| |
Main
Date: 27 Aug 2007 12:30:08
From: Doug Taylor
Subject: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
But others may have ulterior motives:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 21:50:19
From: JeffWills
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Aug 30, 7:00 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net > wrote:
>
> At the risk of inappropriateness, I remember getting a (IIRC) Bike
> Warehouse catalog back when I was in high school. On one of the pages
> there was a picture of an attractive woman holding a Campy seatpost with
> the caption "grease before insertion." Even at 16 the innuendo was
> glaringly obvious. Sex (or implied sex) sells.
Damn you to hell... I remember that catalog, too. Bikeology (aka
Supergo) circa 1980. Now I've gone and reviewed my misspent youth in a
public forum... I'll never be president now!
Jeff
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 13:38:28
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Aug 29, 10:35 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me > wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
>
>
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>
> >>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
> >>>> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
>
> >>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>
> >> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>
> >> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link
> >> to it on a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's
> >> /inappropriate/ and would almost certainly upset (or even anger)
> >> some people.
>
> > It would be silly to get upset or angry over the video. There is
> > nothing morally wrong or inherently offensive about a woman
> > masturbating by way of a bicycle.
>
> Well hell then, let's send it to some church groups and the PTA. Hey, why
> not the Girl Scouts -- they gotta learn about this /some/ day. (Some of 'em
> even ride bikes!)
>
> >> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common
> >> sense and respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not only
> >> who posted it but who's bothering to defend it).
> > In a sensible society, no one would find the video offensive.
>
> Same goes for the Dildo one?
>
> Tell you what: ask ANY of the shop owners on these newsgroups if they'd
> send either video out to their mailing lists. Guess what? They WOULDN'T,
> because many of their customers would not appreciate being sent something
> like that without warning or consent.
>
> (Also, of course, if someone you usually oppose posted it, /you'd/ be saying
> it was inappropriate. And for once (!) you'd be right.)
>
> > What about the people that often insert quips that are offensive (like
> > an importer of Chinese titanium bicycles that used to post here)?
>
> What about them? Floggittodeathlinson drove one of them out of here with
> non-stop, unfair and dishonest character assassination.
>
> That was weak, even for you.
>
> >> Again, I only commented in the form of a quip when someone basically
> >> gave me a straight line, like "under what category does this
> >> belong?" and I replied "inappropriate postings to newsgroups". It
> >> wasn't that big a deal.
> > Granted, it should have been in just rec.bicycles.misc, not
> > rec.bicycles.tech and rec.bicycles.soc.
>
> > It some newsgroups the link to the video would have been on-topic, and
> > therefore appropriate.
>
> So let's post vids of women getting off on bib shorts and tires and
> handlebars. Hey, it's /on topic/...
>
> >> Whoever said it about you was right: you'll argue ANYTHING just to
> >> be disagreeable.
>
> > butbutbut, arguing is fun and entertains Andres Muro!
>
> Whatever...
Where's Jim Beam when ya need him??? (and baby makes 3)
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 18:22:29
From: Marz
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Aug 30, 12:11 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me > wrote:
> Marz wrote:
> > On Aug 30, 10:33 am, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
> >> Marz wrote:
> >>> On Aug 29, 8:24 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
> >>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
> >>>>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
> >>>>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one
> >>>>>> -- to your boss or clients or co-workers?
> >>>>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>
> >>>> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>
> >>>> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link
> >>>> to it on a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's
> >>>> /inappropriate/ and would almost certainly upset (or even anger)
> >>>> some people.
>
> >>>> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common
> >>>> sense and respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not
> >>>> only who posted it but who's bothering to defend it).
>
> >>> It has everything to do with USian, as the US is totally f*&ked up
> >>> when it comes to anything to do with sex. It was a harmless video,
> >>> funny and on topic and if you felt it was offensive or posted in the
> >>> wrong place you have problems. Would I have emailed it onto folks at
> >>> work, hell no, not here in Texas, I'd have been fired on the spot.
> >>> But it's ok to forward videos containing violence, 'cos they're
> >>> funny, right!
>
> >> As usual, you've completely failed to follow the thread. (Requires
> >> re-reading at this point, due to selective snipping.)
>
> >> Ask any bike business owner if he or she would send the dildo saddle
> >> video out to entire customer mailing list. Answer: no.
>
> >> HTHBKIW (but know it won't)- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > I thought the problem (and over 50% of this thread) was about your
> > prudish behaviour and lack of acceptance of a funny video. By trying
> > to support your own argument by bringing up the point that your
> > average bike shop wouldn't send out such a video to its customers you
> > fail to demonstrate why such a video may be inappropriate for a public
> > forum. This is a public forum and as such, allows for a greater
> > freedom of expression than allowed within the private enterprise of a
> > bike shop.
>
> As I said, you've failed to follow the thread or comprehend what's been
> said.
>
> As usual.
>
> I never even saw the OP (apparently someone I've plonked). I saw a reply or
> two, and only when someone asked what "category" it belonged in did I make a
> rather innocuous quip about inappropriate NG postings.
>
> Let me try one last thing. Say Claire was reading the NG and clicked on the
> link. No big deal (I doubt she'd be offended or even taken aback; or maybe
> she might. be). Now say she was sitting with her 10-year-old daughter
> reading the NG and clicked on the link. PERHAPS she might not appreciate
> her daughter seeing that without some warning or advisory; and PERHAPS she'd
> wait to click on it until her daughter wasn't with her (or just not click on
> it at all).
>
> Maybe you'd want your kid to see an explicit DILDO VIDEO in a cycling
> newsgroup. I'd bet a lot of parents wouldn't, and WOULD want to be told in
> advance what the content was.
>
> My cat was quite shocked.
>
> "Prudish behavior" -- ROTFL
>
> BS- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Just because an article posted here could or may offend someone does
not make it inappropriate for a public forum such as
rec.bicycles.tech. If I was reading a private printed publication or
website, such as a bike mag, I would expect controls on the content
and I wouldn't expect to see anything I couldn't share with my
grandmother or three year old daughter. Here within a public newsgroup
where topics are supposed to be about cycling, all limits and controls
are off with regards to appropriate content, language, profanity,
images and videos and hence I won't share everything I see and read
here with folks who may be offended.
It's like over hearing a conversation, I'd be confident that I'd be ok
with my daughter over hearing any open converstation held here at
work, with the reverse being any conversation held at the pub.
Should folks label content to be NSFW, maybe, but more out of courtesy
than compulsion.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 21:53:35
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
In article <1188498149.168504.97840@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com >,
Marz <marzjennings@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Aug 30, 12:11 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
> >
> > Let me try one last thing. Say Claire was reading the NG and
> > clicked on the link. No big deal (I doubt she'd be offended or
> > even taken aback; or maybe she might. be). Now say she was sitting
> > with her 10-year-old daughter reading the NG and clicked on the
> > link. PERHAPS she might not appreciate her daughter seeing that
> > without some warning or advisory; and PERHAPS she'd wait to click
> > on it until her daughter wasn't with her (or just not click on it
> > at all).
> >
> > Maybe you'd want your kid to see an explicit DILDO VIDEO in a
> > cycling newsgroup. I'd bet a lot of parents wouldn't, and WOULD
> > want to be told in advance what the content was.
>
> Just because an article posted here could or may offend someone does
> not make it inappropriate for a public forum such as
> rec.bicycles.tech.
While I was not offended by the video, which I saw through a link in an
entirely different forum than this newsgroup, I think it would have been
courteous and common sense to warn that the content of the video was
slightly salacious in nature (and a bit silly- the myth of sexual
gratification from a bike saddle has been around for well over 100
years- perhaps Carl with his mastery of Google searches can find us some
19th century "hygienic" saddles to look at. Here's an encapsulated
history (no salacious images or videos but some frank terminology)):
http://www.mothernature.com/Library/Bookshelf/Books/51/7.cfm
If it really worked, bicycling would be *much* more popular among women
then among men.
I think it would be reasonable to expect that some of our co-readers in
r.b.t might not want to watch such a video without some advance notice
of the content. I haven't seen the "dildo video" to which Bill refers
and doubt that I have missed much, but I would hope that whomever posted
it would have the courtesy to flag the video for what it was. A TinyURL
masks all information about what the link contains, after all, so r.b.t
readers cannot easily judge for themselves whether or not they want to
click www.videos.com/cute-blonde-gets-off-on-her-bike-saddle.mpg because
they just don't get that data.
We already have enough gratuitous incivility in r.b.t that we don't need
to sandbag people. Bill isn't asking for self-censorship, just a
modicum of courtesy. I don't think that's so unreasonable.
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 22:02:07
From:
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:53:35 -0500, Tim McNamara
<timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:
[snip]
> . . . some
>19th century "hygienic" saddles to look at.
[snip]
Dear Tim,
Pictures can be found by paging through the pdfs below. Basically,
"hygenic" meant either the familiar seat-slot, or else seats made of
woven strips, thought to allow ventilation.
A more interesting saddle design is detailed at the end of this post.
***
Naturally, Morley Brothers offers a wide variety of lady's saddles,
including one with "best tanned oak leather top which comes down over
the pommel, affording protection to the skirts."
http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/morley/29.jpg
***
The stodgy Brooks catalog for 1914 offers saddles for both gentlemen
and ladies, but can't bring itself to say "slots."
"B33 L is a similar saddle, but suitably modified for ladies' use."
In the B40 and B40L, "the special construction of this saddle entirely
obviates the possibility of injurious pressure."
http://www.brooksarchives.info/brooks%20/catalogs/1914%20brooks/page16.html
***
Outing Magazine often reviewed hygienic saddles in the 1890's.
"An excellent line of hygiene and pneumatic saddles is offered, for
1898, by the Bunker Saddle Company, of Chicago, Ill. The distinctive
feature of the Rubber Neck is a patented rubber cushion which makes
the seat to which it is fitted soft, springy, cool and durable. The
vertical rubber tubes forming the honeycomb in this type yield to
every motion and conform anatomically to the form of the rider, while
the air spaces or cells extending from the plate to the cover,
throughout its area, keep the saddle cool and thoroughly ventilated.
The Number 1 Pneumatic Saddle, which is used transverse to the frame
of the wheel, is highly recommended as a type of cycle scat from the
use of which no injury can possibly result, there being nothing
interposed between the limbs. In the Model 5 pneumatic, the inflating
case is moulded to the exact shape of the saddle, and made of very
thick, heavy rubber, so as to prevent, absolutely, puncture or
deflation. This inflating case is neatly covered with selected
calfskin, in black or tan. The saddles marketed by this concern
range in price from $2.50 to $4.00, according to
sizes and styles."
--Outing Magazine, April 1898
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_32/outXXXII01/outXXXII01ze.pdf
Pictures of anatomic and hygenic bicycle saddles:
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_30/outXXX01/outXXX01w.pdf
***
" . . . the late [recent] introduction of many anatomical and hygienic
saddles, made in whole or in part of metal, rubber, wood, leather and
cork, together with several pneumatic models, has created a strong and
sensible demand for those styles which suit the individualities of the
riders. The tendency to shorten the pommel on the saddles for ladies’
bicycles is still noticeable, and will probably result in its
elimination so far as possible."
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_29/outXXIX05/outXXIX05y.pdf
But who cares about slots in saddles? The hot new seat from 1898
appears near the end of the Outing review, after the stunning new
chainless models.
The Drop-Seat Cycle Company
Jumping, or curb-stone mounting, is no longer necessary with the
bicycle brought forward for ’98 by the Drop-Seat Cycle Company of
Philadelphia. It has a mechanical device for depressing the seat,
consisting, in the main, of what is known as a toggle joint. The
locked toggle supports the saddle at its normal height, and yet allows
the rider at will to depress it to a point where, while seated upon
it, the feet may rest squarely upon the ground. This is invaluable for
photographic, or military, or sporting purposes, where a quick rest
and normal conditions of freedom of all the limbs are essential. It
has the further advantage that, when a lever connected with the left
handle grip is released, the seat is again unlocked and the coiled
spring forces the saddle up as the rider rises on the pedals. The
action of depressing is especially comfortable to ladies, inasmuch as
it allows them to arrange their costumes in a perfectly comfortable
position upon the saddle, before starting, and almost automatically
rises when they are prepared to start. If a rest is desired, or an
obstruction is met with, the rider need not dismount. It only needs a
slight pressure on the lever, and the saddle will fall sufficiently to
enable the feet to rest on the ground. The limit of the depression is
normally ten inches, but, of course, special arrangements are possible
to meet individual cases. “The West Point” is a natural and
appropriate name for a wheel so admirably suited to the needs of
military men in active service."
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_31/outXXXI05/outXXXI05r.pdf
To understand what jumping and curb-mounting meant, consider how these
ladies managed to get up onto their tall-wheeled safety bikes:
http://woment.mur.at/images/GrazerDamenBicycleClub.jpg
Short-stuff on the right-side of the picture is sitting on a bike with
30-inch wheels and wishing for 650B.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 20:09:54
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <1188498149.168504.97840@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> Marz <marzjennings@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 30, 12:11 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>>>
>>> Let me try one last thing. Say Claire was reading the NG and
>>> clicked on the link. No big deal (I doubt she'd be offended or
>>> even taken aback; or maybe she might. be). Now say she was sitting
>>> with her 10-year-old daughter reading the NG and clicked on the
>>> link. PERHAPS she might not appreciate her daughter seeing that
>>> without some warning or advisory; and PERHAPS she'd wait to click
>>> on it until her daughter wasn't with her (or just not click on it
>>> at all).
>>>
>>> Maybe you'd want your kid to see an explicit DILDO VIDEO in a
>>> cycling newsgroup. I'd bet a lot of parents wouldn't, and WOULD
>>> want to be told in advance what the content was.
>>
>> Just because an article posted here could or may offend someone does
>> not make it inappropriate for a public forum such as
>> rec.bicycles.tech.
>
> While I was not offended by the video, which I saw through a link in
> an entirely different forum than this newsgroup, I think it would
> have been courteous and common sense to warn that the content of the
> video was slightly salacious in nature (and a bit silly- the myth of
> sexual gratification from a bike saddle has been around for well over
> 100 years- perhaps Carl with his mastery of Google searches can find
> us some 19th century "hygienic" saddles to look at. Here's an
> encapsulated history (no salacious images or videos but some frank
> terminology)):
>
> http://www.mothernature.com/Library/Bookshelf/Books/51/7.cfm
>
> If it really worked, bicycling would be *much* more popular among
> women then among men.
>
> I think it would be reasonable to expect that some of our co-readers
> in r.b.t might not want to watch such a video without some advance
> notice of the content. I haven't seen the "dildo video" to which
> Bill refers and doubt that I have missed much, but I would hope that
> whomever posted it would have the courtesy to flag the video for what
> it was. A TinyURL masks all information about what the link
> contains, after all, so r.b.t readers cannot easily judge for
> themselves whether or not they want to click
> www.videos.com/cute-blonde-gets-off-on-her-bike-saddle.mpg because
> they just don't get that data.
>
> We already have enough gratuitous incivility in r.b.t that we don't
> need to sandbag people. Bill isn't asking for self-censorship, just a
> modicum of courtesy. I don't think that's so unreasonable.
Holy shit! Thank you.
Bill "even when I forward dirty stuff to friends I always let 'em know it's
'adult-ish' or to 'open discreetly'" S.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 11:50:56
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Marz wrote:
> On Aug 30, 12:11 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>> Marz wrote:
>>> On Aug 30, 10:33 am, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>>>> Marz wrote:
>>>>> On Aug 29, 8:24 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>>>>>>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo
>>>>>>>> one -- to your boss or clients or co-workers?
>>>>>>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>>
>>>>>> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>>
>>>>>> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not
>>>>>> link to it on a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's
>>>>>> /inappropriate/ and would almost certainly upset (or even anger)
>>>>>> some people.
>>
>>>>>> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common
>>>>>> sense and respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not
>>>>>> only who posted it but who's bothering to defend it).
>>
>>>>> It has everything to do with USian, as the US is totally f*&ked up
>>>>> when it comes to anything to do with sex. It was a harmless video,
>>>>> funny and on topic and if you felt it was offensive or posted in
>>>>> the wrong place you have problems. Would I have emailed it onto
>>>>> folks at work, hell no, not here in Texas, I'd have been fired on
>>>>> the spot. But it's ok to forward videos containing violence, 'cos
>>>>> they're funny, right!
>>
>>>> As usual, you've completely failed to follow the thread. (Requires
>>>> re-reading at this point, due to selective snipping.)
>>
>>>> Ask any bike business owner if he or she would send the dildo
>>>> saddle video out to entire customer mailing list. Answer: no.
>>
>>>> HTHBKIW (but know it won't)- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>> I thought the problem (and over 50% of this thread) was about your
>>> prudish behaviour and lack of acceptance of a funny video. By trying
>>> to support your own argument by bringing up the point that your
>>> average bike shop wouldn't send out such a video to its customers
>>> you fail to demonstrate why such a video may be inappropriate for a
>>> public forum. This is a public forum and as such, allows for a
>>> greater freedom of expression than allowed within the private
>>> enterprise of a bike shop.
>>
>> As I said, you've failed to follow the thread or comprehend what's
>> been said.
>>
>> As usual.
>>
>> I never even saw the OP (apparently someone I've plonked). I saw a
>> reply or two, and only when someone asked what "category" it
>> belonged in did I make a rather innocuous quip about inappropriate
>> NG postings.
>>
>> Let me try one last thing. Say Claire was reading the NG and
>> clicked on the link. No big deal (I doubt she'd be offended or even
>> taken aback; or maybe she might. be). Now say she was sitting with
>> her 10-year-old daughter reading the NG and clicked on the link.
>> PERHAPS she might not appreciate her daughter seeing that without
>> some warning or advisory; and PERHAPS she'd wait to click on it
>> until her daughter wasn't with her (or just not click on it at all).
>>
>> Maybe you'd want your kid to see an explicit DILDO VIDEO in a cycling
>> newsgroup. I'd bet a lot of parents wouldn't, and WOULD want to be
>> told in advance what the content was.
>>
>> My cat was quite shocked.
>>
>> "Prudish behavior" -- ROTFL
>>
>> BS- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Just because an article posted here could or may offend someone does
> not make it inappropriate for a public forum such as
> rec.bicycles.tech. If I was reading a private printed publication or
> website, such as a bike mag, I would expect controls on the content
> and I wouldn't expect to see anything I couldn't share with my
> grandmother or three year old daughter. Here within a public newsgroup
> where topics are supposed to be about cycling, all limits and controls
> are off with regards to appropriate content, language, profanity,
> images and videos and hence I won't share everything I see and read
> here with folks who may be offended.
> It's like over hearing a conversation, I'd be confident that I'd be ok
> with my daughter over hearing any open converstation held here at
> work, with the reverse being any conversation held at the pub.
> Should folks label content to be NSFW, maybe, but more out of courtesy
> than compulsion.
ISTR an uproar about some cycling rag cover photo or inside spread a few
years ago.
Whatever...
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 14:35:40
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> ISTR an uproar about some cycling rag cover photo or inside spread a
> few years ago.
Actually, I think it was a "suggestive" ad of some sort.
Whatever...
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 22:00:43
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
In article <46d737b4$0$6492$4c368faf@roadrunner.com >,
"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>
> > ISTR an uproar about some cycling rag cover photo or inside spread
> > a few years ago.
>
> Actually, I think it was a "suggestive" ad of some sort.
>
> Whatever...
At the risk of inappropriateness, I remember getting a (IIRC) Bike
Warehouse catalog back when I was in high school. On one of the pages
there was a picture of an attractive woman holding a Campy seatpost with
the caption "grease before insertion." Even at 16 the innuendo was
glaringly obvious. Sex (or implied sex) sells.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2007 01:51:43
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> ISTR an uproar about some cycling rag cover photo or inside spread
>>> a few years ago.
> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote:
>> Actually, I think it was a "suggestive" ad of some sort.
>> Whatever...
Tim McNamara wrote:
> At the risk of inappropriateness, I remember getting a (IIRC) Bike
> Warehouse catalog back when I was in high school. On one of the pages
> there was a picture of an attractive woman holding a Campy seatpost with
> the caption "grease before insertion." Even at 16 the innuendo was
> glaringly obvious. Sex (or implied sex) sells.
Did you buy it?
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2007 11:08:25
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
In article <13dfeiq8hgt3med@corp.supernews.com >,
A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> >> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >>> ISTR an uproar about some cycling rag cover photo or inside
> >>> spread a few years ago.
>
> > "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote:
> >> Actually, I think it was a "suggestive" ad of some sort.
> >> Whatever...
>
> Tim McNamara wrote:
> > At the risk of inappropriateness, I remember getting a (IIRC) Bike
> > Warehouse catalog back when I was in high school. On one of the
> > pages there was a picture of an attractive woman holding a Campy
> > seatpost with the caption "grease before insertion." Even at 16
> > the innuendo was glaringly obvious. Sex (or implied sex) sells.
>
> Did you buy it?
LOL! Actually, no, I didn't. I guess that sex (or implied sex) doesn't
sell every time!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 20:18:58
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <46d737b4$0$6492$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote:
>
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>
>>> ISTR an uproar about some cycling rag cover photo or inside spread
>>> a few years ago.
>>
>> Actually, I think it was a "suggestive" ad of some sort.
>>
>> Whatever...
>
> At the risk of inappropriateness, I remember getting a (IIRC) Bike
> Warehouse catalog back when I was in high school. On one of the pages
> there was a picture of an attractive woman holding a Campy seatpost
> with the caption "grease before insertion." Even at 16 the innuendo
> was glaringly obvious. Sex (or implied sex) sells.
Definitely funny...and risky I'd think. Hard (!) to imagine that was
inadvertent.
I like unintentionally suggestive things, which is why I often quip "family
newsgroup, buddy" when only *I* would take it that way. Posting a dildo
video is just so...coarse (IMO).
Give me that catalog pic of the man on a bike where the saddle front looks
like his pee-pee any day; THAT is funny (and clean)...
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 16:39:29
From: Marz
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Aug 30, 10:33 am, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me > wrote:
> Marz wrote:
> > On Aug 29, 8:24 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
> >> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
> >>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
> >>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
> >>>> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
> >>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>
> >> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>
> >> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link
> >> to it on a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's
> >> /inappropriate/ and would almost certainly upset (or even anger)
> >> some people.
>
> >> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common
> >> sense and respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not only
> >> who posted it but who's bothering to defend it).
>
> > It has everything to do with USian, as the US is totally f*&ked up
> > when it comes to anything to do with sex. It was a harmless video,
> > funny and on topic and if you felt it was offensive or posted in the
> > wrong place you have problems. Would I have emailed it onto folks at
> > work, hell no, not here in Texas, I'd have been fired on the spot. But
> > it's ok to forward videos containing violence, 'cos they're funny,
> > right!
>
> As usual, you've completely failed to follow the thread. (Requires
> re-reading at this point, due to selective snipping.)
>
> Ask any bike business owner if he or she would send the dildo saddle video
> out to entire customer mailing list. Answer: no.
>
> HTHBKIW (but know it won't)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I thought the problem (and over 50% of this thread) was about your
prudish behaviour and lack of acceptance of a funny video. By trying
to support your own argument by bringing up the point that your
average bike shop wouldn't send out such a video to its customers you
fail to demonstrate why such a video may be inappropriate for a public
forum. This is a public forum and as such, allows for a greater
freedom of expression than allowed within the private enterprise of a
bike shop.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 10:11:48
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Marz wrote:
> On Aug 30, 10:33 am, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>> Marz wrote:
>>> On Aug 29, 8:24 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>
>>>>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>>>>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one
>>>>>> -- to your boss or clients or co-workers?
>>>>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>>
>>>> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>>
>>>> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link
>>>> to it on a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's
>>>> /inappropriate/ and would almost certainly upset (or even anger)
>>>> some people.
>>
>>>> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common
>>>> sense and respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not
>>>> only who posted it but who's bothering to defend it).
>>
>>> It has everything to do with USian, as the US is totally f*&ked up
>>> when it comes to anything to do with sex. It was a harmless video,
>>> funny and on topic and if you felt it was offensive or posted in the
>>> wrong place you have problems. Would I have emailed it onto folks at
>>> work, hell no, not here in Texas, I'd have been fired on the spot.
>>> But it's ok to forward videos containing violence, 'cos they're
>>> funny, right!
>>
>> As usual, you've completely failed to follow the thread. (Requires
>> re-reading at this point, due to selective snipping.)
>>
>> Ask any bike business owner if he or she would send the dildo saddle
>> video out to entire customer mailing list. Answer: no.
>>
>> HTHBKIW (but know it won't)- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I thought the problem (and over 50% of this thread) was about your
> prudish behaviour and lack of acceptance of a funny video. By trying
> to support your own argument by bringing up the point that your
> average bike shop wouldn't send out such a video to its customers you
> fail to demonstrate why such a video may be inappropriate for a public
> forum. This is a public forum and as such, allows for a greater
> freedom of expression than allowed within the private enterprise of a
> bike shop.
As I said, you've failed to follow the thread or comprehend what's been
said.
As usual.
I never even saw the OP (apparently someone I've plonked). I saw a reply or
two, and only when someone asked what "category" it belonged in did I make a
rather innocuous quip about inappropriate NG postings.
Let me try one last thing. Say Claire was reading the NG and clicked on the
link. No big deal (I doubt she'd be offended or even taken aback; or maybe
she might. be). Now say she was sitting with her 10-year-old daughter
reading the NG and clicked on the link. PERHAPS she might not appreciate
her daughter seeing that without some warning or advisory; and PERHAPS she'd
wait to click on it until her daughter wasn't with her (or just not click on
it at all).
Maybe you'd want your kid to see an explicit DILDO VIDEO in a cycling
newsgroup. I'd bet a lot of parents wouldn't, and WOULD want to be told in
advance what the content was.
My cat was quite shocked.
"Prudish behavior" -- ROTFL
BS
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 13:51:33
From: Marz
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Aug 29, 8:24 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me > wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
> > Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
> >> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
> >> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
> > I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>
> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>
> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link to it on
> a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's /inappropriate/ and would
> almost certainly upset (or even anger) some people.
>
> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common sense and
> respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not only who posted it but
> who's bothering to defend it).
It has everything to do with USian, as the US is totally f*&ked up
when it comes to anything to do with sex. It was a harmless video,
funny and on topic and if you felt it was offensive or posted in the
wrong place you have problems. Would I have emailed it onto folks at
work, hell no, not here in Texas, I'd have been fired on the spot. But
it's ok to forward videos containing violence, 'cos they're funny,
right!
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 08:33:50
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Marz wrote:
> On Aug 29, 8:24 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>
>>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
>>>> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
>>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>>
>> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>>
>> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link
>> to it on a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's
>> /inappropriate/ and would almost certainly upset (or even anger)
>> some people.
>>
>> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common
>> sense and respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not only
>> who posted it but who's bothering to defend it).
>
> It has everything to do with USian, as the US is totally f*&ked up
> when it comes to anything to do with sex. It was a harmless video,
> funny and on topic and if you felt it was offensive or posted in the
> wrong place you have problems. Would I have emailed it onto folks at
> work, hell no, not here in Texas, I'd have been fired on the spot. But
> it's ok to forward videos containing violence, 'cos they're funny,
> right!
As usual, you've completely failed to follow the thread. (Requires
re-reading at this point, due to selective snipping.)
Ask any bike business owner if he or she would send the dildo saddle video
out to entire customer mailing list. Answer: no.
HTHBKIW (but know it won't)
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 13:45:34
From: zencycle
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Aug 29, 1:00 am, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me > wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one -- to your
> boss or clients or co-workers?
>
Some bosses I've had would have sent it to me. Lighten up bill,
there's worse things in this world - even this forum - to worry about
than some chick getting 'bicycle smile'. Take the racism posts for
example. A link to a youtube video has you upset, yet you're willing
to put up with hate-speech posts? Get over it, learn to laugh once in
a while, ya buzzkill.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 08:38:24
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
zencycle wrote:
> On Aug 29, 1:00 am, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
>> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
>>
>
> Some bosses I've had would have sent it to me. Lighten up bill,
> there's worse things in this world - even this forum - to worry about
> than some chick getting 'bicycle smile'. Take the racism posts for
> example. A link to a youtube video has you upset, yet you're willing
> to put up with hate-speech posts? Get over it, learn to laugh once in
> a while, ya buzzkill.
A) I'm not upset. B) If you hadn't DELETED the context, I simply made a
quip about what "category" the post belonged. C) Not sure what hate-speech
posts you seem to think I "put up with" -- there's a lot to /ignore/ on this
and other newsgroups; I probably did just that.
Otherwise, your anonymous snipe was spot-on.
BS
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 22:13:25
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Doug Taylor wrote:
> But others may have ulterior motives:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
All that hair causes excess drag, and she need clipless pedals to keep
her feet attached.
--
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: 01 Sep 2007 13:48:39
From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
"Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@iinvalid.com > wrote in message
news:46d4d848$0$19694$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
> Doug Taylor wrote:
>> But others may have ulterior motives:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
>
> All that hair causes excess drag, and she need clipless pedals to keep her
> feet attached.
>
> --
> 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
>
Since she shaved her legs, that would compensate for loss of aero, no?
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 19:59:42
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:30:08 -0400, Doug Taylor
<dtaylor@dreamscape.com > wrote:
>But others may have ulterior motives:
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
It exposes one danger for those seeking the true bicycle path.
Had she been riding as street traffic her mind would have been unable
to lose focus.
Certainly she exhibited the perfect connectedness between ones
inner-self and their machine and the rhythm of the road.
But, this student wasn't mindful of being in the outer world.
The lamp post abruptly taught her that lesson and she was immediately
enlightened.
It's always amazing the way a bicycle can transport you to places
you'd least expected.
--
zk
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 22:12:29
From: Carl Sundquist
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
"Zoot Katz" <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote in message
news:2j27d3d3mvvm7v00v997lsquua2hokmj97@4ax.com...
>
> The lamp post abruptly taught her that lesson and she was immediately
> enlightened.
Nice pun.
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 02:10:04
From: me
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:30:08 -0400, Doug Taylor wrote:
> But others may have ulterior motives:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
Love it! I just want to know, what was that comment from the passenger in
the car?
Something along the lines of the matronly woman in "when Harry Met Sally"
"I'll have whatever she's having" perhaps?
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 21:53:40
From: Kurt Isane
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
me schrieb am Dienstag, 28. August 2007 04:10:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:30:08 -0400, Doug Taylor wrote:
>
>> But others may have ulterior motives:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
>
>
> Love it! I just want to know, what was that comment from the passenger in
> the car?
The old woman says: "The next time we take our bicycle again"
> Something along the lines of the matronly woman in "when Harry Met Sally"
> "I'll have whatever she's having" perhaps?
--
Kurt Isane
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 17:19:51
From: Luke
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
In article <ptu5d3hqljhpog3kaipff81a6pf4q38upg@4ax.com >, Doug Taylor
<dtaylor@dreamscape.com > wrote:
> But others may have ulterior motives:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
Well so much for the two minute drill, she finished in about a minute!
Why the rush?
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 19:20:41
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Luke wrote:
:: In article <ptu5d3hqljhpog3kaipff81a6pf4q38upg@4ax.com >, Doug Taylor
:: <dtaylor@dreamscape.com > wrote:
::
::: But others may have ulterior motives:
:::
::: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
::
:: Well so much for the two minute drill, she finished in about a
:: minute! Why the rush?
Didn't you see that traffic light?
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 12:23:20
From: andresmuro@aol.com
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Aug 27, 10:30 am, Doug Taylor <dtay...@dreamscape.com > wrote:
> But others may have ulterior motives:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
She needs a stationary trainer.
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 19:10:49
From: landotter
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Aug 27, 11:30 am, Doug Taylor <dtay...@dreamscape.com > wrote:
> But others may have ulterior motives:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
I believe her saddle position is much too high causing her hips to
rock. She seems to be in terrible discomfort, poor thing.
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 16:56:44
From: (PeteCresswell)
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Per landotter:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
It's gotta be part of an advertisement for something or other.
Anybody know what?
--
PeteCresswell
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 16:24:32
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per landotter:
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
Didn't Doug Taylor post that? (I plonked him AND the land-rat, so only
going by Andre's reply.)
> It's gotta be part of an advertisement for something or other.
>
> Anybody know what?
Inappropriate posting to Usenet newsgroups? (There was also the "dildo
saddle" a few weeks ago, equally if not more unsuitable for a public forum.)
Whatever...
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 21:41:52
From: Doug Taylor
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:24:32 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me >
wrote:
>(PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Per landotter:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
>
>Didn't Doug Taylor post that? (I plonked him AND the land-rat, so only
>going by Andre's reply.)
>
>> It's gotta be part of an advertisement for something or other.
>>
>> Anybody know what?
>
>Inappropriate posting to Usenet newsgroups? (There was also the "dildo
>saddle" a few weeks ago, equally if not more unsuitable for a public forum.)
>
>Whatever...
Hey Billy Club: Get over yourself, why don't you? Else we might
wonder if you are just another repressed Larry Craig or Tom Foley.
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 22:38:45
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Per landotter:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
>
> Didn't Doug Taylor post that? (I plonked him AND the land-rat, so only
> going by Andre's reply.)
>
>> It's gotta be part of an advertisement for something or other.
>>
>> Anybody know what?
>
> Inappropriate posting to Usenet newsgroups? (There was also the "dildo
> saddle" a few weeks ago, equally if not more unsuitable for a public forum.)
>
> Whatever...
Why is sex bad and violence good in USian culture?
--
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: 28 Aug 2007 22:00:35
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>>> Per landotter:
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
>>
>> Didn't Doug Taylor post that? (I plonked him AND the land-rat, so
>> only going by Andre's reply.)
>>
>>> It's gotta be part of an advertisement for something or other.
>>>
>>> Anybody know what?
>>
>> Inappropriate posting to Usenet newsgroups? (There was also the
>> "dildo saddle" a few weeks ago, equally if not more unsuitable for a
>> public forum.) Whatever...
> Why is sex bad and violence good in USian culture?
Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one -- to your
boss or clients or co-workers?
Otherwise, nice troll.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 19:58:41
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>>>> Per landotter:
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf8O1GXI5Sc
>>> Didn't Doug Taylor post that? (I plonked him AND the land-rat, so
>>> only going by Andre's reply.)
>>>
>>>> It's gotta be part of an advertisement for something or other.
>>>>
>>>> Anybody know what?
>>> Inappropriate posting to Usenet newsgroups? (There was also the
>>> "dildo saddle" a few weeks ago, equally if not more unsuitable for a
>>> public forum.) Whatever...
>
>> Why is sex bad and violence good in USian culture?
>
> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one -- to your
> boss or clients or co-workers?
I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me. However, I
would be offended if someone sent me a violent video with the intent to
be humorous.
I would not send ANYTHING non-work related with my work email account.
> Otherwise, nice troll.
No, it is silly for anyone to be offended by the video that is the topic
of this thread.
Maybe Sorni was offended by the woman not wearing a foam bicycle hat? ;)
--
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: 29 Aug 2007 18:24:34
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
>> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link to it on
a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's /inappropriate/ and would
almost certainly upset (or even anger) some people.
Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common sense and
respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not only who posted it but
who's bothering to defend it).
Again, I only commented in the form of a quip when someone basically gave me
a straight line, like "under what category does this belong?" and I replied
"inappropriate postings to newsgroups". It wasn't that big a deal.
Whoever said it about you was right: you'll argue ANYTHING just to be
disagreeable.
BS (not really)
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 21:12:53
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>
>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
>>> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
>
>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>
> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>
> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link to it on
> a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's /inappropriate/ and would
> almost certainly upset (or even anger) some people.
It would be silly to get upset or angry over the video. There is nothing
morally wrong or inherently offensive about a woman masturbating by way
of a bicycle.
> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common sense and
> respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not only who posted it but
> who's bothering to defend it).
In a sensible society, no one would find the video offensive.
What about the people that often insert quips that are offensive (like
an importer of Chinese titanium bicycles that used to post here)?
> Again, I only commented in the form of a quip when someone basically gave me
> a straight line, like "under what category does this belong?" and I replied
> "inappropriate postings to newsgroups". It wasn't that big a deal.
Granted, it should have been in just rec.bicycles.misc, not
rec.bicycles.tech and rec.bicycles.soc.
It some newsgroups the link to the video would have been on-topic, and
therefore appropriate.
> Whoever said it about you was right: you'll argue ANYTHING just to be
> disagreeable.
butbutbut, arguing is fun and entertains Andres Muro!
--
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: 29 Aug 2007 21:35:01
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>>
>>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
>>>> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
>>
>>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>>
>> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>>
>> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link
>> to it on a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's
>> /inappropriate/ and would almost certainly upset (or even anger)
>> some people.
>
> It would be silly to get upset or angry over the video. There is
> nothing morally wrong or inherently offensive about a woman
> masturbating by way of a bicycle.
Well hell then, let's send it to some church groups and the PTA. Hey, why
not the Girl Scouts -- they gotta learn about this /some/ day. (Some of 'em
even ride bikes!)
>> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common
>> sense and respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not only
>> who posted it but who's bothering to defend it).
> In a sensible society, no one would find the video offensive.
Same goes for the Dildo one?
Tell you what: ask ANY of the shop owners on these newsgroups if they'd
send either video out to their mailing lists. Guess what? They WOULDN'T,
because many of their customers would not appreciate being sent something
like that without warning or consent.
(Also, of course, if someone you usually oppose posted it, /you'd/ be saying
it was inappropriate. And for once (!) you'd be right.)
> What about the people that often insert quips that are offensive (like
> an importer of Chinese titanium bicycles that used to post here)?
What about them? Floggittodeathlinson drove one of them out of here with
non-stop, unfair and dishonest character assassination.
That was weak, even for you.
>> Again, I only commented in the form of a quip when someone basically
>> gave me a straight line, like "under what category does this
>> belong?" and I replied "inappropriate postings to newsgroups". It
>> wasn't that big a deal.
> Granted, it should have been in just rec.bicycles.misc, not
> rec.bicycles.tech and rec.bicycles.soc.
>
> It some newsgroups the link to the video would have been on-topic, and
> therefore appropriate.
So let's post vids of women getting off on bib shorts and tires and
handlebars. Hey, it's /on topic/...
>> Whoever said it about you was right: you'll argue ANYTHING just to
>> be disagreeable.
>
> butbutbut, arguing is fun and entertains Andres Muro!
Whatever...
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 00:01:17
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>>>>> Would you send this video -- or the much more explicit dildo one --
>>>>> to your boss or clients or co-workers?
>>>> I would NOT be offended if someone sent this video to me.
>>> Nor would I. That's not what I asked you.
>>>
>>> I'm not offended by pornography, either. However, I would not link
>>> to it on a cycling newsgroup (or work e-mail)because it's
>>> /inappropriate/ and would almost certainly upset (or even anger)
>>> some people.
>> It would be silly to get upset or angry over the video. There is
>> nothing morally wrong or inherently offensive about a woman
>> masturbating by way of a bicycle.
>
> Well hell then, let's send it to some church groups and the PTA. Hey, why
> not the Girl Scouts -- they gotta learn about this /some/ day. (Some of 'em
> even ride bikes!)
The church groups could use some lightening up, as could the PTA.
My real dislike of Bill Clinton came when he fired Joycelyn Elders for
saying ""I think that it [masturbation] is part of human sexuality, and
perhaps it should be taught" (as an alternative to riskier forms of
sexual activity).
>>> Has nothing to do with "USian" anything. Has to do with common
>>> sense and respect for others' sensibilities (which explains not only
>>> who posted it but who's bothering to defend it).
>
>> In a sensible society, no one would find the video offensive.
>
> Same goes for the Dildo one?
If it were not for prudish hysteria, what would be the big deal about
dildos?
> Tell you what: ask ANY of the shop owners on these newsgroups if they'd
> send either video out to their mailing lists. Guess what? They WOULDN'T,
> because many of their customers would not appreciate being sent something
> like that without warning or consent.
So?
> (Also, of course, if someone you usually oppose posted it, /you'd/ be saying
> it was inappropriate. And for once (!) you'd be right.)
Nonsense. Stop the projection behavior.
>> What about the people that often insert quips that are offensive (like
>> an importer of Chinese titanium bicycles that used to post here)?
>
> What about them? Floggittodeathlinson drove one of them out of here with
> non-stop, unfair and dishonest character assassination.
If you want to complain about inappropriate postings...
> That was weak, even for you.
>
>>> Again, I only commented in the form of a quip when someone basically
>>> gave me a straight line, like "under what category does this
>>> belong?" and I replied "inappropriate postings to newsgroups". It
>>> wasn't that big a deal.
>
>> Granted, it should have been in just rec.bicycles.misc, not
>> rec.bicycles.tech and rec.bicycles.soc.
>>
>> It some newsgroups the link to the video would have been on-topic, and
>> therefore appropriate.
>
> So let's post vids of women getting off on bib shorts and tires and
> handlebars. Hey, it's /on topic/...
NO! NO! NO! rec.bicycles.* are NOT binary groups.
Posting links to such videos wound not bother me (actually kinda cool if
the women were attractive).
>>> Whoever said it about you was right: you'll argue ANYTHING just to
>>> be disagreeable.
>> butbutbut, arguing is fun and entertains Andres Muro!
>
> Whatever...
Yep, Sorni never participates in the long, drawn out flame-war threads. ;)
--
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: 30 Aug 2007 00:45:46
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: I ride my bicycle to ride my bicycle
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>> Tell you what: ask ANY of the shop owners on these newsgroups if
>> they'd send either video out to their mailing lists. Guess what? They
>> WOULDN'T, because many of their customers would not appreciate
>> being sent something like that without warning or consent.
> So?
TYVM.
|
|
