| |
Main
Date: 08 Aug 2007 14:23:30
From: andresmuro@aol.com
Subject: jim beam vs the world
|
I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
afternoons.
Thx,
Andres
|
|
| |
Date: 11 Aug 2007 19:14:02
From: KF
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Aug 11, 3:41 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net > wrote:
> Neither jb nor JB (let's keep them straight) are trolls. Contentious
> and argumentative at times, yes, but not trolls.
Yes, and for that reason both are equally valuable.
I neither like nor dislike either one, nor will I automatically accept
or deny either's opinion.
But there there is nothing I despise more than the attitude of "I
have *data* on subject x, therefor my *opinion* on subject y is not
refutable."
JB is the king of this. The worst part is he apparently is not even
aware of when he switches into this mode.
DR
|
| |
Date: 11 Aug 2007 17:20:35
From:
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Aug 10, 2:58 pm, Fritz <kh6...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 14:23:30 -0700, "andresm...@aol.com"
>
> <andresm...@aol.com> wrote:
> >I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
> >which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
> >Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
> >find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
> >between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
> >wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
> >call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
> >afternoons.
>
> >Thx,
>
> >Andres
>
> We love Jim Beam. Don't change a thing! UDAMAN!
Agreed. If there were no "Jim Beam" we would have to invent him.
Nigel Grinter
Well-Spoken Wheels Inc.
(wellspokenwheels.com)
|
| | |
Date: 11 Aug 2007 17:50:10
From: !Jones
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:20:35 -0000, in rec.bicycles.tech
ngrinter@aol.com wrote:
>Agreed. If there were no "Jim Beam" we would have to invent him.
All newsgroups *must* have one or more trolls; it's required by the
charter.
|
| | | |
Date: 11 Aug 2007 18:38:10
From: RBrickston
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
In article <8ktrb3ps0lb62ahjqdml0e6tiot6qaj86o@4ax.com >, piss@off.com
says...
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:20:35 -0000, in rec.bicycles.tech
> ngrinter@aol.com wrote:
>
> >Agreed. If there were no "Jim Beam" we would have to invent him.
>
> All newsgroups *must* have one or more trolls; it's required by the
> charter.
>
>
>
You must be talking about this thread's originator, not JB.
|
| | | | |
Date: 11 Aug 2007 18:23:41
From: !Jones
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:38:10 GMT, in rec.bicycles.tech RBrickston
<rb20170REMOVE@yahoo.com > wrote:
>In article <8ktrb3ps0lb62ahjqdml0e6tiot6qaj86o@4ax.com>, piss@off.com
>says...
>> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:20:35 -0000, in rec.bicycles.tech
>> ngrinter@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> >Agreed. If there were no "Jim Beam" we would have to invent him.
>>
>> All newsgroups *must* have one or more trolls; it's required by the
>> charter.
>>
>You must be talking about this thread's originator, not JB.
Not talkin' 'bout anybody.
|
| | | | |
Date: 11 Aug 2007 16:41:23
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
In article <MPG.2127cc1b5cab6ebc989824@news.verizon.net >,
RBrickston <rb20170REMOVE@yahoo.com > wrote:
> In article <8ktrb3ps0lb62ahjqdml0e6tiot6qaj86o@4ax.com>, piss@off.com
> says...
> > On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:20:35 -0000, in rec.bicycles.tech
> > ngrinter@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > >Agreed. If there were no "Jim Beam" we would have to invent him.
> >
> > All newsgroups *must* have one or more trolls; it's required by the
> > charter.
> >
> You must be talking about this thread's originator, not JB.
Neither jb nor JB (let's keep them straight) are trolls. Contentious
and argumentative at times, yes, but not trolls.
|
| |
Date: 10 Aug 2007 12:58:44
From: Fritz
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 14:23:30 -0700, "andresmuro@aol.com"
<andresmuro@aol.com > wrote:
>I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
>which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
>Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
>find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
>between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
>wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
>call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
>afternoons.
>
>Thx,
>
>Andres
We love Jim Beam. Don't change a thing! UDAMAN!
|
| | |
Date: 11 Aug 2007 20:42:02
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
In article
<hjgpb3d8uq9uaubjti8etlgh3dmhm6kh7v@4ax.com >,
Fritz <kh6zv9@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 14:23:30 -0700, "andresmuro@aol.com"
> <andresmuro@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
> >which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
> >Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
> >find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
> >between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
> >wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
> >call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
> >afternoons.
>
> We love Jim Beam. Don't change a thing! UDAMAN!
That is spelled `jim beam.'
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 10 Aug 2007 05:25:45
From: D'ohBoy
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
> >> you don't need me son - you can have plenty of fun on your own account.
> >> simply pick a bullshitter, then call them on it.
> >>
> >> works much better if they're bullshitting on a subject on which you
> >> happen to have expertise. if they're retarded enough to keep
> >> bullshitting in defense, that's just gravy.
> >
Can't bullshit a bullshitter, can ya?
;D
D'ohBoy
|
| | |
Date: 10 Aug 2007 06:01:21
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
D'ohBoy wrote:
>>>> you don't need me son - you can have plenty of fun on your own account.
>>>> simply pick a bullshitter, then call them on it.
>>>>
>>>> works much better if they're bullshitting on a subject on which you
>>>> happen to have expertise. if they're retarded enough to keep
>>>> bullshitting in defense, that's just gravy.
>
> Can't bullshit a bullshitter, can ya?
of course you can! if someone knows their subject, they don't have to
bullshit and in turn, they're not susceptible to it. but since a
bullshitter doesn't know what they're talking about, there's knowledge
gaps into which you can feed them all kinds of crap when presented artfully.
|
| |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 19:55:27
From: andresmuro@aol.com
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Aug 9, 8:15 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <j72dnRpTkd7PHyfbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hn...@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> >> andresm...@aol.com wrote:
> >>> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
> >>> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
> >>> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
> >>> find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
> >>> between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
> >>> wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
> >>> call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
> >>> afternoons.
>
> >>> Thx,
>
> >>> Andres
>
> >> you don't need me son - you can have plenty of fun on your own account.
> >> simply pick a bullshitter, then call them on it.
>
> >> works much better if they're bullshitting on a subject on which you
> >> happen to have expertise. if they're retarded enough to keep
> >> bullshitting in defense, that's just gravy.
>
> > Suppose someone chose you. How would you know?
>
> the day i start pulling metal fatigue solutions out of my ass [or start
> spewing other underinformed bullshit like "dye penetrant proves
> anodizing causes rim cracking" for example] then i'm fair game.
Ahhhh, yes! See, that is what I am talking about. Please give us more.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 20:26:47
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
> On Aug 9, 8:15 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <j72dnRpTkd7PHyfbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hn...@speakeasy.net>,
>>> jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>> andresm...@aol.com wrote:
>>>>> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
>>>>> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
>>>>> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
>>>>> find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
>>>>> between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
>>>>> wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
>>>>> call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
>>>>> afternoons.
>>>>> Thx,
>>>>> Andres
>>>> you don't need me son - you can have plenty of fun on your own account.
>>>> simply pick a bullshitter, then call them on it.
>>>> works much better if they're bullshitting on a subject on which you
>>>> happen to have expertise. if they're retarded enough to keep
>>>> bullshitting in defense, that's just gravy.
>>> Suppose someone chose you. How would you know?
>> the day i start pulling metal fatigue solutions out of my ass [or start
>> spewing other underinformed bullshit like "dye penetrant proves
>> anodizing causes rim cracking" for example] then i'm fair game.
>
> Ahhhh, yes! See, that is what I am talking about. Please give us more.
>
get a life andres.
|
| |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 22:09:13
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Aug 8, 3:23 pm, "andresm...@aol.com" <andresm...@aol.com > wrote:
> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
> find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
> between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
> wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
> call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
> afternoons.
>
> Thx,
>
> Andres
Some of the responses are priceless.......
|
| |
Date: 08 Aug 2007 19:56:17
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
> find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
> between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
> wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
> call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
> afternoons.
>
> Thx,
>
> Andres
>
you don't need me son - you can have plenty of fun on your own account.
simply pick a bullshitter, then call them on it.
works much better if they're bullshitting on a subject on which you
happen to have expertise. if they're retarded enough to keep
bullshitting in defense, that's just gravy.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 20:25:09
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
In article
<j72dnRpTkd7PHyfbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
> > I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
> > which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
> > Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
> > find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
> > between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
> > wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
> > call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
> > afternoons.
> >
> > Thx,
> >
> > Andres
> >
>
> you don't need me son - you can have plenty of fun on your own account.
> simply pick a bullshitter, then call them on it.
>
> works much better if they're bullshitting on a subject on which you
> happen to have expertise. if they're retarded enough to keep
> bullshitting in defense, that's just gravy.
Suppose someone chose you. How would you know?
--
Michael Press
|
| | | |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 19:15:00
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <j72dnRpTkd7PHyfbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
>>> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
>>> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
>>> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
>>> find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
>>> between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
>>> wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
>>> call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
>>> afternoons.
>>>
>>> Thx,
>>>
>>> Andres
>>>
>> you don't need me son - you can have plenty of fun on your own account.
>> simply pick a bullshitter, then call them on it.
>>
>> works much better if they're bullshitting on a subject on which you
>> happen to have expertise. if they're retarded enough to keep
>> bullshitting in defense, that's just gravy.
>
> Suppose someone chose you. How would you know?
>
the day i start pulling metal fatigue solutions out of my ass [or start
spewing other underinformed bullshit like "dye penetrant proves
anodizing causes rim cracking" for example] then i'm fair game.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 13:47:09
From: Doug Taylor
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 19:56:17 -0700, jim beam
<spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
>andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
>> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
>> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
>> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
>> find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
>> between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
>> wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
>> call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
>> afternoons.
>>
>> Thx,
>>
>> Andres
>>
>
>you don't need me son - you can have plenty of fun on your own account.
> simply pick a bullshitter, then call them on it.
>
>works much better if they're bullshitting on a subject on which you
>happen to have expertise. if they're retarded enough to keep
>bullshitting in defense, that's just gravy.
Not trying to sound like a suck up, but I have learned more of value
from JB than most of the other so called experts around here.
The background entertainment is just an added plus.
|
| |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 08:45:35
From: Michael Warner
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 14:23:30 -0700, andresmuro@aol.com wrote:
> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons.
Sounds like you need a career change.
|
| |
Date: 08 Aug 2007 16:10:38
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
On Aug 8, 2:23 pm, "andresm...@aol.com" <andresm...@aol.com > wrote:
> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
> find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
> between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
> wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
> call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
> afternoons.
>
> Thx,
>
> Andres
Jim seems to have mellowed of late. He seems to be making more sense.
Maybe because Jobst han't been posting as much, Jim doesn't feel
compelled to disagree for the sake of disagreeing.
Jim is free to disagree with me.
|
| | |
Date: 08 Aug 2007 18:39:34
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: jim beam vs the world
|
Hank Wirtz wrote:
> On Aug 8, 2:23 pm, "andresm...@aol.com" <andresm...@aol.com> wrote:
>> I am bored right now, so I was searching for the latest messages in
>> which jb argues with everyone and then ends up calling people names.
>> Those threads are kind of fun during long afternoons. I didn't seem to
>> find anything today. I was wondering if there weren't any arguments
>> between jb and others today that I may have missed. Also, jb, I was
>> wondering if you could argue, at least daily, with a few people and
>> call them names. That will provide some amusement during slow
>> afternoons.
>>
>> Thx,
>>
>> Andres
>
> Jim seems to have mellowed of late. He seems to be making more sense.
> Maybe because Jobst han't been posting as much, Jim doesn't feel
> compelled to disagree for the sake of disagreeing.
Isn't Jobst off on his annual alpine cycling vacation?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
