. But there you
go, how's that for a standard of social deviancy to measure
up to.

And I must say, sticking up anonymously for Tyler Hamilton
after Tyler sodomized his own integrity sets the social
deviancy bar pretty high. Keep it up.

Bob Schwartz

[Robert]

"Bob Schwartz" <bob.schwartz@REMOVEsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:EVxzk.362$be.238@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...

> You're wrong on several counts. RBR did not turn me into a
> social deviant. I've always been a social deviant. So many
> people here lack basic self awareness. That's when things
> really get creepy.
>
> And I've been posting here for 20 years, not 15. I think
> Kunich is the only one that has been pissing away time down
> this rat hole for an equivalent amount of time. Of course,
> Les is in his own class with respect to that. But there you
> go, how's that for a standard of social deviancy to measure
> up to.
>
> And I must say, sticking up anonymously for Tyler Hamilton
> after Tyler sodomized his own integrity sets the social
> deviancy bar pretty high. Keep it up.
>
> Bob Schwartz

Here's what creepy for me. There are two people here that have stalked and
harassed me pretty much ever since i have been in this group, but it's more
of a social disease with them because they do it to a few others as well .
Only two, no one else does it, so its a disease with them. BTW, you're not
one of the two, but it seems you want to make it three. However, that's not
all of why I prefer to use a handle. Since you really want to press me on
it, I will go to another much more anonymous handle in the future. But the
fact is, you been hassling me, and there is no need for it. I don't hassle
you, so why don't you take a break, and deal with content instead of
hassling people. Stop hassling me!

Handles are necessary evil on Usenet. In this age when people are stealing
ID's, stealing personal info, credit card info, SSI numbers, etc, etc,
limiting your personal details on the Internet is not just a good idea, its
needed in Usenet, because that makes it harder for people to engage in
attacking each other personally. Do tell. Attacking the facts and ideas of a
poster as being bogus is one thing, but making personal attacks and
slandering others repeatedly is quite another. It's no surprise that lots of
people use handles on Usenet, because they don't want their good name
dragged through the mud for one, and for two, they don't want their real
name and email abused or stolen to aggravate things further. I am tired of
the slander-fests Bob, give it a break.

If I want to remain anonymous, that's my choice, and netiquette says you
should respect other people's privacy. It's my choice, however I do it,
anyone can crack it if they want, since its not that hard trying to figure
out who posted women's topics of racing here. But that's not the point, its
done to provide (general) Anonymity, and that's one of the rules of
netiquette. I'm not a regular like Kunich anyway, and I can't imagine why
people want to hang around here and engage in such abuse and misery. There
has been plenty of that going around, first Henry's post about Stevie a
while back, yeah I saw that. Then Stevie retaliated, is it any surprise?
This group is shameful compared to how the French and the Italians behave in
their groups, but rbr is boorish, and there is no way around this. It seems
impossible to post around here without getting shot at, but usenet is not a
very good design, it has a lot of promise, but lacks much!

anonymous

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 15, 2:16*pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> *If I want to remain anonymous,

Bruce, let's face it - you just can't do anonymous.

-rj

[Michael Press]

In article <ItadnfoA8K4WKVPVnZ2dnUVZ_oDinZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> If I want to remain anonymous, that's my choice, and netiquette says you
> should respect other people's privacy. It's my choice, however I do it,
> anyone can crack it if they want, since its not that hard trying to figure
> out who posted women's topics of racing here.

sierraman?

--
Michael Press

[Donald Munro]

ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> Bruce, let's face it - you just can't do anonymous.

Eponymous perhaps.

[Robert]

"ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jeremiah@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ca26c3fc-b637-4476-9e8e-4ed6dc93ad70@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 15, 2:16 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> If I want to remain anonymous,

Bruce, let's face it - you just can't do anonymous.

-rj

I'll do what I want, ****head!\

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 16, 12:18*pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ca26c3fc-b637-4476-9e8e-4ed6dc93ad70@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 15, 2:16 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > If I want to remain anonymous,
>
> Bruce, let's face it - you just can't do anonymous.
>
> -rj
>
> I'll do what I want, ****head!\


By all means. But whatever it is, it won't be anonymous.

-rj

They see me trollin', they hatin'...

[Robert]

"ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jeremiah@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:75dd1734-3d26-47fc-9e1d-3b5132dd7c31@73g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 16, 12:18 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ca26c3fc-b637-4476-9e8e-4ed6dc93ad70@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 15, 2:16 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > If I want to remain anonymous,
>
> Bruce, let's face it - you just can't do anonymous.
>
> -rj
>
> I'll do what I want, ****head!\


By all means. But whatever it is, it won't be anonymous.

I am anonymous enough generally speaking, which works for me. There are only
a few like yourself who are bend on repeatedly breaking the rules of
netiquette, posting peoples ID's using it for their own little public
humiliation billboard. Hypocrite, you like the privacy of your own handle,
but your break the very rules on which the Internet was founded.

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 16, 12:55*pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:75dd1734-3d26-47fc-9e1d-3b5132dd7c31@73g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 16, 12:18 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:ca26c3fc-b637-4476-9e8e-4ed6dc93ad70@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com....
> > On Sep 15, 2:16 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > > If I want to remain anonymous,
>
> > Bruce, let's face it - you just can't do anonymous.
>
> > -rj
>
> > I'll do what I want, ****head!\
>
> By all means. *But whatever it is, it won't be anonymous.
>
> I am anonymous enough generally speaking, which works for me. There are only
> a few like yourself who are bend on repeatedly breaking the rules of
> netiquette, posting peoples ID's using it for their own little public
> humiliation billboard. Hypocrite, you like the privacy of your own handle,
> but your break the very rules on which the Internet was founded.

Bruce -

It's not like I'm some kind of human Enigma machine. You can use
whatever handle you want, but your signature remains unchanged.

It's a fascinating thing about human behavior - it's remarkably
difficult to change, or even conceal.

I'm no hypocrite. I've used this same handle for years, and plenty of
people know my "real" identity. It's not a secret, or at least not
much of one. You, on the other hand, have used two different handles
in this very thread.

As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded, perhaps
you can tell me where these are posted. Are you quite sure they don't
exist only in your mind?

-rj

[Bruce]

ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:

> As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded, perhaps
> you can tell me where these are posted. Are you quite sure they don't
> exist only in your mind?

I am aware of all internet traditions.

[Donald Munro]

ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> It's not like I'm some kind of human Enigma machine. You can use whatever
> handle you want, but your signature remains unchanged.

Neural networks are much subtler.

[Robert]

"ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jeremiah@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:155bc8e6-dbd1-4bf8-a9b8-e954903c7ad8@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 16, 12:55 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:75dd1734-3d26-47fc-9e1d-3b5132dd7c31@73g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 16, 12:18 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:ca26c3fc-b637-4476-9e8e-4ed6dc93ad70@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > On Sep 15, 2:16 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > > If I want to remain anonymous,
>
> > Bruce, let's face it - you just can't do anonymous.
>
> > -rj
>
> > I'll do what I want, ****head!\
>
> By all means. But whatever it is, it won't be anonymous.
>
> I am anonymous enough generally speaking, which works for me. There are
> only
> a few like yourself who are bend on repeatedly breaking the rules of
> netiquette, posting peoples ID's using it for their own little public
> humiliation billboard. Hypocrite, you like the privacy of your own handle,
> but your break the very rules on which the Internet was founded.

Bruce -

It's not like I'm some kind of human Enigma machine. You can use
whatever handle you want, but your signature remains unchanged.

It's a fascinating thing about human behavior - it's remarkably
difficult to change, or even conceal.

I'm no hypocrite. I've used this same handle for years, and plenty of
people know my "real" identity. It's not a secret, or at least not
much of one. You, on the other hand, have used two different handles
in this very thread.

As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded, perhaps
you can tell me where these are posted. Are you quite sure they don't
exist only in your mind?

-rj

You can't seem to grasp it. You use a fake handle, but yet you post others
peoples real ID because you think its funny without consideration for their
privacy. You are violating the rules of netiquette, which states to respect
the privacy of others. What you can't seem to understand is that if I use a
general handle, that suits me just fine, and it works well enough for my
needs, until people like you start dragging it through the mud. Like I said,
this isn't your public humiliation billboard, you continue to abuse the
rules of netiquette. Whatever handle I use, works well enough for me to be
anonymous to the majority of people in here since I don't post much or
often. I have no interest to join the dead enders club. Its a cycling
newsgroup and not the property of a handful of thugs bent on keeping it
their own little private domain. Out of thousands of people who have posted
here over the years, less then ten people generally cause the majority of
the trouble. These guys should of been kicked out of here years ago by
usenet authority, but there's no real solid system in place for this, so
troublemakers have to be reported to their ISP's, which just means they can
skip on to another newsfeed. There's only a few hucksters left from the old
jaded crowd who still like to play games here, I guess because they have
nothing better to do, or because they think they can get away with it. There
are a lot of guys, who I know by the way they think and write their thoughts
into their posts, but I don't go around dragging their personal ID through
the mud here, ever if many already know who they are, because I respect
their handle and privacy, something you can't seem to grasp.


You're a haunt, that's for sure.

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 16, 3:01*pm, "Bruce" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address> wrote:
> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> > As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded, perhaps
> > you can tell me where these are posted. *Are you quite sure they don't
> > exist only in your mind?
>
> I am aware of all internet traditions.

Maybe *you* are. But *you're* not Bruce.

-rj

[Bruce]

ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> On Sep 16, 3:01 pm, "Bruce" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address> wrote:
>> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>>> As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded,
>>> perhaps you can tell me where these are posted. Are you quite sure
>>> they don't exist only in your mind?
>>
>> I am aware of all internet traditions.
>
> Maybe *you* are. But *you're* not Bruce.

If Bruce can be Robert, why can't I be Bruce?

[Bob Schwartz]

Donald Munro wrote:
> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>> It's not like I'm some kind of human Enigma machine. You can use whatever
>> handle you want, but your signature remains unchanged.
>
> Neural networks are much subtler.

Neural networks suck.

Bob Schwartz

[Howard Kveck]

In article <rubrum-621E17.15263116092008@news.sf.sbcglobal.net>,
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> wrote:

> In article <ItadnfoA8K4WKVPVnZ2dnUVZ_oDinZ2d@sti.net>,
> "Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > If I want to remain anonymous, that's my choice, and netiquette says you
> > should respect other people's privacy. It's my choice, however I do it,
> > anyone can crack it if they want, since its not that hard trying to figure
> > out who posted women's topics of racing here.
>
> sierraman?

And many more.

--
tanx,
Howard

I'll take the case!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

[Kyle Legate]

ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> On Sep 16, 3:56 pm, Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Bruce wrote:
>>> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>>>> As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded, perhaps
>>>> you can tell me where these are posted. Are you quite sure they don't
>>>> exist only in your mind?
>>> I am aware of all internet traditions.
>> You weren't aware of Goatse until I graced your presence with it.
>>
>> You're still unaware of the great internet tradition of the Lemonparty.
>
> Damn, dude. I was unaware of lemonparty until about 5 minutes ago...
>
> -rj

Curiosity killed the...old man with an erection.

[Ted van de Weteringe]

Bruce wrote:
> If Bruce can be Robert, why can't I be Bruce?

Sure. There's a long history of those two names going side by side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_the_Bruce

[Robert]

" Bruce" <anonymous.coward@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:YoYzk.470$be.58@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>> On Sep 16, 3:01 pm, "Bruce" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address> wrote:
>>> ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>>>> As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded,
>>>> perhaps you can tell me where these are posted. Are you quite sure
>>>> they don't exist only in your mind?
>>>
>>> I am aware of all internet traditions.
>>
>> Maybe *you* are. But *you're* not Bruce.
>
> If Bruce can be Robert, why can't I be Bruce?

You can, but don't post the real ID of others who use handles, as a general
rule of netiquette. Lots of people use first names only instead of a fake
handle. But posting peoples true ID's is a form of cyberstalking, it's
malicious in nature with the intention of maligning someone's character, and
against the rules of netiquette.

But you're Mr. smarty pants, so you already knew the answer.

[Donald Munro]

ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>> Maybe *you* are. But *you're* not Bruce.

Bruce wrote:
> If Bruce can be Robert, why can't I be Bruce?

Robert the Bruce will cut off your head.

[Howard Kveck]

In article <48d058e6$0$197$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
Ted van de Weteringe <myfullname@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:

> Bruce wrote:
> > If Bruce can be Robert, why can't I be Bruce?
>
> Sure. There's a long history of those two names going side by side.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_the_Bruce

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_f_p0CgPeyA

--
tanx,
Howard

I'll take the case!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

[Bruce]

Ted van de Weteringe wrote:

> Sure. There's a long history of those two names going side by side.

That's disquieting.

[Kurgan Gringioni]

On Sep 16, 6:24*pm, "Bruce" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address> wrote:
> Ted van de Weteringe wrote:
>
> > Sure. There's a long history of those two names going side by side.
>
> That's disquieting.




You are a dirtbag.

[Ted van de Weteringe]

Bruce wrote:
> Ted van de Weteringe wrote:
>> Sure. There's a long history of those two names going side by side.
>
> That's disquieting.

I didn't want to write hand in hand. Or: they go together like a nice
quiet evening with the Mrs and some butter.

[Tom Kunich]

"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f851bbb7-da40-4fe1-9c5d-2222faf31105@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> You are a dirtbag.

This coming from Henry? (Pot, kettle and all that stuff.)

[Howard Kveck]

In article <f851bbb7-da40-4fe1-9c5d-2222faf31105@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Kurgan Gringioni <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Sep 16, 6:24*pm, "Bruce" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address> wrote:
> > Ted van de Weteringe wrote:
> >
> > > Sure. There's a long history of those two names going side by side.
> >
> > That's disquieting.
>
>
>
>
> You are a dirtbag.

Ronaldo Jeremiah is the One True Dirtbag.

--
tanx,
Howard

I'll take the case!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

[Bruce]

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
> "Bruce" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address> wrote:
>> Ted van de Weteringe wrote:
>>
>>> Sure. There's a long history of those two names going side by side.
>>
>> That's disquieting.
>
> You are a dirtbag.

Is there a www.hotchickswithdirtbags.com ?

[Howard Kveck]

In article <O5adnYgIgK4gA03VnZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jeremiah@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:155bc8e6-dbd1-4bf8-a9b8-e954903c7ad8@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 16, 12:55 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> > "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:75dd1734-3d26-47fc-9e1d-3b5132dd7c31@73g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> > On Sep 16, 12:18 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >
> > >news:ca26c3fc-b637-4476-9e8e-4ed6dc93ad70@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > > On Sep 15, 2:16 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > If I want to remain anonymous,
> >
> > > Bruce, let's face it - you just can't do anonymous.
> >
> > > -rj
> >
> > > I'll do what I want, ****head!\
> >
> > By all means. But whatever it is, it won't be anonymous.
> >
> > I am anonymous enough generally speaking, which works for me. There are
> > only
> > a few like yourself who are bend on repeatedly breaking the rules of
> > netiquette, posting peoples ID's using it for their own little public
> > humiliation billboard. Hypocrite, you like the privacy of your own handle,
> > but your break the very rules on which the Internet was founded.
>
> Bruce -
>
> It's not like I'm some kind of human Enigma machine. You can use
> whatever handle you want, but your signature remains unchanged.
>
> It's a fascinating thing about human behavior - it's remarkably
> difficult to change, or even conceal.
>
> I'm no hypocrite. I've used this same handle for years, and plenty of
> people know my "real" identity. It's not a secret, or at least not
> much of one. You, on the other hand, have used two different handles
> in this very thread.
>
> As for breaking the rules upon which the Internet was founded, perhaps
> you can tell me where these are posted. Are you quite sure they don't
> exist only in your mind?
>
> -rj
>
> You can't seem to grasp it. You use a fake handle, but yet you post others
> peoples real ID because you think its funny without consideration for their
> privacy. You are violating the rules of netiquette, which states to respect
> the privacy of others.

Mmm, I think that's not quite right. "Respecting the privacy of others" seems to
me to be related to not posting someone's home address or phone number, for example,
not pointing out the name of a poster.

Oh, when it was pointed out that you "don't do anonymity," it wasn't telling you
not to do it, just saying that you aren't very good at it. That's part of how this
stuff gets going - you keep swapping identities but keep posting about the same
subjects in the same style with the same idiosyncratic features in your writing. And
then get annoyed when you get spotted. Why not just maintain a little bit better?

What you can't seem to understand is that if I use a
> general handle, that suits me just fine, and it works well enough for my
> needs, until people like you start dragging it through the mud. Like I said,
> this isn't your public humiliation billboard, you continue to abuse the
> rules of netiquette. Whatever handle I use, works well enough for me to be
> anonymous to the majority of people in here since I don't post much or
> often. I have no interest to join the dead enders club. Its a cycling
> newsgroup and not the property of a handful of thugs bent on keeping it
> their own little private domain. Out of thousands of people who have posted
> here over the years, less then ten people generally cause the majority of
> the trouble. These guys should of been kicked out of here years ago by
> usenet authority, but there's no real solid system in place for this, so
> troublemakers have to be reported to their ISP's, which just means they can
> skip on to another newsfeed. There's only a few hucksters left from the old
> jaded crowd who still like to play games here, I guess because they have
> nothing better to do, or because they think they can get away with it. There
> are a lot of guys, who I know by the way they think and write their thoughts
> into their posts, but I don't go around dragging their personal ID through
> the mud here, ever if many already know who they are, because I respect
> their handle and privacy, something you can't seem to grasp.

Um, whatever.

--
tanx,
Howard

I'll take the case!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 17, 1:07*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> You can't seem to grasp it.

Yeah, you're right. It's me who is confused.

> You use a fake handle,

Not fake. Just a handle. I use it consistently. So what?

Remember, on the internet, no one knows you're a dog.

> but yet you post others
> peoples real ID

I've never posted anything about you that you have not posted about
yourself.

> because you think its funny without consideration for their
> privacy.

I have never jeopardized your privacy, only your very weak attempts at
anonymity.

> You are violating the rules of netiquette, which states to respect
> the privacy of others. What you can't seem to understand is that if I use a
> general handle, that suits me just fine, and it works well enough for my
> needs, until people like you start dragging it through the mud.

Ah yes, the metaphorical mud. Perhaps you could show us where I have
besmirched you so.

> Like I said,
> this isn't your public humiliation billboard, you continue to abuse the
> rules of netiquette. Whatever handle I use, works well enough for me to be
> anonymous to the majority of people in here since I don't post much or
> often. I have no interest to join the dead enders club.

Newsflash - you are obsessed with joining the dead enders club.

> Its a cycling
> newsgroup

Just barely.

> and not the property of a handful of thugs bent on keeping it
> their own little private domain. Out of thousands of people who have posted
> here over the years, less then ten people generally cause the majority of
> the trouble. These guys should of been kicked out of here years ago by
> usenet authority, but there's no real solid system in place for this, so
> troublemakers have to be reported to their ISP's,

Reported for what? Saying things you don't like?

> which just means they can
> skip on to another newsfeed. *There's only a few hucksters left from the old
> jaded crowd who still like to play games here, I guess because they have
> nothing better to do, or because they think they can get away with it. There
> are a lot of guys, who I know by the way they think and write their thoughts
> into their posts, but I don't go around dragging their personal ID through
> the mud here, ever if many already know who they are, because I respect
> their handle and privacy, something you can't seem to grasp.
>
> You're a haunt

You certainly seem haunted by r.b.r.

-rj

[Michael Press]

In article <O5adnYgIgK4gA03VnZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:


[...]

> You can't seem to grasp it. You use a fake handle, but yet you post others
>
[...]


> their handle and privacy, something you can't seem to grasp.
>
>
> You're a haunt, that's for sure.

If I absolutely had to find out who is behind some net
alias,I might have a fighting chance, but would probably
fail. As it is I never try. So when you are obviously the
same writer as many net aliases to me, then your veil of
anonymity ranks with the emperors new clothes.

And secondly, people (and by people I include myself)
anticipate a sierraman flame out from you. We are likely
to be disappointed, since it is a once ever type event.
Do not pick at sores; else they will never heal.

--
Michael Press

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 17, 1:28*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
the rules of netiquette.
>

Dumbass -

Again, I ask you - where can I find these rules?

-rj

[Robert]

"Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
news:YOURhoward-B72C6E.23451516092008@newsgroups.comcast.net...

for example,
> not pointing out the name of a poster.

He's posting my name, hijacking threads, and posting trolls to further
malign my character. This needs to stop. Ben didn't reveal my name to be
mean, there is a big difference there. I wish he hadn't but Ben is not a
troublemaker. This guy RJ always likes to run with it and milk it for all
its worth, sewing discord and disrupting the group. Not one word on
Bastanelli, but instead a hijacked thread, courtesy of this guy RJ.

[Donald Munro]

Ted van de Weteringe wrote:
>>> Sure. There's a long history of those two names going side by side.

Bruce wrote:
>> That's disquieting.

Ted van de Weteringe wrote:
> I didn't want to write hand in hand. Or: they go together like a nice
> quiet evening with the Mrs and some butter.

Be a cheapskate and try margarine.

[Bill C]

On Sep 17, 10:21*am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Sep 17, 1:28*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> the rules of netiquette.
>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
> Again, I ask you - where can I find these rules?
>
> -rj
http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/netiquettenazi.htm

Leather too, now if only there was a bicycle in the drawing. ;-)
Bill C

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 17, 9:25*am, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 10:21*am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:> On Sep 17, 1:28*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> > the rules of netiquette.
>
> > Dumbass -
>
> > Again, I ask you - where can I find these rules?
>
> > -rj
>
> http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/netiquettenazi.htm
>
> Leather too, now if only there was a bicycle in the drawing. ;-)
> Bill C


Nope, doesn't fit. Bruce (not the new one; aka Sierraman, aka Gone
Before My Time, aka Aaron Burr, aka Robert) is not actually a
Netiquette Nazi. Using their descriptions, Bruce is:

2 parts Garble + 2 parts Innocence Abused + 1 part Crybaby + a dash of
Loopy.

-rj

[Ted van de Weteringe]

ronaldo_jeremiah schreef:
> Nope, doesn't fit. Bruce (not the new one; aka Sierraman, aka Gone
> Before My Time, aka Aaron Burr, aka Robert) is not actually a
> Netiquette Nazi. Using their descriptions, Bruce is:
>
> 2 parts Garble + 2 parts Innocence Abused + 1 part Crybaby + a dash of
> Loopy.

I won't argue with the ingredient list so far but you forgot: a few
dollops of genuine interest in women's bike racing. Which is nice and
sometimes interesting.

[Robert]

"ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jeremiah@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:415b61c5-d3b3-41c2-a49e-39d293636b64@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 17, 9:25 am, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 10:21 am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:> On Sep 17, 1:28 am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> > the rules of netiquette.
>
> > Dumbass -
>
> > Again, I ask you - where can I find these rules?
>
> > -rj
>
> http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/netiquettenazi.htm
>
> Leather too, now if only there was a bicycle in the drawing. ;-)
> Bill C


Nope, doesn't fit. Bruce (not the new one; aka Sierraman, aka Gone
Before My Time, aka Aaron Burr, aka Robert) is not actually a
Netiquette Nazi. Using their descriptions, Bruce is:

2 parts Garble + 2 parts Innocence Abused + 1 part Crybaby + a dash of
Loopy.

-rj

Dude, you hijack threads, engage in random personal attacks, often nasty and
vicious, and post people's ID's while enjoying the anonymity of your own
handle. That's hypocritical and cowardly to say the least. You don't follow
any rules of netiquette but enjoy traipsing around this newsgroup sewing
discord on a regular basis. You and a handful of others have done rbr a
disservice over the years, driving people away, and keeping people away with
the usual gang of thugs, some of who like to use the dumbass reply. The
dumbass replies should end, and will end sometime in the future, but for
now, rbr just seems like a nasty place to outside observers.



That's not the model of cycling, rbr should be presenting to the public.
This crap has been going on for quite some time now, and its time to allow a
new generation a chance to enjoy this group without being abused by the
rat-packs. Most of this has been done for kicks because you think its cute
or funny, at the expense of thousands of others in this forum over time who
would rather have a civil newsgroup. Its basically like a gang of cyber
warlords who run in packs for kicks, nothing more, its truly pathetic. The
majority of good contributors here, have nothing to do with the rat-packs,
and for good reason. They use basic civility and follow netiquette because
its the right thing to do, but its not an obligation. Since usenet is not
moderated, you can choose to play nice, or be a jackass and run with the
rat-packs.



As relentless and opinionated as Kunich has been over the years, he's a
Maverick and doesn't run with the rat-packs. I do give him credit for that,
probably no one has taken more crap here by far then Kunich. He's not a
coward and stood his ground, but rbr usenet is a low profile cycling forum
and hardly worth all the time and trouble. I admit that Kunich does fight
back hard relentlessly, but there shouldn't be the need for all the non-stop
bikering and personal attacks that go on all the time. RBR posts and replies
should go smoothly like France and Italian road racing groups, where you
stay on content, deal with the subject matter but don't kill the messenger.
Posts should go no more then 50 replies tops, and then move on, which is
what a finely tuned robust cycling forum should be like, instead of a bunch
of guys playing cyber grab ass all the time.



I've had my say, and leave my ID alone in the future. This is not a game
forum for catch me if you can.




Robert

[Michael Press]

In article
<415b61c5-d3b3-41c2-a49e-39d293636b64@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jeremiah@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Sep 17, 9:25*am, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Sep 17, 10:21*am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:> On Sep 17, 1:28*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> > > the rules of netiquette.
> >
> > > Dumbass -
> >
> > > Again, I ask you - where can I find these rules?
> >
> > > -rj
> >
> > http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/netiquettenazi.htm
> >
> > Leather too, now if only there was a bicycle in the drawing. ;-)
> > Bill C
>
>
> Nope, doesn't fit. Bruce (not the new one; aka Sierraman, aka Gone
> Before My Time, aka Aaron Burr, aka Robert) is not actually a
> Netiquette Nazi. Using their descriptions, Bruce is:
>
> 2 parts Garble + 2 parts Innocence Abused + 1 part Crybaby + a dash of
> Loopy.

+ Eaglescout.

--
Michael Press

[Bill C]

On Sep 17, 11:43*am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Sep 17, 1:07*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > You can't seem to grasp it.
>
> Yeah, you're right. *It's me who is confused.
>
> > You use a fake handle,
>
> Not fake. *Just a handle. *I use it consistently. *So what?
>
> Remember, on the internet, no one knows you're a dog.
>
> > but yet you post others
> > peoples real ID
>
> I've never posted anything about you that you have not posted about
> yourself.
>
> > because you think its funny without consideration for their
> > privacy.
>
> I have never jeopardized your privacy, only your very weak attempts at
> anonymity.
>
> > You are violating the rules of netiquette, which states to respect
> > the privacy of others. What you can't seem to understand is that if I use a
> > general handle, that suits me just fine, and it works well enough for my
> > needs, until people like you start dragging it through the mud.
>
> Ah yes, the metaphorical mud. *Perhaps you could show us where I have
> besmirched you so.
>
> > * Like I said,
> > this isn't your public humiliation billboard, you continue to abuse the
> > rules of netiquette. Whatever handle I use, works well enough for me to be
> > anonymous to the majority of people in here since I don't post much or
> > often. I have no interest to join the dead enders club.
>
> Newsflash - you are obsessed with joining the dead enders club.
>
> > Its a cycling
> > newsgroup
>
> Just barely.
>
> > and not the property of a handful of thugs bent on keeping it
> > their own little private domain. Out of thousands of people who have posted
> > here over the years, less then ten people generally cause the majority of
> > the trouble. These guys should of been kicked out of here years ago by
> > usenet authority, but there's no real solid system in place for this, so
> > troublemakers have to be reported to their ISP's,
>
> Reported for what? *Saying things you don't like?
>
> > which just means they can
> > skip on to another newsfeed. *There's only a few hucksters left from the old
> > jaded crowd who still like to play games here, I guess because they have
> > nothing better to do, or because they think they can get away with it. There
> > are a lot of guys, who I know by the way they think and write their thoughts
> > into their posts, but I don't go around dragging their personal ID through
> > the mud here, ever if many already know who they are, because I respect
> > their handle and privacy, something you can't seem to grasp.
>
> > You're a haunt
>
> You certainly seem haunted by r.b.r.
>
> -rj

Ya know RJ, to bust a myth, this place is incredibly civil in
comparison to an awful lot of unmoderated forums. Most of the folks
here are usenet "old hands" and know how to deal with the worst of the
bunch, usually ignore, after we're done playing with them, and never
take them too seriously. It's a lot like the crazy guy standing on the
street corner yelling things, sometimes it's fun to talk to him, but
most of the time it doesn't even register except as background noise.
It hasn't been really bad here in years. I wouldn't even say it
approached being bad.
Different strokes I guess.
Bill C

[Robert]

"Ted van de Weteringe" <myfullname@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote in message
news:48d13d42$0$197$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...

> I won't argue with the ingredient list so far but you forgot: a few
> dollops of genuine interest in women's bike racing. Which is nice and
> sometimes interesting.

I don't post here, almost never. Only one race, Pine Flat in January, and I
do it for a reason. Same reason that Cycleto gets hammered for sharing. I'm
not that stupid, because I know how pathetically uncivil and vicious this
group is to almost everything cycling. I share my stuff with the Euro crowd,
but not here. Its not civil here yet, don't know if it will ever be, but I
do reply to threads on occasion for my own interest and fun, as long as I
can avoid the troublemakers.

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 17, 1:09*pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

>You don't follow
> any rules of netiquette but enjoy traipsing around this newsgroup sewing
> discord on a regular basis.

Dumbass -

I don't even know how to sew.

-rj

[Kyle Legate]

Robert wrote:
>
> That's not the model of cycling, rbr should be presenting to the public.
> This crap has been going on for quite some time now, and its time to allow a
> new generation a chance to enjoy this group without being abused by the
> rat-packs. Most of this has been done for kicks because you think its cute
> or funny, at the expense of thousands of others in this forum over time who
> would rather have a civil newsgroup. Its basically like a gang of cyber
> warlords who run in packs for kicks, nothing more, its truly pathetic. The
> majority of good contributors here, have nothing to do with the rat-packs,
> and for good reason. They use basic civility and follow netiquette because
> its the right thing to do, but its not an obligation. Since usenet is not
> moderated, you can choose to play nice, or be a jackass and run with the
> rat-packs.
>
Jesus, Bruce, just STFU and melt down, already. Wanker.

[Donald Munro]

Robert wrote:
> That's not the model of cycling, rbr should be presenting to the public.

Public ? If the "public knew anything about a usenet they all be going to
alt.sex.big.beavers not rbr (even though there may be some big beavers
on rbr)

[Michael Press]

In article <-4udneTTAYSC1EzVnZ2dnUVZ_ovinZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jeremiah@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:415b61c5-d3b3-41c2-a49e-39d293636b64@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 17, 9:25 am, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Sep 17, 10:21 am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:> On Sep 17, 1:28 am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
> > > the rules of netiquette.
> >
> > > Dumbass -
> >
> > > Again, I ask you - where can I find these rules?
> >
> > > -rj
> >
> > http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/netiquettenazi.htm
> >
> > Leather too, now if only there was a bicycle in the drawing. ;-)
> > Bill C
>
>
> Nope, doesn't fit. Bruce (not the new one; aka Sierraman, aka Gone
> Before My Time, aka Aaron Burr, aka Robert) is not actually a
> Netiquette Nazi. Using their descriptions, Bruce is:
>
> 2 parts Garble + 2 parts Innocence Abused + 1 part Crybaby + a dash of
> Loopy.
>
>
> Dude, you hijack threads, engage in random personal attacks, often nasty and
> vicious, and post people's ID's while enjoying the anonymity of your own
> handle. That's hypocritical and cowardly to say the least. You don't follow
> any rules of netiquette but enjoy traipsing around this newsgroup sewing

He's got me in stitches.

--
Michael Press

[Off The Back]

Robert wrote:
> ...there shouldn't be the need for all the non-stop bikering and personal
> attacks that go on all the time.
^^^^^^^^

....but, but, but... this is rec.bikering.racing, right?

btw, bruce, not sure if you noticed or not but I found the top-3 women
placings for Nevada City in 2002 and posted a link in that other thread
("Who is this?").

Mark
http://marcofanelli.blogspot.com

[Bob Schwartz]

Robert wrote:
> This needs to stop.

Dumbass,

You know, I was having a conversation on a similar topic the
other day with a friend of mine. He was feeling persecuted
and beset upon. My advice was that he not react so strongly
with the perceived offense. If he would just chill a little,
eventually his older sister would get bored and look somewhere
else for entertainment.

I think that's good advice for you as well. I doubt either you
or my friend have the emotional maturity to act upon it. I
didn't call him a dumbass, because that's kind of strong for
someone that age. But really, if you want the abuse to stop
you have the power to make it stop.

Oh, and it's kind of funny that you blame RJ for blowing your
cover.

Bob Schwartz

[Bob Schwartz]

Robert wrote:
> Not one word on Bastanelli,

How's this...

http://images33.fotki.com/v1071/photos/1/108147/5795588/183-vi.jpg
http://images34.fotki.com/v1079/photos/1/108147/5795588/195-vi.jpg

Not bad looking, but Tamanini is totally hot.

Bob Schwartz

[Bill C]

On Sep 17, 3:15*pm, Bob Schwartz <bob.schwa...@REMOVEsbcglobal.net>
wrote:

> Robert wrote:
> > This needs to stop.
>
> Dumbass,
>
> You know, I was having a conversation on a similar topic the
> other day with a friend of mine. He was feeling persecuted
> and beset upon. My advice was that he not react so strongly
> with the perceived offense. If he would just chill a little,
> eventually his older sister would get bored and look somewhere
> else for entertainment.
>
> I think that's good advice for you as well. I doubt either you
> or my friend have the emotional maturity to act upon it. I
> didn't call him a dumbass, because that's kind of strong for
> someone that age. But really, if you want the abuse to stop
> you have the power to make it stop.
>
> Oh, and it's kind of funny that you blame RJ for blowing your
> cover.
>
> Bob Schwartz

That's really good advice for more than one person around here. Their
paper thin skin really encourages some folks to see how little it can
take to wind them right up. Usually doesn't take much either.
Bill C

[Donald Munro]

Bob Schwartz wrote:
> Oh, and it's kind of funny that you blame RJ for blowing your cover.

Lemonparty is really catching on.

[Robert]

"Bob Schwartz" <bob.schwartz@REMOVEsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:cHcAk.403$hc1.151@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Robert wrote:
>> This needs to stop.
>
> Dumbass,
>
> You know, I was having a conversation on a similar topic the
> other day with a friend of mine. He was feeling persecuted
> and beset upon. My advice was that he not react so strongly
> with the perceived offense. If he would just chill a little,
> eventually his older sister would get bored and look somewhere
> else for entertainment.
>
> I think that's good advice for you as well. I doubt either you
> or my friend have the emotional maturity to act upon it. I
> didn't call him a dumbass, because that's kind of strong for
> someone that age. But really, if you want the abuse to stop
> you have the power to make it stop.
>
> Oh, and it's kind of funny that you blame RJ for blowing your
> cover.
>
> Bob Schwartz

Bob, I am beyond being pissed at this guy. He has been slandering me for
years in this group, and often when I post something, he attacks me, posts
my ID and starts a troll to further malign my character. As much as you
think that's cool, its not. Contacting his ISP is the only recourse, because
it appears he won't stop, no matter what. When you hijack a thread, publish
someone's ID and drag it through the mud with a troll, that's about as bad
as it gets, he has no consideration to follow the rules of Nettique. And he
keeps doing it, over and over and over. No thanks to your trolls either.

You guys shouldn't try to confuse people about rbr. For the majority of
people, its civil for them, as long as they are not targeted, or their
threads are not hijacked by the ratpacks. Its a very small group who cause
most of the problems, and I have already wasted far too much time responding
and defending myself against the troublemakers. In all the years I have been
in usenet, only once previously, have I considered complaining to an ISP.
Its up to me now, to put a stop to this, and this must stop.

As for you Bob, well, you might of been here 20 years, but it doesn't belong
to you, or your pack of followers. I respect Kunich more because he won't
run with your packs and he's still reasonably civil. For someone who's been
here longer, its amazing the guy is still civil at all! That's why I don't
read all this stuff, because this place will rot your brain over time. This
is a free forum, its belongs to the whole world, and shouldn't be held
hostage by packs of thugs. I was thinking maybe its time for you to pack it
in, and let a new generation have rbr.

I'll be back in time with a new handle. If anyone posts my ID out of spite
or because they think it funny, I'll report it. Like I said before, if I
could, I would eliminate every single one of these troublemakers from this
group.

BTW, I don't like being addressed as Dumbass as a cue. Its a nasty habit
that's caught on with far too many people, and its bad for rbr.

[Robert Chung]

Bob Schwartz wrote:
> Robert wrote:
>> Not one word on Bastanelli,
>
> How's this...
> http://images34.fotki.com/v1079/photos/1/108147/5795588/195-vi.jpg

Hey, Bill Gates is in that photo. Seinfeld couldn't be far away.

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 17, 3:16*pm, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 11:43*am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 17, 1:07*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > > You can't seem to grasp it.
>
> > Yeah, you're right. *It's me who is confused.
>
> > > You use a fake handle,
>
> > Not fake. *Just a handle. *I use it consistently. *So what?
>
> > Remember, on the internet, no one knows you're a dog.
>
> > > but yet you post others
> > > peoples real ID
>
> > I've never posted anything about you that you have not posted about
> > yourself.
>
> > > because you think its funny without consideration for their
> > > privacy.
>
> > I have never jeopardized your privacy, only your very weak attempts at
> > anonymity.
>
> > > You are violating the rules of netiquette, which states to respect
> > > the privacy of others. What you can't seem to understand is that if I use a
> > > general handle, that suits me just fine, and it works well enough for my
> > > needs, until people like you start dragging it through the mud.
>
> > Ah yes, the metaphorical mud. *Perhaps you could show us where I have
> > besmirched you so.
>
> > > * Like I said,
> > > this isn't your public humiliation billboard, you continue to abuse the
> > > rules of netiquette. Whatever handle I use, works well enough for me to be
> > > anonymous to the majority of people in here since I don't post much or
> > > often. I have no interest to join the dead enders club.
>
> > Newsflash - you are obsessed with joining the dead enders club.
>
> > > Its a cycling
> > > newsgroup
>
> > Just barely.
>
> > > and not the property of a handful of thugs bent on keeping it
> > > their own little private domain. Out of thousands of people who have posted
> > > here over the years, less then ten people generally cause the majority of
> > > the trouble. These guys should of been kicked out of here years ago by
> > > usenet authority, but there's no real solid system in place for this, so
> > > troublemakers have to be reported to their ISP's,
>
> > Reported for what? *Saying things you don't like?
>
> > > which just means they can
> > > skip on to another newsfeed. *There's only a few hucksters left from the old
> > > jaded crowd who still like to play games here, I guess because they have
> > > nothing better to do, or because they think they can get away with it.. There
> > > are a lot of guys, who I know by the way they think and write their thoughts
> > > into their posts, but I don't go around dragging their personal ID through
> > > the mud here, ever if many already know who they are, because I respect
> > > their handle and privacy, something you can't seem to grasp.
>
> > > You're a haunt
>
> > You certainly seem haunted by r.b.r.
>
> > -rj
>
> Ya know RJ, to bust a myth, this place is incredibly civil in
> comparison to an awful lot of unmoderated forums. Most of the folks
> here are usenet "old hands" and know how to deal with the worst of the
> bunch, usually ignore, after we're done playing with them, and never
> take them too seriously. It's a lot like the crazy guy standing on the
> street corner yelling things, sometimes it's fun to talk to him, but
> most of the time it doesn't even register except as background noise.
> *It hasn't been really bad here in years. I wouldn't even say it
> approached being bad.
> *Different strokes I guess.
> *Bill C- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Why are you telling this to me, Bill?

-rj

[Donald Munro]

Kyle Legate wrote:
> Jesus, Bruce, just STFU and melt down, already. Wanker.

Dunno about melt down, I was quite looking forward to another
flame out. The last one was quite entertaining.

[Bill C]

On Sep 17, 4:20*pm, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Sep 17, 3:16*pm, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 17, 11:43*am, ronaldo_jeremiah <ronaldo_jerem...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 17, 1:07*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
> > > > You can't seem to grasp it.
>
> > > Yeah, you're right. *It's me who is confused.
>
> > > > You use a fake handle,
>
> > > Not fake. *Just a handle. *I use it consistently. *So what?
>
> > > Remember, on the internet, no one knows you're a dog.
>
> > > > but yet you post others
> > > > peoples real ID
>
> > > I've never posted anything about you that you have not posted about
> > > yourself.
>
> > > > because you think its funny without consideration for their
> > > > privacy.
>
> > > I have never jeopardized your privacy, only your very weak attempts at
> > > anonymity.
>
> > > > You are violating the rules of netiquette, which states to respect
> > > > the privacy of others. What you can't seem to understand is that if I use a
> > > > general handle, that suits me just fine, and it works well enough for my
> > > > needs, until people like you start dragging it through the mud.
>
> > > Ah yes, the metaphorical mud. *Perhaps you could show us where I have
> > > besmirched you so.
>
> > > > * Like I said,
> > > > this isn't your public humiliation billboard, you continue to abuse the
> > > > rules of netiquette. Whatever handle I use, works well enough for me to be
> > > > anonymous to the majority of people in here since I don't post much or
> > > > often. I have no interest to join the dead enders club.
>
> > > Newsflash - you are obsessed with joining the dead enders club.
>
> > > > Its a cycling
> > > > newsgroup
>
> > > Just barely.
>
> > > > and not the property of a handful of thugs bent on keeping it
> > > > their own little private domain. Out of thousands of people who have posted
> > > > here over the years, less then ten people generally cause the majority of
> > > > the trouble. These guys should of been kicked out of here years ago by
> > > > usenet authority, but there's no real solid system in place for this, so
> > > > troublemakers have to be reported to their ISP's,
>
> > > Reported for what? *Saying things you don't like?
>
> > > > which just means they can
> > > > skip on to another newsfeed. *There's only a few hucksters left from the old
> > > > jaded crowd who still like to play games here, I guess because they have
> > > > nothing better to do, or because they think they can get away with it. There
> > > > are a lot of guys, who I know by the way they think and write their thoughts
> > > > into their posts, but I don't go around dragging their personal ID through
> > > > the mud here, ever if many already know who they are, because I respect
> > > > their handle and privacy, something you can't seem to grasp.
>
> > > > You're a haunt
>
> > > You certainly seem haunted by r.b.r.
>
> > > -rj
>
> > Ya know RJ, to bust a myth, this place is incredibly civil in
> > comparison to an awful lot of unmoderated forums. Most of the folks
> > here are usenet "old hands" and know how to deal with the worst of the
> > bunch, usually ignore, after we're done playing with them, and never
> > take them too seriously. It's a lot like the crazy guy standing on the
> > street corner yelling things, sometimes it's fun to talk to him, but
> > most of the time it doesn't even register except as background noise.
> > *It hasn't been really bad here in years. I wouldn't even say it
> > approached being bad.
> > *Different strokes I guess.
> > *Bill C- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Why are you telling this to me, Bill?
>
> -rj- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Just an observation on your conversation. I guess I'm still mildly
amazed by the whole conversation.
Bill C

[Bob Schwartz]

Bill C wrote:
> I guess I'm still mildly
> amazed by the whole conversation.

Lemonparty will do that.

Bob Schwartz

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 17, 3:35*pm, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Just an observation on your conversation. I guess I'm still mildly
> amazed by the whole conversation.
> Bill C

I see. I thought maybe you were intending to address Bruce/Sierraman/
Gone/Libere/Aaron/Robert - you know, the guy who has a problem with
the fact that I use a handle - rather than me, but I wasn't sure.

And yeah, I'm also mildly amazed.

-rj

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <tAiAk.614$x%.560@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com>,
"Robert Chung" <anonymous.coward@invalid.address> wrote:

> Bob Schwartz wrote:
> > Robert wrote:
> >> Not one word on Bastanelli,
> >
> > How's this...
> > http://images34.fotki.com/v1079/photos/1/108147/5795588/195-vi.jpg
>
> Hey, Bill Gates is in that photo. Seinfeld couldn't be far away.

Jerry is further away than you think:

<http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/news/agency/e3if0f83346ff54253c
725d95628bb70e08>

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

[Donald Munro]

Robert wrote:
>> You don't follow any rules of netiquette but enjoy traipsing around
>> this newsgroup sewing

Michael Press wrote:
> He's got me in stitches.

You're just embroidering the facts.

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 17, 10:35*pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:

>
> + Eaglescout.
>
> --
> Michael Press- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You're right. Good call, Michael.

-rj

[Robert]

"Michael Press" <rubrum@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:rubrum-733111.20353017092008@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...

> + Eaglescout.
>
> --
> Michael Press

There's been a gradual but constant reduction of civics in America, a bad
thing, not a good thing. Rituals and traditions build character. Society
today is bascially full of cheese.

[Donald Munro]

Michael Press wrote:
> And secondly, people (and by people I include myself) anticipate a
> sierraman flame out from you. We are likely to be disappointed, since it
> is a once ever type event.

Alas no more supernovas, he's a neutron star now.

[Bruce]

Donald Munro wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
>> Robert wrote:
>>> You don't follow any rules of netiquette but enjoy traipsing around
>>> this newsgroup sewing
>
>> He's got me in stitches.
>
> You're just embroidering the facts.

It's a tissue of lies.

[Off The Back]

bikering
^^^^^^^

That's what I meant...

[Robert]

"Off The Back" <marco_fennelli@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8ivAk.8262$PS3.6669@newsfe06.iad...

> btw, not sure if you noticed or not but I found the top-3 women placings
> for Nevada City in 2002 and posted a link in that other thread ("Who is
> this?").
>
> Mark
> http://marcofanelli.blogspot.com

Thanks, check the winner of 1982 if you have it? That's the only year with a
missing winner since 1978. 1977 was probably the most fascinating finish in
the history of the event, and then women started the year after, in 1978.

[Kurgan Gringioni]

On Sep 18, 3:19*pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

>
> BTW, I don't like being addressed as Dumbass as a cue. Its a nasty habit
> that's caught on with far too many people, and its bad for rbr.





Dumbass -


You are a dirtbag and I wish you would quit stocking me.

I have nothing to do with these ratpacks. Please refrain from
including me with them. You have no manners.


thanks,

K. Gringioni.

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 18, 5:19*pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> Bob, I am beyond being pissed at this guy. He has been slandering me for
> years in this group, and often when I post something, he attacks me, posts
> my ID and starts a *troll to further malign my character. As much as you
> think that's cool, its not. Contacting his ISP is the only recourse,


Whiny dumbass -

Please stop threatening me. Contact my ISP now and explain to them
how I've broken the rules of netiquette. Be sure that they understand
how I have dragged your fine name and reputation through the mud, and
how I have prevented the new generation from taking the reins of the
venerable institution that is r.b.r. Don't forget to tell them how
I've sewn so much discord in this group and in your life. Above all,
make sure they understand that your fragile ego has been harmed by the
fact that I think you are comedic.

How dare I have any fun at your expense! There oughta be a law!

-rj

P.S. Whiny dumbass - if you don't stop stocking me, threatening me,
and hiding behind your many handles, I'll be forced to contact your
ISP to bring a stop to this constant harassment and violation of my
civil liberties.

P.P.S. Whiny dumbass - if you decide to finally make good on your
threats, and decide to contact my ISP in writing, I strongly suggest
you have someone check your spelling and grammar. Otherwise, they
might mistake you for a kook.

[Howard Kveck]

In article <cLSdnbSQDdCPSU_VnZ2dnUVZ_oPinZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> "Bob Schwartz" <bob.schwartz@REMOVEsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:cHcAk.403$hc1.151@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
> > Robert wrote:
> >> This needs to stop.
> >
> > Dumbass,
> >
> > You know, I was having a conversation on a similar topic the
> > other day with a friend of mine. He was feeling persecuted
> > and beset upon. My advice was that he not react so strongly
> > with the perceived offense. If he would just chill a little,
> > eventually his older sister would get bored and look somewhere
> > else for entertainment.
> >
> > I think that's good advice for you as well. I doubt either you
> > or my friend have the emotional maturity to act upon it. I
> > didn't call him a dumbass, because that's kind of strong for
> > someone that age. But really, if you want the abuse to stop
> > you have the power to make it stop.
> >
> > Oh, and it's kind of funny that you blame RJ for blowing your
> > cover.
> >
> > Bob Schwartz
>
> Bob, I am beyond being pissed at this guy. He has been slandering me for
> years in this group, and often when I post something, he attacks me, posts
> my ID and starts a troll to further malign my character. As much as you
> think that's cool, its not. Contacting his ISP is the only recourse, because
> it appears he won't stop, no matter what. When you hijack a thread, publish
> someone's ID and drag it through the mud with a troll, that's about as bad
> as it gets, he has no consideration to follow the rules of Nettique. And he
> keeps doing it, over and over and over. No thanks to your trolls either.
>
> You guys shouldn't try to confuse people about rbr. For the majority of
> people, its civil for them, as long as they are not targeted, or their
> threads are not hijacked by the ratpacks. Its a very small group who cause
> most of the problems, and I have already wasted far too much time responding
> and defending myself against the troublemakers. In all the years I have been
> in usenet, only once previously, have I considered complaining to an ISP.
> Its up to me now, to put a stop to this, and this must stop.
>
> As for you Bob, well, you might of been here 20 years, but it doesn't belong
> to you, or your pack of followers. I respect Kunich more because he won't
> run with your packs and he's still reasonably civil.

Ha! Holy crap, I don't think that word means what you think it does. Wow.

> For someone who's been
> here longer, its amazing the guy is still civil at all! That's why I don't
> read all this stuff, because this place will rot your brain over time. This
> is a free forum, its belongs to the whole world, and shouldn't be held
> hostage by packs of thugs. I was thinking maybe its time for you to pack it
> in, and let a new generation have rbr.
>
> I'll be back in time with a new handle. If anyone posts my ID out of spite
> or because they think it funny, I'll report it. Like I said before, if I
> could, I would eliminate every single one of these troublemakers from this
> group.
>
> BTW, I don't like being addressed as Dumbass as a cue. Its a nasty habit
> that's caught on with far too many people, and its bad for rbr.

Figuring out who is behind some pseudonym and calling that person by name is *not*
something they give a damn about. You consider that an "invasion of your privacy" -
it isn't. As I mentioned in another post, what they get worked about and will respond
to is the posting of personal info like your home address or phone number. And that's
fair. There are a few people in here posting under pseudonyms and people regularly
refer to them in their posts by their real name - you're the only one who gets worked
up about it. And threatening to try to eliminate "troublemakers" by contacting their
ISP isn't going to help *you* in any way. I think you should understand that.

Here's some thoughts on your troubles in here (and I'm only speaking for myself,
okay?). You got some heckling early on and responded by getting really mad (for
example, saying that you'd kick Henry's ass in a "Texas second"). Telling us that the
guys who were following the men's racing instead fo the women's made you think they
were queer didn't help much. Then there was the Philly Sucks incident - you said that
you were going to leave for good but you wanted to say your piece and that dragged on
for days. But the problem was this: you didn't leave forever, choosing to come back
with a different nym, several times. So you couldn't stay away. Well, that's fine,
but when people figured out who it was you started telling us how much better it was
in French and Italian groups, but staying here.

Anyway, this whole business of repeatedly "going away" and reappearing with a new
name but the same material, writing style, etc. seems like the virtual version of
putting on a fake nose and glasses and thinking that the people you were hanging out
with wouldn't recognize you.

You like women's racing and follow it closely - that's great. I pay attention to
those races too. But perhaps the way you follow it is problematic to people in here:
it comes across as obsessive, and not in a good way. Just saying.

--
tanx,
Howard

I'll take the case!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

[Kyle Legate]

Robert wrote:
>
> I'll be back in time with a new handle. If anyone posts my ID out of spite
> or because they think it funny, I'll report it. Like I said before, if I
> could, I would eliminate every single one of these troublemakers from this
> group.
>
> BTW, I don't like being addressed as Dumbass as a cue. Its a nasty habit
> that's caught on with far too many people, and its bad for rbr.
>
Dumbass (I really mean it),

There was a time when you swore you were leaving and you would never
come back. Why don't you just do that? You're clearly not Usenet
material, and it would be better for everyone if you would do what you
promised in the first place. Bruce. Whoops, have I outed you? Report me,
please.

[Donald Munro]

Robert wrote:
> There's been a gradual but constant reduction of civics in America, a bad
> thing, not a good thing. Rituals and traditions build character. Society
> today is bascially full of cheese.

The Dutch invasion. Perhaps New Orleans can still be saved.

[Robert]

"ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_jeremiah@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:afdb3640-a52f-41d5-ae18-4a2208127b24@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...

P.P.S. Whiny dumbass - if you decide to finally make good on your
threats, and decide to contact my ISP in writing, I strongly suggest
you have someone check your spelling and grammar. Otherwise, they
might mistake you for a kook.

Listen rat filth, its not a threat, simply the only way to deal with jerks
like you. You're not civil, and you don't deserve any liberties. Muck around
all you want, but leave me off your Lemon club target list.

[Robert]

"Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
news:YOURhoward-AB2AF4.18575218092008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>
> You like women's racing and follow it closely - that's great. I pay
> attention to
> those races too. But perhaps the way you follow it is problematic to
> people in here:
> it comes across as obsessive, and not in a good way. Just saying.

That's just crazy and shouldn't matter one squat! I don't post anything in
here, ever. Only once this year from Pine Flat, and that was it! I knew full
well, that if I did, someone would drag it through the knot hole. The only
thing I post here, are replies to other posts. I don't even post root posts
because mainly of what happened with this post. Like the Redland post, had
300 replies, and only one reply about Redlands, same with this post. Nothing
about the orignal topic, but just this nonsense. Compared to the majority of
posts here, I reply to some threads very seldom, and only when it interests
me. RBR usenet, mildly interests me, but for the huge amount of static, its
hardly worth it for all the hassle. In fact it isn't. That's why I come back
another day with yet another handle so I can enjoy a little privacy, as
short as that might be. Its only a few people who want to push and prod my
ID. For 99 percent of the rest here, it works. It works for me, it works for
them. They don't care. If I can just get the remaining few to leave it
alone, everything would be fine.

I followed the men races for many years, I know them as well as anyone, but
I grew weary of all the drug scandals, and got bored with Lance winning the
tour. I find the specialty sport of women's cycling interesting, but I don't
by any means dominate the rbr headers, to the contrary, I post ZERO. That's
because I don't find RBR particular civil enough in general to share much of
anything, so I mostly show up during the tour, olympics and the worlds
sometimes, and not much else. I'm not trying to break back into the club,
been there, done that. I am just a guy with a fake handle who replies to
occasional posts when its interests me. The rbr crowd is mostly civil, but
somehow much of what dominates the posts often turns ugly and uncivil. I
don't know why, the Europeans would like to know why this is also. They
often ask me why rbr is the way it is, for a group which is almost as big or
bigger then the largest usenet racing group in the world, which is
it.sport.ciclismo

[Donald Munro]

Roberta wrote:
>> As for you Bob, well, you might of been here 20 years, but it doesn't
>> belong to you, or your pack of followers. I respect Kunich more because
>> he won't run with your packs and he's still reasonably civil.

Howard Kveck wrote:
> Ha! Holy crap, I don't think that word means what you think it does.
> Wow.

This represents a serious indictment of SchwartzSoft quality control.

[Michael Press]

In article <JeOdnfkr6u-muk7VnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> That's why I come back
> another day with yet another handle so I can enjoy a little privacy, as
> short as that might be. Its only a few people who want to push and prod my
> ID. For 99 percent of the rest here, it works. It works for me, it works for
> them. They don't care. If I can just get the remaining few to leave it
> alone, everything would be fine.

Define works.
You want privacy? Do not drag your coat as you saunter through rbr.
No, you are a drama queen.

--
Michael Press

[Kurgan Gringioni]

On Sep 18, 9:14*pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:


> I followed the men races for many years, I know them as well as anyone, but
> I grew weary of all the drug scandals, and got bored with Lance winning the
> tour. I find the specialty sport of women's cycling interesting,

<snip>



Dumbass -


There's doping in women's cycling too. For instance, check out the
subject of this thread, which, by the way, you started.


thanks,

K. Gringioni.

[Howard Kveck]

In article <JeOdnfkr6u-muk7VnZ2dnUVZ_uednZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> "Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
> news:YOURhoward-AB2AF4.18575218092008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> >
> > You like women's racing and follow it closely - that's great. I pay
> > attention to those races too. But perhaps the way you follow it is
> > problematic to people in here: it comes across as obsessive, and not
> > in a good way. Just saying.
>
> That's just crazy and shouldn't matter one squat! I don't post anything in
> here, ever. Only once this year from Pine Flat, and that was it! I knew full
> well, that if I did, someone would drag it through the knot hole. The only
> thing I post here, are replies to other posts. I don't even post root posts
> because mainly of what happened with this post. Like the Redland post, had
> 300 replies, and only one reply about Redlands, same with this post. Nothing
> about the orignal topic, but just this nonsense. Compared to the majority of
> posts here, I reply to some threads very seldom, and only when it interests
> me. RBR usenet, mildly interests me, but for the huge amount of static, its
> hardly worth it for all the hassle. In fact it isn't. That's why I come back
> another day with yet another handle so I can enjoy a little privacy, as
> short as that might be. Its only a few people who want to push and prod my
> ID. For 99 percent of the rest here, it works. It works for me, it works for
> them. They don't care. If I can just get the remaining few to leave it
> alone, everything would be fine.

Well, I think you're ignoring all of those posts about LvM - they may not have
been the first post in a thread but you did talk about her a lot. Seriously a lot. As
for what followed, it happened and at this point it'll probably be hard to change
that pattern. The one thing that might help is to not be so thin-skinned about it.
Trying to make a bunch of other people change to accomodate you by threatening to
report people to their ISP is only going to work against you. You can't threaten
people into being nice to you. Isn't that obvious?

--
tanx,
Howard

I'll take the case!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

[Robert]

"Kyle Legate" <legatek@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6jgr73F38vpuU1@mid.individual.net...
> Robert wrote:
>>
>> I'll be back in time with a new handle. If anyone posts my ID out of
>> spite or because they think it funny, I'll report it. Like I said before,
>> if I could, I would eliminate every single one of these troublemakers
>> from this group.
>>
>> BTW, I don't like being addressed as Dumbass as a cue. Its a nasty habit
>> that's caught on with far too many people, and its bad for rbr.
>>
> Dumbass (I really mean it),
>
> There was a time when you swore you were leaving and you would never come
> back. Why don't you just do that? You're clearly not Usenet material, and
> it would be better for everyone if you would do what you promised in the
> first place. Bruce. Whoops, have I outed you? Report me, please.

Idiot,

Because for one, these idiots keep slandering me behind my back, even years
after I am long gone. I don't like people who continue to slander me on
usenet for no reason. Certain members of the Lemon club have been doing this
crap for years now, so I need to not only defend myself against the slander
attacks, but take action and put a stop to it. You can have your Lemon club,
as long as it doesn't slander me, reveal my ID, and engage in personal
malicious trolls against my good name.



Its the Lemon club that causes the vast majority of the problems in rbr.
Most of the people are new, as compared to a few years ago. Its the same old
dead-enders Lemon club who gets their kicks by exposing people's IDs,
launching trolls and personal attacks. To the majority of newbies and
lurkers, they don't know, don't care, who I am. This is strictly a problem
created by the Lemon club. No one else outside of the Lemon club cares about
who posts what, why, or who they are. Its strictly an obsession of the Lemon
club, its got nothing to do with me. BTW, the Lemon club is not usenet
material. Usenet was not designed to be controlled by warlords and gangs of
renegade thugs.

[Robert]

"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e8c8aa83-781a-47e5-9b1f-2c327d7a0dec@g17g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 18, 9:14 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:


There's doping in women's cycling too. For instance, check out the
subject of this thread, which, by the way, you started.


thanks,

K. Gringioni.

The only comment on topic so far. She doesn't use drugs. This was a case of
not doing your homework, nothing more. She never intended to take banned
substances. She didn't know the pharmacist was mixing a banned substance for
her, otherwise she wouldn't of never jeopardized her chance at making the
Olympics. The druggist didn't check the banned list when he made this weight
loss cocktail.

[MagillaGorilla]

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:

> On Sep 18, 9:14 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>I followed the men races for many years, I know them as well as anyone, but
>>I grew weary of all the drug scandals, and got bored with Lance winning the
>>tour. I find the specialty sport of women's cycling interesting,
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
>
> There's doping in women's cycling too. For instance, check out the
> subject of this thread, which, by the way, you started.
>
>
> thanks,
>
> K. Gringioni.


I think it's safe to say that Bastardnelli's case was one of technical
doping, and not intentional.

Jeanson is intentional doping, not Bastanelli. In fact, Bastanelli's
case has way more mitigating circumstances to it than half the men who
apply for a TUE and get it.



Magillanelli

[Bob Schwartz]

Donald Munro wrote:
> Roberta wrote:
>>> As for you Bob, well, you might of been here 20 years, but it doesn't
>>> belong to you, or your pack of followers. I respect Kunich more because
>>> he won't run with your packs and he's still reasonably civil.
>
> Howard Kveck wrote:
>> Ha! Holy crap, I don't think that word means what you think it does.
>> Wow.
>
> This represents a serious indictment of SchwartzSoft quality control.

Dumbass,

On the contrary, the Cognitive Dissonance module is core to all
our products.

Bob Schwartz

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 19, 11:47*am, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> Idiot,

Spoken like someone who values, and is trying to promote, civility.

-rj, aka Dirtbag, aka Rat Filth
Vice President, r.b.r. Lemon Club

P.S. Howard, Bob, and Kyle all gave you good advice. Seriously. You
should take it.

[Michael Press]

In article <5_WdnR3W9d5XSk7VnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> "Kyle Legate" <legatek@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6jgr73F38vpuU1@mid.individual.net...
> > Robert wrote:
> >>
> >> I'll be back in time with a new handle. If anyone posts my ID out of
> >> spite or because they think it funny, I'll report it. Like I said before,
> >> if I could, I would eliminate every single one of these troublemakers
> >> from this group.
> >>
> >> BTW, I don't like being addressed as Dumbass as a cue. Its a nasty habit
> >> that's caught on with far too many people, and its bad for rbr.
> >>
> > Dumbass (I really mean it),
> >
> > There was a time when you swore you were leaving and you would never come
> > back. Why don't you just do that? You're clearly not Usenet material, and
> > it would be better for everyone if you would do what you promised in the
> > first place. Bruce. Whoops, have I outed you? Report me, please.
>
> Idiot,
>
> Because for one, these idiots keep slandering me behind my back, even years
> after I am long gone. I don't like people who continue to slander me on
> usenet for no reason. Certain members of the Lemon club have been doing this

Robert, you are legendary. sierraman's leave taking is awesome.
You are revered.

--
Michael Press

[Fred Fredburger]

Robert wrote:

>
> Because for one, these idiots keep slandering me behind my back, even years
> after I am long gone.

Perfect.

[Kyle Legate]

Robert wrote:
> "Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e8c8aa83-781a-47e5-9b1f-2c327d7a0dec@g17g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 18, 9:14 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
>
> There's doping in women's cycling too. For instance, check out the
> subject of this thread, which, by the way, you started.
>
>
> thanks,
>
> K. Gringioni.
>
> The only comment on topic so far. She doesn't use drugs. This was a case of
> not doing your homework, nothing more. She never intended to take banned
> substances. She didn't know the pharmacist was mixing a banned substance for
> her, otherwise she wouldn't of never jeopardized her chance at making the
> Olympics. The druggist didn't check the banned list when he made this weight
> loss cocktail.
>
What's wrong with just riding your bike more and eating smarter? The
fact that she had a weight loss cocktail concocted for her reveals the
doper mentality, and surely contributed to her sentence.

She was just trying to keep up with the Joneses, who can afford the good
stuff.

[Michael Press]

In article <tvadnXOfqIGAR07VnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> "Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e8c8aa83-781a-47e5-9b1f-2c327d7a0dec@g17g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 18, 9:14 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>
>
> There's doping in women's cycling too. For instance, check out the
> subject of this thread, which, by the way, you started.
>
> The only comment on topic so far. She doesn't use drugs. This was a case of
> not doing your homework, nothing more. She never intended to take banned
> substances. She didn't know the pharmacist was mixing a banned substance for
> her, otherwise she wouldn't of never jeopardized her chance at making the
> Olympics. The druggist didn't check the banned list when he made this weight
> loss cocktail.

Here, this one has bells on.

--
Michael Press

[Robert]

"Kyle Legate" <legatek@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6ji9mtF3ftsrU1@mid.individual.net...
> Robert wrote:
>> "Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e8c8aa83-781a-47e5-9b1f-2c327d7a0dec@g17g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> On Sep 18, 9:14 pm, "Robert" <R...@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> There's doping in women's cycling too. For instance, check out the
>> subject of this thread, which, by the way, you started.
>>
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> K. Gringioni.
>>
>> The only comment on topic so far. She doesn't use drugs. This was a case
>> of not doing your homework, nothing more. She never intended to take
>> banned substances. She didn't know the pharmacist was mixing a banned
>> substance for her, otherwise she wouldn't of never jeopardized her chance
>> at making the Olympics. The druggist didn't check the banned list when he
>> made this weight loss cocktail.
>>
> What's wrong with just riding your bike more and eating smarter? The fact
> that she had a weight loss cocktail concocted for her reveals the doper
> mentality, and surely contributed to her sentence.
>
> She was just trying to keep up with the Joneses, who can afford the good
> stuff.

Sorta of the doper mentality, but not completely. Riders take vitamins,
cutting edge energy supplements, and everything they can within legal
limits, to save time, produce results quicker for the amount of time they
spend on the bike. All the riders do it, even Cooke does it, someone who
slams dopers hard. But what Maribel did was unforgiveable. Taking EPO before
the road race, that's a duck.

[Ted van de Weteringe]

ronaldo_jeremiah schreef:
> Vice President, r.b.r. Lemon Club

Any good parties, are there?

[ronaldo_jeremiah]

On Sep 19, 2:56*pm, Ted van de Weteringe
<myfulln...@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:
> ronaldo_jeremiah schreef:
>
> > Vice President, r.b.r. Lemon Club
>
> Any good parties, are there?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGFO128AmQg


-rj

[Donald Munro]

Michael Press wrote:
> Here, this one has bells on.

Lightweight titanium bells presumably.

[Robert]

"Fred Fredburger" <Fred.Fredburger@Where.Are.The.Nachos.Huh> wrote in
message news:GVYAk.14$t%4.3@fe089.usenetserver.com...
> Robert wrote:
>
>>
>> Because for one, these idiots keep slandering me behind my back, even
>> years after I am long gone.
>
> Perfect.

No, actually that sucks.

[Robert]

"Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
news:YOURhoward-BA6B91.22261019092008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>
> Well, I think you're ignoring all of those posts about LvM - they may
> not have
> been the first post in a thread but you did talk about her a lot.
> Seriously a lot. As
> for what followed, it happened and at this point it'll probably be hard to
> change
> that pattern. The one thing that might help is to not be so thin-skinned
> about it.
> Trying to make a bunch of other people change to accomodate you by
> threatening to
> report people to their ISP is only going to work against you. You can't
> threaten
> people into being nice to you. Isn't that obvious?

Lvm, that's so old, nobody remembers that except the Lemon club. Besides, I
didn't post that much about her. Those were sub-sets of trolls, done by the
Lemon Club which had too much time on their hands. That was the Lemon club
getting their kicks, that's all it was. On the ISP thing, out of all the
years since the 80's I have been using billboards and usenet, only once
have I even considered calling an ISP. Its not that big of a deal to do it.
It's not the end of the world you know. The ISP warns the person that they
got a complaint. People complain to ISP's all the time, that's why the abuse
address is located at in the properties of the message. Its there for a
reason. It shouldn't be much different then getting harassed constantly by a
neighbor. When you get fed up, you file a complaint. I don't need thick
skin, nor do I want it. I have normal skin and would rather make normal
sound judgements then ignoring abuse. If you throttle or push someone's
buttons long enough, they will react. So will a cornered or abused animal.
But all this, ah, well, nothing to do with cycling. Nuff said.

[ST]

On 9/19/08 10:26 PM, in article
YOURhoward-BA6B91.22261019092008@newsgroups.comcast.net, "Howard Kveck"
<YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:

> You can't threaten
> people into being nice to you. Isn't that obvious?

Hey! Isn't that the standard Democrap tactic???



Sent VIRUS FREE from an Apple Macintosh

[Robert]

"Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
news:YOURhoward-BA6B91.22261019092008@newsgroups.comcast.net...

> Trying to make a bunch of other people change to accomodate you by
> threatening to
> report people to their ISP is only going to work against you. You can't
> threaten
> people into being nice to you. Isn't that obvious?

BTW, you need to go read that again. It was not a direct threat. Not a
threat at all. Its recourse, but not a threat. I never said I am going to do
this or that to someone. If you read it, it was an subject matter
observation I made about what a person's options might be on usenet to deal
with such matters. It was not a direct threat. You make it sound worse then
what it is. You guys like to pick on grammar and spelling a lot, but then
you misconstrue what's being said. Even if it was direct, which it wasn't,
that's not much of threat, having an ISP warn someone. Use your
comprehension instead of trying to throw gas on the fire.

[Michael Press]

In article <48d4be72$0$26806$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com>,
Donald Munro <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Michael Press wrote:
> > Here, this one has bells on.
>
> Lightweight titanium bells presumably.

They go ting-a-ling-a-ling

--
Michael Press

[Howard Kveck]

In article <S_adnayDUPb7HEjVnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@sti.net>,
"Robert" <Rob@nospam-invalid.net> wrote:

> "Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
> news:YOURhoward-BA6B91.22261019092008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> >
> > Well, I think you're ignoring all of those posts about LvM - they may
> > not have been the first post in a thread but you did talk about her a lot.
> > Seriously a lot. As for what followed, it happened and at this point it'll
> > probably be hard to change that pattern. The one thing that might help
> > is to not be so thin-skinned about it. Trying to make a bunch of other
> > people change to accomodate you by threatening to report people to their
> > ISP is only going to work against you. You can't threaten people into
> > being nice