| |
Main
Date: 24 Sep 2007 18:50:42
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Just stop it.
Kindest regards,
a whole bunch of rbt.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Sep 2007 12:50:42
From: andresmuro@aol.com
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
On Sep 30, 12:25 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<sunsetss0...@iinvalid.com > wrote:
> Jambo who? wrote:
> > "jim beam" <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> >news:5eadndfKhdMGCWXbnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> >>> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
> >> please don't, moron. if you think that opening your kimono is the least
> >> bit useful in somehow making the uninformed garbage you spew to be
> >> anything less than a joke, you're sadly mistaken. garbage is garbage,
> >> regardless of the name you put on it. just ask jobst.
>
> > But I'm really interested in your "metallurgist" background, beamboy, and
> > your CIA black ops classified stories, and where your "metarials skool"
> > training was.
>
> > Put your cards on the table beamboy, you can't hide forever!
>
> >> oh, i only have time for one taunting of your dumb moronic ass tonight.
> >> but i'll be back for more later. rely on it. oh yeah! moron.
>
> > After a few more swigs of cheap bourbon in your dark, damp hole, littered
> > with empty fast food containers, cigarette butts and porn mags, right
> > beamboy? Do you really think your image is salvageable at this stage?
>
> Well, "jim beam" (and "Jambo" for that matter) can come back as
> different sock puppets.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
Back from vacation? Where u been? We missed you, and so did Ed
Trollin.
Andres
|
| | |
Date: 30 Sep 2007 15:51:58
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
andresmuro@aol.com aka Andres Muro wrote:
>
> Back from vacation? Where u been? We missed you, and so did Ed
> Trollin.
The building's management finally gave up on bandage repairs, and
replaced all the DSL equipment.
Sorry, but I was not about to spend the money on a broadband mobile
wireless connection.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 13:23:56
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo - beamboy's last dying gasp
|
On Sep 25, 2:46 pm, "Jambo" <-...@-.- > wrote from On High:
<extraneous BS snipped >
> Normally it's easy to just killfile the fraud, but it's clear there is a
> requirement to battle this kind of nefarious invasion of technical
> newsgroups if the utility, integrity and even enjoyment of r.b.t is to be
> preserved. Usenet is littered with failed newsgroups precisely because of
> frauds like beamboy and his followers/apologists.
>
Why, you're The Savior!!!! Why didn't you reveal YourSelf earlier, O
Lord?
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 14:26:26
From:
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
On Sep 25, 9:25 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net > wrote:
>
> "jim beam" has a
> long history of ad hominem attacks on various members of this NG. For
> years he has stalked Jobst, posting nothing but diatribe in response to
> Jobst's posts, virtually every time Jobst has posted.
>
> Jobst has adopted the practice of ignoring him, where "Jambo" (only
> recently) has tried to "pay back in kind", and I've tried to rebut the
> content of his posts while ignoring the abuse.
>
> I find the tolerance of this behavior both surprising and depressing.
> "jim beam" is, first and foremost, a simple bully. This sort of person
> can kill a NG. If you go back through the archives, you'll see that this
> one was not only a kinder, gentler place, but a more informative one.
I think when a person posts technically mistaken information, that
information should be countered, at least up to a point - after which
it becomes futile. But when a person switches to pure abuse, that
person should be shunned.
"jim beam" occasionally has something of value to say about specific
bike components, but he's incapable of civil disagreement. As Ryan
said, the signal to noise ratio is pitifully low. So is the signal to
abuse ratio.
I agree with Peter's phrase "a simple bully." And I think Jobst's
approach is good.
- Frank Krygowski
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:42:30
From:
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
On Sep 24, 1:50 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca > wrote:
> Just stop it.
>
> Kindest regards,
> a whole bunch of rbt.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcous...@sfu.cahttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
> to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
I'm mostly just a sometime reader of RBT, but it seems to me that
there are only a few laudable soldiers in this honorable fight against
the forces of fucktarditude and its collaborators. The rest are
trembling pacifists, draft dodgers, or AWOL. Tough it up, do your
duty, enlist -- RBT wants you.
--
Only half kidding, Spike
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 19:22:29
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
On Sep 24, 8:13 pm, "Jambo" <-...@-.- > wrote:
<mercifully snipped >
>
> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
Who gives a shit?
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 15:37:26
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
On Sep 24, 3:20 pm, "andresm...@aol.com" <andresm...@aol.com > wrote:
> On Sep 24, 1:36 pm, Paul Myron Hobson <phob...@gatech.edu> wrote:
>
> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > > Just stop it.
>
> > > Kindest regards,
> > > a whole bunch of rbt.
>
> > Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
> > Y'all can easily get out with good behavior.
>
> > \\paul
>
> I am enjoying the hell out of their exchange. Why should they stop. If
> you guys are uninterested simply skip to the next topic.
BINGO!!!
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 15:04:31
From:
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:50:42 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca >
wrote:
>Just stop it.
>
>Kindest regards,
>a whole bunch of rbt.
Dear Ryan,
Agreed.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 13:20:05
From: andresmuro@aol.com
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
On Sep 24, 1:36 pm, Paul Myron Hobson <phob...@gatech.edu > wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > Just stop it.
>
> > Kindest regards,
> > a whole bunch of rbt.
>
> Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
> Y'all can easily get out with good behavior.
>
> \\paul
I am enjoying the hell out of their exchange. Why should they stop. If
you guys are uninterested simply skip to the next topic.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 06:31:32
From: John Henderson
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
> I am enjoying the hell out of their exchange. Why should they
> stop. If you guys are uninterested simply skip to the next
> topic.
Because we're not omniscient perhaps? We need to at least skim
them in order to ascertain whether they've got any significant
content?
John
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 16:59:41
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <5lql54F9fqv6U1@mid.individual.net >,
John Henderson <jhenRemoveThis@talk21.com > wrote:
> andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
>
> > I am enjoying the hell out of their exchange. Why should they stop.
> > If you guys are uninterested simply skip to the next topic.
>
> Because we're not omniscient perhaps? We need to at least skim them
> in order to ascertain whether they've got any significant content?
The odds of significant content in any thread with jim beam involved are
slim, at this point- except perhaps some posts in rebuttal to him.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 18:41:29
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <5lql54F9fqv6U1@mid.individual.net>,
> John Henderson <jhenRemoveThis@talk21.com> wrote:
>
>> andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>> I am enjoying the hell out of their exchange. Why should they stop.
>>> If you guys are uninterested simply skip to the next topic.
>>
>> Because we're not omniscient perhaps? We need to at least skim them
>> in order to ascertain whether they've got any significant content?
>
> The odds of significant content in any thread with jim beam involved
> are slim, at this point- except perhaps some posts in rebuttal to him.
Yeahbutt that Jambo sure adds to the discourse! LOL
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 20:40:43
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <5lql54F9fqv6U1@mid.individual.net >,
John Henderson <jhenRemoveThis@talk21.com > wrote:
> andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
>
> > I am enjoying the hell out of their exchange. Why should they
> > stop. If you guys are uninterested simply skip to the next
> > topic.
>
> Because we're not omniscient perhaps? We need to at least skim
> them in order to ascertain whether they've got any significant
> content?
>
> John
Alas, we no longer do.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 15:36:13
From: Paul Myron Hobson
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> Just stop it.
>
> Kindest regards,
> a whole bunch of rbt.
>
Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
Y'all can easily get out with good behavior.
\\paul
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 20:54:14
From:
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Paul Myron Hobson writes:
>> Just stop it.
>> Kindest regards, a whole bunch of RBT.
> Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
> Y'all can easily get out with good behavior.
I disagree. I think the dirty underside of the "discussion" has
exposed crass rudeness which will not be forgotten. I suggest they
return to RBT under their real names and behave like adults if
possible. I am doubtful.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:13:41
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote in message
news:46f823f6$0$14133$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Paul Myron Hobson writes:
>
>>> Just stop it.
>
>>> Kindest regards, a whole bunch of RBT.
>
>> Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
>> Y'all can easily get out with good behavior.
>
> I disagree. I think the dirty underside of the "discussion" has
> exposed crass rudeness which will not be forgotten. I suggest they
> return to RBT under their real names and behave like adults if
> possible. I am doubtful.
Yes, it's as if you all needed to be reminded of that crass rudeness, didn't
you? Years of beamboy's fraudulent bleatings and his juvenile insults
seemed to have cowed many people in rbt - yet when you see REAL crass
rudeness directed at beamboy, it's as if you re-awaken to the reality of his
fraudulent persona that you've come to love and tolerate.
I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:54:51
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Jambo wrote:
> <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message
> news:46f823f6$0$14133$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> Paul Myron Hobson writes:
>>
>>>> Just stop it.
>>>> Kindest regards, a whole bunch of RBT.
>>> Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
>>> Y'all can easily get out with good behavior.
>> I disagree. I think the dirty underside of the "discussion" has
>> exposed crass rudeness which will not be forgotten. I suggest they
>> return to RBT under their real names and behave like adults if
>> possible. I am doubtful.
>
> Yes, it's as if you all needed to be reminded of that crass rudeness, didn't
> you? Years of beamboy's fraudulent bleatings and his juvenile insults
> seemed to have cowed many people in rbt - yet when you see REAL crass
> rudeness directed at beamboy, it's as if you re-awaken to the reality of his
> fraudulent persona that you've come to love and tolerate.
>
> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
>
>
please don't, moron. if you think that opening your kimono is the least
bit useful in somehow making the uninformed garbage you spew to be
anything less than a joke, you're sadly mistaken. garbage is garbage,
regardless of the name you put on it. just ask jobst.
oh, i only have time for one taunting of your dumb moronic ass tonight.
but i'll be back for more later. rely on it. oh yeah! moron.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 14:55:54
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:5eadndfKhdMGCWXbnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>
>> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
> please don't, moron. if you think that opening your kimono is the least
> bit useful in somehow making the uninformed garbage you spew to be
> anything less than a joke, you're sadly mistaken. garbage is garbage,
> regardless of the name you put on it. just ask jobst.
But I'm really interested in your "metallurgist" background, beamboy, and
your CIA black ops classified stories, and where your "metarials skool"
training was.
Put your cards on the table beamboy, you can't hide forever!
> oh, i only have time for one taunting of your dumb moronic ass tonight.
> but i'll be back for more later. rely on it. oh yeah! moron.
After a few more swigs of cheap bourbon in your dark, damp hole, littered
with empty fast food containers, cigarette butts and porn mags, right
beamboy? Do you really think your image is salvageable at this stage?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 Sep 2007 13:25:34
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Jambo who? wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:5eadndfKhdMGCWXbnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
>> please don't, moron. if you think that opening your kimono is the least
>> bit useful in somehow making the uninformed garbage you spew to be
>> anything less than a joke, you're sadly mistaken. garbage is garbage,
>> regardless of the name you put on it. just ask jobst.
>
> But I'm really interested in your "metallurgist" background, beamboy, and
> your CIA black ops classified stories, and where your "metarials skool"
> training was.
>
> Put your cards on the table beamboy, you can't hide forever!
>
>> oh, i only have time for one taunting of your dumb moronic ass tonight.
>> but i'll be back for more later. rely on it. oh yeah! moron.
>
> After a few more swigs of cheap bourbon in your dark, damp hole, littered
> with empty fast food containers, cigarette butts and porn mags, right
> beamboy? Do you really think your image is salvageable at this stage?
Well, "jim beam" (and "Jambo" for that matter) can come back as
different sock puppets.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 08:40:15
From: _
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 21:54:51 -0700, jim beam wrote:
> oh, i only have time for one taunting of your dumb moronic ass tonight.
> but i'll be back for more later. rely on it. oh yeah! moron.
Well, it seems that we have one answer.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:53:45
From: Luke
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <46f86094$0$32501$4c368faf@roadrunner.com >, Jambo <-@-.->
wrote:
> Yes, it's as if you all needed to be reminded of that crass rudeness, didn't
> you? Years of beamboy's fraudulent bleatings and his juvenile insults
> seemed to have cowed many people in rbt - yet when you see REAL crass
> rudeness directed at beamboy, it's as if you re-awaken to the reality of his
> fraudulent persona that you've come to love and tolerate.
Love?! With all due respect Jambo, to borrow an expression from jb,
please get back on the meds! ;-) In a free, public forum tolerance is
an indispensable ingredient; it shouldn't be confused with credibility
or esteem.
>
> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
>
What's in a name? Your conduct has already revealed you.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 22:17:42
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Luke" <lucasiragusa@rogers.com > wrote in message
news:240920072153453743%lucasiragusa@rogers.com...
> In article <46f86094$0$32501$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Jambo <-@-.->
> wrote:
>
>> Yes, it's as if you all needed to be reminded of that crass rudeness,
>> didn't
>> you? Years of beamboy's fraudulent bleatings and his juvenile insults
>> seemed to have cowed many people in rbt - yet when you see REAL crass
>> rudeness directed at beamboy, it's as if you re-awaken to the reality of
>> his
>> fraudulent persona that you've come to love and tolerate.
>
> Love?! With all due respect Jambo, to borrow an expression from jb,
> please get back on the meds! ;-) In a free, public forum tolerance is
> an indispensable ingredient; it shouldn't be confused with credibility
> or esteem.
Really? So when you get people to stop posting because an imbecile becomes
abusive when confronted by the truth, tolerance over-rides everything? This
is credibility and esteem for you?
In any case, what are you really complaining about? Are you upset that
beamboy is getting his justs?
>>
>> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
>>
> What's in a name? Your conduct has already revealed you.
Tell me about it, "Luke".
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 23:38:22
From: Luke
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <46f86f96$0$18974$4c368faf@roadrunner.com >, Jambo <-@-.->
wrote:
> "Luke" <lucasiragusa@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:240920072153453743%lucasiragusa@rogers.com...
> > In article <46f86094$0$32501$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Jambo <-@-.->
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, it's as if you all needed to be reminded of that crass rudeness,
> >> didn't
> >> you? Years of beamboy's fraudulent bleatings and his juvenile insults
> >> seemed to have cowed many people in rbt - yet when you see REAL crass
> >> rudeness directed at beamboy, it's as if you re-awaken to the reality of
> >> his
> >> fraudulent persona that you've come to love and tolerate.
> >
> > Love?! With all due respect Jambo, to borrow an expression from jb,
> > please get back on the meds! ;-) In a free, public forum tolerance is
> > an indispensable ingredient; it shouldn't be confused with credibility
> > or esteem.
>
> Really? So when you get people to stop posting because an imbecile becomes
> abusive when confronted by the truth, tolerance over-rides everything? This
> is credibility and esteem for you?
Others know what jb et al don't: when to end an conversation. They say
what they have to, qualify it when necessary, then move on... Lurkers
can decide for themselves how much tolerance, e.g., filters, and
credibility is applicable. Responding in kind when 'an imbecile becomes
abusive' is hardly necessary to re-awaken us 'to the reality of his
fraudulent persona'.
>
> In any case, what are you really complaining about? Are you upset that
> beamboy is getting his justs?
Not complaining and not upset.
>
> >>
> >> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
> >>
> > What's in a name? Your conduct has already revealed you.
>
> Tell me about it, "Luke".
Again what's in a name? But if it matters to you my full name, Luca
Siragusa, forms my email address, accessible to all for years. No need
to be overly formal though, just Luke will do. I've been called worse.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 15:00:39
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Luke" <lucasiragusa@rogers.com > wrote in message
news:240920072338220393%lucasiragusa@rogers.com...
> In article <46f86f96$0$18974$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Jambo <-@-.->
>> Really? So when you get people to stop posting because an imbecile
>> becomes
>> abusive when confronted by the truth, tolerance over-rides everything?
>> This
>> is credibility and esteem for you?
>
> Others know what jb et al don't: when to end an conversation. They say
> what they have to, qualify it when necessary, then move on... Lurkers
> can decide for themselves how much tolerance, e.g., filters, and
> credibility is applicable. Responding in kind when 'an imbecile becomes
> abusive' is hardly necessary to re-awaken us 'to the reality of his
> fraudulent persona'.
You haven't addressed my statement.
>> In any case, what are you really complaining about? Are you upset that
>> beamboy is getting his justs?
>
> Not complaining and not upset.
Then I fail to see the point of your post.
>> >> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
>> >>
>> > What's in a name? Your conduct has already revealed you.
>>
>> Tell me about it, "Luke".
>
> Again what's in a name? But if it matters to you my full name, Luca
> Siragusa, forms my email address, accessible to all for years. No need
> to be overly formal though, just Luke will do. I've been called worse.
It's not your name that matters, it's your identity. I could have called
myself John Smith and no one would have batted an eyelid - your name, in
this case, is not important.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2007 19:54:32
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Jambo wrote:
> "Luke" <lucasiragusa@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:240920072338220393%lucasiragusa@rogers.com...
>> In article <46f86f96$0$18974$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Jambo <-@-.->
>
>>> Really? So when you get people to stop posting because an imbecile
>>> becomes
>>> abusive when confronted by the truth, tolerance over-rides everything?
>>> This
>>> is credibility and esteem for you?
>> Others know what jb et al don't: when to end an conversation. They say
>> what they have to, qualify it when necessary, then move on... Lurkers
>> can decide for themselves how much tolerance, e.g., filters, and
>> credibility is applicable. Responding in kind when 'an imbecile becomes
>> abusive' is hardly necessary to re-awaken us 'to the reality of his
>> fraudulent persona'.
>
> You haven't addressed my statement.
>
>>> In any case, what are you really complaining about? Are you upset that
>>> beamboy is getting his justs?
>> Not complaining and not upset.
>
> Then I fail to see the point of your post.
>
>>>>> I'm perfectly happy to post my real identity, if beamboy would.
>>>>>
>>>> What's in a name? Your conduct has already revealed you.
>>> Tell me about it, "Luke".
>> Again what's in a name? But if it matters to you my full name, Luca
>> Siragusa, forms my email address, accessible to all for years. No need
>> to be overly formal though, just Luke will do. I've been called worse.
>
> It's not your name that matters, it's your identity. I could have called
> myself John Smith and no one would have batted an eyelid - your name, in
> this case, is not important.
>
>
wtf are you still doing, moron? me being busy and not playing means
you've go to argue the toss with everybody else? and you don't even
have the excuse of bullshitting about scientific principle that you want
to contradict! damn, that's moronic.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 16:35:59
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu > wrote in message
news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> Just stop it.
>>
>> Kindest regards,
>> a whole bunch of rbt.
>>
>
> Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now. Y'all
> can easily get out with good behavior.
>
Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is engaged
in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with the
altruistic intention of this website?
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:31:22
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <46f81f7e$0$24269$4c368faf@roadrunner.com >, "Jambo" <-@-.->
wrote:
> "Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu> wrote in message
> news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> >> Just stop it.
> >>
> >> Kindest regards,
> >> a whole bunch of rbt.
> >>
> >
> > Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now. Y'all
> > can easily get out with good behavior.
> >
>
> Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is engaged
> in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with the
> altruistic intention of this website?
This is a website?
In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
what y'all do.
But I just wanted to point out that while you both seem to show evidence
of notable technical acumen, the rather high-volume argument you're
carrying out has devolved to name-calling and point-scoring on
barely-relevant side issues (let me settle the whole "when did composite
rotors first get used on helicopters?" question for you: "it doesn't
matter.") Worse, one or both of you has started to just take random
snipes at the other in alternate threads.
I mean, there's better hobbies, eh?
Here's a trick for both of you: try to spend a whole week in your posts
to each other addressing each other as "Mr beam" and "Mr," uh, "Jambo."
When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
audience. If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which your
point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be specific
in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in terms
of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
that's the goal.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:41:03
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <46f81f7e$0$24269$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Jambo" <-@-.->
> wrote:
>
>> "Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu> wrote in message
>> news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
>>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>>> Just stop it.
>>>>
>>>> Kindest regards,
>>>> a whole bunch of rbt.
>>>>
>>> Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now. Y'all
>>> can easily get out with good behavior.
>>>
>> Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is engaged
>> in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with the
>> altruistic intention of this website?
>
> This is a website?
>
> In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
> what y'all do.
>
> But I just wanted to point out that while you both seem to show evidence
> of notable technical acumen, the rather high-volume argument you're
> carrying out has devolved to name-calling and point-scoring on
> barely-relevant side issues (let me settle the whole "when did composite
> rotors first get used on helicopters?" question for you: "it doesn't
> matter.") Worse, one or both of you has started to just take random
> snipes at the other in alternate threads.
>
> I mean, there's better hobbies, eh?
>
> Here's a trick for both of you: try to spend a whole week in your posts
> to each other addressing each other as "Mr beam" and "Mr," uh, "Jambo."
> When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
> terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
> audience. If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which your
> point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
> in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be specific
> in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
> main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
> debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
>
> Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in terms
> of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
> right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
> people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
> that's the goal.
>
so here's what you're really saying - it's not the content, it's the
presentation. that makes no sense. example: every time we turn on the
tv and watch a politician speechify, the subtext, to me, appears pretty
transparent. yet in discussing later with others, it appears that most
people didn't listen to the words [or what they meant], they simply
watched the presentation - and content was completely lost!
so here we have jambo, a guy that doesn't understand basic physical
principles he should have learned in grade school, or what they mean in
application, or even display any ability to look it up on the net! yet
he can present what superficially appears to be quotes that support what
he hopes to be an argument. accompanied of course by liberal doses of
naughty cuss-words, just for good effect. in other words, content is
garbage but that's masked by a charade of "righteous indignation and
justified retaliation" just because i taunt his dumb moronic ass for his
mistakes. put more simply, it's just like the political presentation,
the content is not being absorbed. [we see the same with jobst and the
dumb-ass mistakes he makes and insists on defending, even when he's
hopelessly out of his depth and starts making stuff up.]
well, i think that's stupid. you're requesting what is the usenet
equivalent of the political maxim of sacrificing freedom for security.
and deserving neither. put another way, to protect your tender
sensibilities, you'd rather listen to a dip-shit know-nothing moron
re-write the science books and get it hopelessly wrong, just because you
don't like to see me have some fun while i stand up for the facts,
however crudely presented.
if you have wit enough to consider the truth of what i say [as opposed
to my presentation], you'll stand up for what is right and vote for
factual accuracy and let me say my bit, not get sidetracked by my
personal weakness of finding the taunting of morons and retards to be
quite irresistible. and if you don't personally like that, use a
killfile rather than bleat for blanket silence.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 15:46:41
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo - beamboy's last dying gasp
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:Jrudnc9DDsj9DGXbnZ2dnUVZ_v6rnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> so here we have jambo, a guy that doesn't understand basic physical
> principles he should have learned in grade school, or what they mean in
> application, or even display any ability to look it up on the net! yet he
> can present what superficially appears to be quotes that support what he
> hopes to be an argument.
> accompanied of course by liberal doses of naughty cuss-words, just for
> good effect. in other words, content is garbage but that's masked by a
> charade of "righteous indignation and justified retaliation" just because
> i taunt his dumb moronic ass for his mistakes.
I think there's a term for someone who projects his own flaws and
shortcomings to others, in maybe a half-subconscious attempt to somehow
become exempt from it.... can't think of the term at the moment, but the
above is a perfect example.
beamboy starts with an emotional view of technical issues, which he then
reinforces with "knowledge" that's parroted from pop science publications,
and then tries to add scientific credibility in projecting that emotional
perspective by picking only those bits from pop science that seem to support
his views, and shutting his eyes to all other information.
Some examples of this are his extreme emotional fanaticism with erroneous
understandings of carbon fiber composites, wheel spoke mechanics, statics
and dynamics principles, and materials physics.
It's also possible to observe his fierce desire to be acknowledged as an
"expert", by inventing experiences and anecdotes from his supposed
"technical past". His "sikorski" story, followed by a hysterically
desperate attempt to reference web sources that have extremely ambiguous
information, after being confronted with facts that prove the story to be
imagination, is again a prime example.
In addition, the attempts at bullying to cover beamboy's many technical and
intellectual inadequacies have forced some to reduce or stop posting, which
really is eroding this ng. As a perfect example of this attempted bullying,
look at the very first exchange between beamboy and I, and follow that
through:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/64438489f8973a3d/db32b69d3f8d829b?q=cf+bike+shatters+-+continued&lnk=ol&
Note the degeneration to insults and name-calling of beamboy's posts after
being confronted with facts that he cannot dispute.
Of course there's also been the beamboy-Peter Cole threads - judge that
yourselves.
It's quite obvious that beamboy has aspirations in this ng to be what he
can't be in real life, but he fails to achieve his goals of being seen as a
"(former) metallurgist" and having the adulation of everyone in this
newsgroup, because he fails to see the transparency of his intentions,
actions and words.
Normally it's easy to just killfile the fraud, but it's clear there is a
requirement to battle this kind of nefarious invasion of technical
newsgroups if the utility, integrity and even enjoyment of r.b.t is to be
preserved. Usenet is littered with failed newsgroups precisely because of
frauds like beamboy and his followers/apologists.
I have no doubt that beamboy believes he is an "expert", that he only states
the "facts", and that is the tragedy of that guy - he is just completely
unable to understand his position of ignorance. Add to that his unwavering
belief of his entitlement to abuse everyone who disagrees with him, and you
get someone who really needs mental help but isn't getting it, instead
spreading annoyance to all those around him.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 05:47:49
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <Jrudnc9DDsj9DGXbnZ2dnUVZ_v6rnZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > In article <46f81f7e$0$24269$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Jambo" <-@-.->
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu> wrote in message
> >> news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
> >>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> >>>> Just stop it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Kindest regards,
> >>>> a whole bunch of rbt.
> >>>>
> >>> Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now. Y'all
> >>> can easily get out with good behavior.
> >>>
> >> Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is
> >> engaged
> >> in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with the
> >> altruistic intention of this website?
> >
> > This is a website?
> >
> > In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
> > what y'all do.
> >
> > But I just wanted to point out that while you both seem to show evidence
> > of notable technical acumen, the rather high-volume argument you're
> > carrying out has devolved to name-calling and point-scoring on
> > barely-relevant side issues (let me settle the whole "when did composite
> > rotors first get used on helicopters?" question for you: "it doesn't
> > matter.") Worse, one or both of you has started to just take random
> > snipes at the other in alternate threads.
> >
> > I mean, there's better hobbies, eh?
> >
> > Here's a trick for both of you: try to spend a whole week in your posts
> > to each other addressing each other as "Mr beam" and "Mr," uh, "Jambo."
> > When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
> > terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
> > audience. If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which your
> > point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
> > in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be specific
> > in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
> > main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
> > debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
> >
> > Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in terms
> > of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
> > right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
> > people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
> > that's the goal.
> >
>
> so here's what you're really saying - it's not the content, it's the
> presentation. that makes no sense. example: every time we turn on the
> tv and watch a politician speechify, the subtext, to me, appears pretty
> transparent. yet in discussing later with others, it appears that most
> people didn't listen to the words [or what they meant], they simply
> watched the presentation - and content was completely lost!
I'm saying that in this case, your presentation has obscured your
content. It's like reading the first year of Wired magazine: it hardly
matter what the content was, as the graphical layout made it unreadable.
At some point, one ceases to think the effort worth it.
On this matter, I commend to you the opening paragraphs of Aristotle's
_Rhetoric_:
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/rhetoric.1.i.html
I'm especially fond of the concise summary in the seventh paragraph.
> so here we have jambo, a guy that doesn't understand basic physical
> principles he should have learned in grade school, or what they mean in
> application, or even display any ability to look it up on the net! yet
> he can present what superficially appears to be quotes that support what
> he hopes to be an argument. accompanied of course by liberal doses of
> naughty cuss-words, just for good effect. in other words, content is
> garbage but that's masked by a charade of "righteous indignation and
> justified retaliation" just because i taunt his dumb moronic ass for his
> mistakes. put more simply, it's just like the political presentation,
> the content is not being absorbed. [we see the same with jobst and the
> dumb-ass mistakes he makes and insists on defending, even when he's
> hopelessly out of his depth and starts making stuff up.]
I'm suggesting that clear summaries, charitable explications of the
point at hand, and trying to avoid pointless pissing matches will
improve two things:
1) the clarity of your correct argument on the subject at hand.
2) the clarity of your thinking about your correct argument on the
subject at hand.
Frankly, I'm going to die soon*, and I mostly read these newsgroups for
pleasure, and there's neither pleasure nor instruction to be easily
found in your posts right now. I accept your assertion that there's much
to be learned from them; I doubt it's special enough to deserve the
extra effort needed.
In engineering terms, your S/N ratio is low.
> well, i think that's stupid. you're requesting what is the usenet
> equivalent of the political maxim of sacrificing freedom for security.
> and deserving neither. put another way, to protect your tender
> sensibilities, you'd rather listen to a dip-shit know-nothing moron
> re-write the science books and get it hopelessly wrong, just because you
> don't like to see me have some fun while i stand up for the facts,
> however crudely presented.
I'm suggesting (and it has nothing to do with my tender sensibilities;
in a previous job a former USMC drill instructor demonstrated the
particular linguistic faculties for which USMC drill instructors are
renowned; I feel...inoculated against such things now) -- and this isn't
really about the insults, those are practically a side-effect at this
point -- that by disregarding the principles of sound rhetorical
practice, you're making it very hard to convince...anyone.
If you're having fun, well, I'm hardly in a position to stop you. Enjoy
your game!
> if you have wit enough to consider the truth of what i say [as opposed
> to my presentation], you'll stand up for what is right and vote for
> factual accuracy and let me say my bit, not get sidetracked by my
> personal weakness of finding the taunting of morons and retards to be
> quite irresistible. and if you don't personally like that, use a
> killfile rather than bleat for blanket silence.
Mr beam, the "it" I asked you to "stop" in my first post was not
posting, by either you or Jambo (I'm beginning to believe you both enjoy
this game you play in equal measure, at which point, what the heck, go
for it...), but rather the very high volume of apparently pointless
posts on heaven-knows-what.
If you two were some random trolls who were dragging through the group
on the usual trollish mission (cf. Dolan, E.) I wouldn't give this a
single thought. But you apparently have a bit of knowledge in your
noggin, and I'd like to have at it. It does you no credit to post so
much noise that nobody here can figure out where the signal is.
*God willing, not unusually soon, but no human life is long enough to
spend it reading USENET. And my birthday is coming up, so it's kind of
the season for thoughts of mortality.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 09:24:11
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <rcousine-8AEB5F.22474824092007@news.telus.net >,
Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote:
> In article <Jrudnc9DDsj9DGXbnZ2dnUVZ_v6rnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> > so here we have jambo, a guy that doesn't understand basic physical
> > principles he should have learned in grade school, or what they
> > mean in application, or even display any ability to look it up on
> > the net! yet he can present what superficially appears to be
> > quotes that support what he hopes to be an argument. accompanied
> > of course by liberal doses of naughty cuss-words, just for good
> > effect. in other words, content is garbage but that's masked by a
> > charade of "righteous indignation and justified retaliation" just
> > because i taunt his dumb moronic ass for his mistakes.
Ah, the irony. You could replace "jambo" with "jim" in this paragraph
and have an equally factual argument.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 09:25:30
From: Peter Cole
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> If you two were some random trolls who were dragging through the group
> on the usual trollish mission (cf. Dolan, E.) I wouldn't give this a
> single thought. But you apparently have a bit of knowledge in your
> noggin, and I'd like to have at it. It does you no credit to post so
> much noise that nobody here can figure out where the signal is.
Sorry, but I think this is rather beside the point. "jim beam" has a
long history of ad hominem attacks on various members of this NG. For
years he has stalked Jobst, posting nothing but diatribe in response to
Jobst's posts, virtually every time Jobst has posted.
Jobst has adopted the practice of ignoring him, where "Jambo" (only
recently) has tried to "pay back in kind", and I've tried to rebut the
content of his posts while ignoring the abuse.
I find the tolerance of this behavior both surprising and depressing.
"jim beam" is, first and foremost, a simple bully. This sort of person
can kill a NG. If you go back through the archives, you'll see that this
one was not only a kinder, gentler place, but a more informative one.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:46:12
From: Luke
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <rcousine-6B434C.14312124092007@news.telus.net >, Ryan
Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote:
> Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in terms
> of an outside observer.
That's just it though. It's not a debate and it really never was; it's
a fit of mutual antagonism so far gone it can't even masquerade as a
debate any longer.
Deportment reveals motives. A good indicator I resort to in determining
if contestants in a thread hold the subject or themselves supreme is
whether they engage in the debate as a stranger and I/you would in the
street. That is, with some modicum of civility and due respect. That
still leaves much room for idiosyncracy, irony, humor, etc...beyond the
subject matter.
> I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
> right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
> people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
> that's the goal.
Doubt it. I'd wager the goal is mutual debasement/self aggrandizement,
the vehicle being this pseudo debate about the properties of CF. Just
goes to show that intelligence or education -- purportedly anyway -- is
not a preventative against degrading behavior. What a waste.
Perhaps they'll heed your advice and cultivate their civility. But
don't hold your breath: reasoning with a child in the midst of a hissy
fit is a futile proposition. Let 'em vent, after they're spent they can
reflect that the undertaking was wasted time and effort.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 09:33:06
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <240920072146126567%lucasiragusa@rogers.com >,
Luke <lucasiragusa@rogers.com > wrote:
> Perhaps they'll heed your advice and cultivate their civility. But
> don't hold your breath: reasoning with a child in the midst of a
> hissy fit is a futile proposition. Let 'em vent, after they're spent
> they can reflect that the undertaking was wasted time and effort.
We've been through this hundreds of times with jim beam in the past few
years. Introspection, reflection and learning from his errors are
outside of his purview. He does not consider his actions a waste of
time and effort, he believes he is bringing his wisdom to the great
unwashed. As was said about another arrogant git yesterday, he is
either deliberately provocative or shockingly uneducated.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2007 20:01:07
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <240920072146126567%lucasiragusa@rogers.com>,
> Luke <lucasiragusa@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps they'll heed your advice and cultivate their civility. But
>> don't hold your breath: reasoning with a child in the midst of a
>> hissy fit is a futile proposition. Let 'em vent, after they're spent
>> they can reflect that the undertaking was wasted time and effort.
>
> We've been through this hundreds of times with jim beam in the past few
> years. Introspection, reflection and learning from his errors are
> outside of his purview. He does not consider his actions a waste of
> time and effort, he believes he is bringing his wisdom to the great
> unwashed. As was said about another arrogant git yesterday, he is
> either deliberately provocative or shockingly uneducated.
says timmy the retard - the only kid in school who doesn't understand
why 5000 !< 1600. why repeat this each time you make retarded errors of
massive non-comprehension? because you pollute the data pool, that's
why. and each time you make these retarded errors in the future, i'll
keep on correcting you too.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:02:11
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote in message
news:rcousine-6B434C.14312124092007@news.telus.net...
> This is a website?
Newsgroup then.
> In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
> what y'all do.
That's good.
> When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
> terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
> audience.
Beamboy's way below that. And if you don't think so, you only need to look
at the last few years of beamboy's so-called "arguments".
> If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which your
> point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
> in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be specific
> in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
> main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
> debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
All beyond beamboy's comprehension and ability to understand.
> Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in terms
> of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
> right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
> people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
> that's the goal.
It's part of the goal, but the main point is to prevent knowledgeable,
expert people in their fields from stopping their contributions because an
inadequate, blustery fraud resorts to foul language when confronted with the
truth.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 15:45:40
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote in message
news:rcousine-6B434C.14312124092007@news.telus.net...
> In article <46f81f7e$0$24269$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Jambo" <-@-.->
> wrote:
>
>> "Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu> wrote in message
>> news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
>> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> >> Just stop it.
>> >>
>> >> Kindest regards,
>> >> a whole bunch of rbt.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
>> > Y'all
>> > can easily get out with good behavior.
>> >
>>
>> Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is
>> engaged
>> in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with the
>> altruistic intention of this website?
>
> This is a website?
>
> In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
> what y'all do.
>
> But I just wanted to point out that while you both seem to show evidence
> of notable technical acumen, the rather high-volume argument you're
> carrying out has devolved to name-calling and point-scoring on
> barely-relevant side issues (let me settle the whole "when did composite
> rotors first get used on helicopters?" question for you: "it doesn't
> matter.") Worse, one or both of you has started to just take random
> snipes at the other in alternate threads.
>
> I mean, there's better hobbies, eh?
>
> Here's a trick for both of you: try to spend a whole week in your posts
> to each other addressing each other as "Mr beam" and "Mr," uh, "Jambo."
> When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
> terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
> audience. If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which your
> point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
> in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be specific
> in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
> main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
> debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
>
> Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in terms
> of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
> right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
> people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
> that's the goal.
>
As usual, you make some excellent points.
I think that it is time for them to step back and look at who they have
become. If either died tomorrow, it is sad to say if the people who read
this newsgroup had to summarize their lives it would probably be something
like, "Self Important Asshole from rbt" Is that really how they want to be
remembered?
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:08:56
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:o_CdnWeamuyco2XbnZ2dnUVZ_sqinZ2d@comcast.com...
> I think that it is time for them to step back and look at who they have
> become. If either died tomorrow, it is sad to say if the people who read
> this newsgroup had to summarize their lives it would probably be something
> like, "Self Important Asshole from rbt" Is that really how they want to
> be remembered?
I'd hope that I'd be remembered for my life's work - my posts in r.b.t.
don't even figure in my "remember-me-as" list.
While I have no doubt that beamboy's life is reflected by the effort he puts
in this NEWSGROUP, I can assure you it ain't the case with me.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 00:20:26
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <o_CdnWeamuyco2XbnZ2dnUVZ_sqinZ2d@comcast.com >,
"Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com > wrote:
> "Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> news:rcousine-6B434C.14312124092007@news.telus.net...
> > In article <46f81f7e$0$24269$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Jambo" <-@-.->
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu> wrote in message
> >> news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
> >> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> >> >> Just stop it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Kindest regards,
> >> >> a whole bunch of rbt.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
> >> > Y'all
> >> > can easily get out with good behavior.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is
> >> engaged
> >> in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with the
> >> altruistic intention of this website?
> >
> > This is a website?
> >
> > In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
> > what y'all do.
> >
> > But I just wanted to point out that while you both seem to show evidence
> > of notable technical acumen, the rather high-volume argument you're
> > carrying out has devolved to name-calling and point-scoring on
> > barely-relevant side issues (let me settle the whole "when did composite
> > rotors first get used on helicopters?" question for you: "it doesn't
> > matter.") Worse, one or both of you has started to just take random
> > snipes at the other in alternate threads.
> >
> > I mean, there's better hobbies, eh?
> >
> > Here's a trick for both of you: try to spend a whole week in your posts
> > to each other addressing each other as "Mr beam" and "Mr," uh, "Jambo."
> > When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
> > terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
> > audience. If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which your
> > point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
> > in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be specific
> > in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
> > main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
> > debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
> >
> > Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in terms
> > of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
> > right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
> > people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
> > that's the goal.
> >
>
>
> As usual, you make some excellent points.
>
> I think that it is time for them to step back and look at who they have
> become. If either died tomorrow, it is sad to say if the people who read
> this newsgroup had to summarize their lives it would probably be something
> like, "Self Important Asshole from rbt" Is that really how they want to be
> remembered?
Erm, in fairness to Messrs beam and Jambo, I'm pretty sure that all
those people they know in real life, the ones who hopefully take up the
majority of their lives, neither know nor care about the hobby-time each
spends in rbt.
And really, why should they?
My wife doesn't even read my blog,
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 20:40:12
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote in message
news:rcousine-15829B.17202524092007@news.telus.net...
> In article <o_CdnWeamuyco2XbnZ2dnUVZ_sqinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> "Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
>> news:rcousine-6B434C.14312124092007@news.telus.net...
>> > In article <46f81f7e$0$24269$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Jambo" <-@-.->
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu> wrote in message
>> >> news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
>> >> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> >> >> Just stop it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Kindest regards,
>> >> >> a whole bunch of rbt.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
>> >> > Y'all
>> >> > can easily get out with good behavior.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is
>> >> engaged
>> >> in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with
>> >> the
>> >> altruistic intention of this website?
>> >
>> > This is a website?
>> >
>> > In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
>> > what y'all do.
>> >
>> > But I just wanted to point out that while you both seem to show
>> > evidence
>> > of notable technical acumen, the rather high-volume argument you're
>> > carrying out has devolved to name-calling and point-scoring on
>> > barely-relevant side issues (let me settle the whole "when did
>> > composite
>> > rotors first get used on helicopters?" question for you: "it doesn't
>> > matter.") Worse, one or both of you has started to just take random
>> > snipes at the other in alternate threads.
>> >
>> > I mean, there's better hobbies, eh?
>> >
>> > Here's a trick for both of you: try to spend a whole week in your posts
>> > to each other addressing each other as "Mr beam" and "Mr," uh, "Jambo."
>> > When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
>> > terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
>> > audience. If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which
>> > your
>> > point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
>> > in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be
>> > specific
>> > in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
>> > main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
>> > debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
>> >
>> > Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in
>> > terms
>> > of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
>> > right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
>> > people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
>> > that's the goal.
>> >
>>
>>
>> As usual, you make some excellent points.
>>
>> I think that it is time for them to step back and look at who they have
>> become. If either died tomorrow, it is sad to say if the people who
>> read
>> this newsgroup had to summarize their lives it would probably be
>> something
>> like, "Self Important Asshole from rbt" Is that really how they want to
>> be
>> remembered?
>
> Erm, in fairness to Messrs beam and Jambo, I'm pretty sure that all
> those people they know in real life, the ones who hopefully take up the
> majority of their lives, neither know nor care about the hobby-time each
> spends in rbt.
>
I truly believe that your life is the sum of your parts and that being a
jerk in one aspect of your life carries over into other parts. Road rage
might be confined to what happens behind the wheel but my guess is that Mr.
Road Rage has issues that are reflected in other areas of his life.
I imagine that someone who is a pompous windbag in newsgroups has excess
wind in other areas. Fine if you want people to think windbag when they
think of you, not so fine if your view of yourself is completely different.
Decide who you want to be when you grow up and periodically review who you
want to be and if you are achieving it.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 15:07:12
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:-bqdnSf9ZfiUHmXbnZ2dnUVZ_tGonZ2d@comcast.com...
> I truly believe that your life is the sum of your parts and that being a
> jerk in one aspect of your life carries over into other parts. Road rage
> might be confined to what happens behind the wheel but my guess is that
> Mr. Road Rage has issues that are reflected in other areas of his life.
Well, you're entitled to your beliefs, I suppose. You may even be right in
some instances. Just don't make the assumption that the whole world agrees
with you.
> I imagine that someone who is a pompous windbag in newsgroups has excess
> wind in other areas.
Imagination is certainly not necessarily fact.
> Fine if you want people to think windbag when they think of you, not so
> fine if your view of yourself is completely different.
> Decide who you want to be when you grow up and periodically review who you
> want to be and if you are achieving it.
Your assumptions exude the arrogance of someone who uses his "imagination"
to perceive the world and tries to warp everyone to fit it.
I can equally imagine you to be a grandfather eager to impart his life
lessons to the younger generation and finding no audience for it, but I'd
just be speculating.
Tell you what, I think you have a real point there, but it's sadly misplaced
here. Go to a kids' counselling group, where your observations of life may
find impressionable ears. And I don't mean that in a malicious way.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Sep 2007 12:10:23
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Jambo" <-@-.- > wrote in message
news:46f95c2f$0$28890$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> "Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:-bqdnSf9ZfiUHmXbnZ2dnUVZ_tGonZ2d@comcast.com...
>> I truly believe that your life is the sum of your parts and that being a
>> jerk in one aspect of your life carries over into other parts. Road rage
>> might be confined to what happens behind the wheel but my guess is that
>> Mr. Road Rage has issues that are reflected in other areas of his life.
>
> Well, you're entitled to your beliefs, I suppose. You may even be right
> in some instances. Just don't make the assumption that the whole world
> agrees with you.
>
>> I imagine that someone who is a pompous windbag in newsgroups has excess
>> wind in other areas.
>
> Imagination is certainly not necessarily fact.
Never said that it was.
>
>> Fine if you want people to think windbag when they think of you, not so
>> fine if your view of yourself is completely different.
>
>> Decide who you want to be when you grow up and periodically review who
>> you want to be and if you are achieving it.
>
> Your assumptions exude the arrogance of someone who uses his "imagination"
> to perceive the world and tries to warp everyone to fit it.
I have no idea what you are trying to say.
>
> I can equally imagine you to be a grandfather eager to impart his life
> lessons to the younger generation and finding no audience for it, but I'd
> just be speculating.
>
> Tell you what, I think you have a real point there, but it's sadly
> misplaced here. Go to a kids' counselling group, where your observations
> of life may find impressionable ears. And I don't mean that in a
> malicious way.
Again, I don't understand what you are trying to say. Sorry if I hit a
nerve.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Oct 2007 10:32:58
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:se6dnfc6CbYCzGDbnZ2dnUVZ_qKgnZ2d@comcast.com...
> I have no idea what you are trying to say.
> Again, I don't understand what you are trying to say.
No, you wouldn't, would you?
> Sorry if I hit a nerve.
Not even close, Frankie.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 03:49:50
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <-bqdnSf9ZfiUHmXbnZ2dnUVZ_tGonZ2d@comcast.com >,
"Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com > wrote:
> "Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> news:rcousine-15829B.17202524092007@news.telus.net...
> > In article <o_CdnWeamuyco2XbnZ2dnUVZ_sqinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > "Frank Drackman" <frankdrack@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> >> news:rcousine-6B434C.14312124092007@news.telus.net...
> >> > In article <46f81f7e$0$24269$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Jambo" <-@-.->
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu> wrote in message
> >> >> news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
> >> >> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> >> >> >> Just stop it.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Kindest regards,
> >> >> >> a whole bunch of rbt.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
> >> >> > Y'all
> >> >> > can easily get out with good behavior.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is
> >> >> engaged
> >> >> in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with
> >> >> the
> >> >> altruistic intention of this website?
> >> >
> >> > This is a website?
> >> >
> >> > In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
> >> > what y'all do.
> >> >
> >> > But I just wanted to point out that while you both seem to show
> >> > evidence
> >> > of notable technical acumen, the rather high-volume argument you're
> >> > carrying out has devolved to name-calling and point-scoring on
> >> > barely-relevant side issues (let me settle the whole "when did
> >> > composite
> >> > rotors first get used on helicopters?" question for you: "it doesn't
> >> > matter.") Worse, one or both of you has started to just take random
> >> > snipes at the other in alternate threads.
> >> >
> >> > I mean, there's better hobbies, eh?
> >> >
> >> > Here's a trick for both of you: try to spend a whole week in your posts
> >> > to each other addressing each other as "Mr beam" and "Mr," uh, "Jambo."
> >> > When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
> >> > terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
> >> > audience. If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which
> >> > your
> >> > point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
> >> > in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be
> >> > specific
> >> > in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
> >> > main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
> >> > debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
> >> >
> >> > Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in
> >> > terms
> >> > of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
> >> > right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
> >> > people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
> >> > that's the goal.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> As usual, you make some excellent points.
> >>
> >> I think that it is time for them to step back and look at who they have
> >> become. If either died tomorrow, it is sad to say if the people who
> >> read
> >> this newsgroup had to summarize their lives it would probably be
> >> something
> >> like, "Self Important Asshole from rbt" Is that really how they want to
> >> be
> >> remembered?
> >
> > Erm, in fairness to Messrs beam and Jambo, I'm pretty sure that all
> > those people they know in real life, the ones who hopefully take up the
> > majority of their lives, neither know nor care about the hobby-time each
> > spends in rbt.
> >
>
>
> I truly believe that your life is the sum of your parts and that being a
> jerk in one aspect of your life carries over into other parts. Road rage
> might be confined to what happens behind the wheel but my guess is that Mr.
> Road Rage has issues that are reflected in other areas of his life.
And I would suggest to you that if usenet is any more than a teeny tiny
part of one's life, then one should cut back. If only I could take my
own advice.
> I imagine that someone who is a pompous windbag in newsgroups has excess
> wind in other areas. Fine if you want people to think windbag when they
> think of you, not so fine if your view of yourself is completely different.
It sounds odd, but my experience is that while some people are very much
like their online personae, some are not. I decline to suggest why this
might be.
> Decide who you want to be when you grow up and periodically review who you
> want to be and if you are achieving it.
Mr Jambo has all but said that he's posting, at this point, mainly to
provoke Mr beam. He has a theory as to why that's a reasonable thing to
do, but, like, you know, whatever.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 22:04:38
From: Bill
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote in message
news:rcousine-6B434C.14312124092007@news.telus.net...
> In article <46f81f7e$0$24269$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Jambo" <-@-.->
> wrote:
>
> > "Paul Myron Hobson" <phobson@gatech.edu> wrote in message
> > news:46F811AD.8070900@gatech.edu...
> > > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > >> Just stop it.
> > >>
> > >> Kindest regards,
> > >> a whole bunch of rbt.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Cosigned. Additionally, y'all are both in the idiot box right now.
Y'all
> > > can easily get out with good behavior.
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, but surely you can be a little grateful that while beamboy is
engaged
> > in digging himself a tunnel to China, y'all are free to carry on with
the
> > altruistic intention of this website?
>
> This is a website?
>
> In fairness to both of you, the NEWSGROUP will carry on regardless of
> what y'all do.
>
> But I just wanted to point out that while you both seem to show evidence
> of notable technical acumen, the rather high-volume argument you're
> carrying out has devolved to name-calling and point-scoring on
> barely-relevant side issues (let me settle the whole "when did composite
> rotors first get used on helicopters?" question for you: "it doesn't
> matter.") Worse, one or both of you has started to just take random
> snipes at the other in alternate threads.
>
> I mean, there's better hobbies, eh?
>
> Here's a trick for both of you: try to spend a whole week in your posts
> to each other addressing each other as "Mr beam" and "Mr," uh, "Jambo."
> When arguing, attempt to define the other's arguments in charitable
> terms, just as reasonable debaters do if they are trying to win the
> audience. If you get side-tracked on a small side question on which your
> point of dispute doesn't really hinge, try precisely defining the terms
> in a straightforward fashion, and when you present evidence, be specific
> in pointing out how it specifically relates the side-question to the
> main topic of debate. If its seems you're at an impasse, see if the
> debate can be continued on the main subject from another line.
>
> Most importantly of all, try to figure out how the debate looks in terms
> of an outside observer. I mean, you're debating one stubborn person,
> right? But there's probably hundreds if not thousands of less-stubborn
> people watching your debate. So see if you can convince them. Surely
> that's the goal.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
> "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
> to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
That's really thoughtful and articulate. I don't think there is a chance in
hell they'll head the advice. They are way to selfish to consider the damage
they do to what has been a mostly collegial and useful community. Years ago
I enjoyed rec.audio.opinion but it fell victim to a handful of selfish
malicious idiots. Maybe it's time to resurrect the time honored tradition of
duels.
Bill
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 21:05:43
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Bill" <bill@example.invalid > wrote in message
news:WvWJi.132224$ax1.98417@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> That's really thoughtful and articulate. I don't think there is a chance
> in
> hell they'll head the advice. They are way to selfish to consider the
> damage
> they do to what has been a mostly collegial and useful community. Years
> ago
> I enjoyed rec.audio.opinion but it fell victim to a handful of selfish
> malicious idiots. Maybe it's time to resurrect the time honored tradition
> of
> duels.
Well, duels will sort this out really quickly, but just be aware, everyone
else is untouched by this - you'll note that those with substantial,
sigmnificant and knowledgeable contributions, driven only by altruistic
intentions, aren't really affected, except when beamboy bleats his ignorant
beliefs just to be contrary.
Killfile the threads - beamboy's spiral to his hopefully quick demise
doesn't have to be a spectacle for everyone.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 17:49:45
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
In article <46f85eb7$0$24330$4c368faf@roadrunner.com >,
"Jambo" <-@-.- > wrote:
> "Bill" <bill@example.invalid> wrote in message
> news:WvWJi.132224$ax1.98417@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > That's really thoughtful and articulate. I don't think there is a chance
> > in
> > hell they'll head the advice. They are way to selfish to consider the
> > damage
> > they do to what has been a mostly collegial and useful community. Years
> > ago
> > I enjoyed rec.audio.opinion but it fell victim to a handful of selfish
> > malicious idiots. Maybe it's time to resurrect the time honored tradition
> > of
> > duels.
>
> Well, duels will sort this out really quickly, but just be aware, everyone
> else is untouched by this -
Not, really. Other usenet groups have gone over to all
squabbling, with even on topic threads being swamped
by nastiness. Kill files are not the answer. Supposing
you achieve your goal, you could also be attracting
personalities who are solely interested in viciousness
and filth.
> you'll note that those with substantial,
> sigmnificant and knowledgeable contributions, driven only by altruistic
> intentions, aren't really affected, except when beamboy bleats his ignorant
> beliefs just to be contrary.
>
> Killfile the threads - beamboy's spiral to his hopefully quick demise
> doesn't have to be a spectacle for everyone.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2007 11:05:15
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: An open letter to Jim Beam and Jambo
|
"Michael Press" <rubrum@pacbell.net > wrote in message
news:rubrum-407A91.17494525092007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net...
> In article <46f85eb7$0$24330$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
> "Jambo" <-@-.-> wrote:
>> Well, duels will sort this out really quickly, but just be aware,
>> everyone
>> else is untouched by this -
>
> Not, really. Other usenet groups have gone over to all
> squabbling, with even on topic threads being swamped
> by nastiness.
As evidenced by the beamboy-Peter Cole threads, for example, and not to
mention beamboy's hounding of JB.
> Kill files are not the answer. Supposing
> you achieve your goal, you could also be attracting
> personalities who are solely interested in viciousness
> and filth.
Too late for that. beamboy fits that description, and he's been bleating
here for years.
|
|
