nitram

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:36:25 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >The Reids writes:
    >> I put the question to a photo group (colour filtering post image
    >> capture) on Friday, one person bothered to say "yes, of course
    >> its fine", nobody else could be bothered to comment.
    >Photo groups don't understand it any better than anyone else.

Another over generalisation?
--
Martin

JohnT

"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > The Reids writes:
    >> I put the question to a photo group (colour filtering post image
    >> capture) on Friday, one person bothered to say "yes, of course
    >> its fine", nobody else could be bothered to comment.
    > Photo groups don't understand it any better than anyone else.
Here in England, there have been occasions when a highly-regarded (by some)
manager/coach has been appointed to a football club and the club has then gone
into steep decline. This prompted the expression (used by players within the
club) to any new manager who was an unknown quantity - "show us your medals". On
this subject, and on various others, you make statements which brook no argument
and there is never any possibility in your own mind that any other opinion may
have validity. I don't think that I am the only one who views your perorations
here as akin to you pulling out the pin and throwing the hand grenade
vertically. But I do accept that I may be wrong, so please show us your medals.

JohnT

Magda

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:59:22 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
electrons, so they looked like this :

... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:53:37 +0000, The Reids
... <[email protected]> wrote:
...
... >Following up to Mxsmanic
... >
... >>> You *still* haven't explained anything here, just wined on about how tired
... >>> you are of (not) doing it.
... >>
... >>Yes, I know.
... >
... >I put the question to a photo group (colour filtering post image
... >capture) on Friday, one person bothered to say "yes, of course
... >its fine", nobody else could be bothered to comment.
... >But the thread does prove one thing, Mixi is a troll, but we knew
... >that. The question is, is the current version entertaining?
...
... He is not a troll, he is just Mixi.

Just because he is a regular troll, and has been so for years, he is not a lesser troll !

nitram

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:58:12 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >[email protected] writes:
    >> How about your opinion/illusion that all French CEOs live in broom
    >> cupboard?
    >I've never expressed or held that opinion.

You most certainly did, I leave it to somebody else to retrieve the
post where you said it.
--
Martin

nitram

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:15:35 +0100, Magda
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:59:22 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
    >electrons, so they looked like this :
    > ... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:53:37 +0000, The Reids
    > ... <[email protected]> wrote:
    > ...
    > ... >Following up to Mxsmanic
    > ... >
    > ... >>> You *still* haven't explained anything here, just wined on about how tired
    > ... >>> you are of (not) doing it.
    > ... >>
    > ... >>Yes, I know.
    > ... >
    > ... >I put the question to a photo group (colour filtering post image
    > ... >capture) on Friday, one person bothered to say "yes, of course
    > ... >its fine", nobody else could be bothered to comment.
    > ... >But the thread does prove one thing, Mixi is a troll, but we knew
    > ... >that. The question is, is the current version entertaining?
    > ...
    > ... He is not a troll, he is just Mixi.
    >Just because he is a regular troll, and has been so for years, he is not a lesser troll !

I don't think Mixi's motive is to troll, maybe it looks like it to
those who disagree with him.

--
Martin

Magda

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:30:13 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
electrons, so they looked like this :

... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:15:35 +0100, Magda
... <[email protected]> wrote:
...
... >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:59:22 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
... >electrons, so they looked like this :
... >
... > ... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:53:37 +0000, The Reids
... > ... <[email protected]> wrote:
... > ...
... > ... >Following up to Mxsmanic
... > ... >
... > ... >>> You *still* haven't explained anything here, just wined on about how tired
... > ... >>> you are of (not) doing it.
... > ... >>
... > ... >>Yes, I know.
... > ... >
... > ... >I put the question to a photo group (colour filtering post image
... > ... >capture) on Friday, one person bothered to say "yes, of course
... > ... >its fine", nobody else could be bothered to comment.
... > ... >But the thread does prove one thing, Mixi is a troll, but we knew
... > ... >that. The question is, is the current version entertaining?
... > ...
... > ... He is not a troll, he is just Mixi.
... >
... >Just because he is a regular troll, and has been so for years, he is not a lesser troll !
...
... I don't think Mixi's motive is to troll, maybe it looks like it to
... those who disagree with him.

You mistyped "those with whom he disagrees". That's about 6.5 billion people at the
moment.

Mxsmanic

[email protected] writes:

    > Another over generalisation?

No, just a simple observation. I've explained this to photographers
many times, but they don't understand it any better than anyone else.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Mxsmanic

JohnT writes:

    > Here in England, there have been occasions when a highly-regarded (by some)
    > manager/coach has been appointed to a football club and the club has then gone
    > into steep decline. This prompted the expression (used by players within the
    > club) to any new manager who was an unknown quantity - "show us your medals". On
    > this subject, and on various others, you make statements which brook no argument
    > and there is never any possibility in your own mind that any other opinion may
    > have validity. I don't think that I am the only one who views your perorations
    > here as akin to you pulling out the pin and throwing the hand grenade
    > vertically. But I do accept that I may be wrong, so please show us your medals.

Instead of asking for credentials, why not just read what I say and
evaluate that on its own merit? I explain things. You can decide
whether the explanation makes sense or not yourself.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

nitram

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:37:14 +0100, Magda
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:30:13 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
    >electrons, so they looked like this :
    > ... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:15:35 +0100, Magda
    > ... <[email protected]> wrote:
    > ...
    > ... >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:59:22 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
    > ... >electrons, so they looked like this :
    > ... >
    > ... > ... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:53:37 +0000, The Reids
    > ... > ... <[email protected]> wrote:
    > ... > ...
    > ... > ... >Following up to Mxsmanic
    > ... > ... >
    > ... > ... >>> You *still* haven't explained anything here, just wined on about how tired
    > ... > ... >>> you are of (not) doing it.
    > ... > ... >>
    > ... > ... >>Yes, I know.
    > ... > ... >
    > ... > ... >I put the question to a photo group (colour filtering post image
    > ... > ... >capture) on Friday, one person bothered to say "yes, of course
    > ... > ... >its fine", nobody else could be bothered to comment.
    > ... > ... >But the thread does prove one thing, Mixi is a troll, but we knew
    > ... > ... >that. The question is, is the current version entertaining?
    > ... > ...
    > ... > ... He is not a troll, he is just Mixi.
    > ... >
    > ... >Just because he is a regular troll, and has been so for years, he is not a lesser troll !
    > ...
    > ... I don't think Mixi's motive is to troll, maybe it looks like it to
    > ... those who disagree with him.
    >You mistyped "those with whom he disagrees". That's about 6.5 billion people at the
    >moment.

Don't be unfair. About 50% of the time I agree with him.
--
Martin

Mxsmanic

[email protected] writes:

    > You most certainly did, I leave it to somebody else to retrieve the
    > post where you said it.

There is no such post.

In fact, the only two posts in USENET that contain the words "broom
cupboard" and were written by me were two posts in which I was
backquoting you.

In the part of the world where I grew up, we don't have or talk about
broom cupboards, so even were I inclined to speak in that figurative
way, it's not an expression that I'd be likely to use.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Magda

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:41:13 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
electrons, so they looked like this :

... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:37:14 +0100, Magda
... <[email protected]> wrote:
...
... >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:30:13 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
... >electrons, so they looked like this :
... >
... > ... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:15:35 +0100, Magda
... > ... <[email protected]> wrote:
... > ...
... > ... >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:59:22 +0100, in rec.travel.europe, [email protected] arranged some
... > ... >electrons, so they looked like this :
... > ... >
... > ... > ... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:53:37 +0000, The Reids
... > ... > ... <[email protected]> wrote:
... > ... > ...
... > ... > ... >Following up to Mxsmanic
... > ... > ... >
... > ... > ... >>> You *still* haven't explained anything here, just wined on about how tired
... > ... > ... >>> you are of (not) doing it.
... > ... > ... >>
... > ... > ... >>Yes, I know.
... > ... > ... >
... > ... > ... >I put the question to a photo group (colour filtering post image
... > ... > ... >capture) on Friday, one person bothered to say "yes, of course
... > ... > ... >its fine", nobody else could be bothered to comment.
... > ... > ... >But the thread does prove one thing, Mixi is a troll, but we knew
... > ... > ... >that. The question is, is the current version entertaining?
... > ... > ...
... > ... > ... He is not a troll, he is just Mixi.
... > ... >
... > ... >Just because he is a regular troll, and has been so for years, he is not a lesser troll !
... > ...
... > ... I don't think Mixi's motive is to troll, maybe it looks like it to
... > ... those who disagree with him.
... >
... >You mistyped "those with whom he disagrees". That's about 6.5 billion people at the
... >moment.
...
... Don't be unfair. About 50% of the time I agree with him.

It does not mean that he agrees with you.

If you do agree with him, he will find a way to prove you wrong.

nitram

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:43:11 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >[email protected] writes:
    >> You most certainly did, I leave it to somebody else to retrieve the
    >> post where you said it.
    >There is no such post.
    >In fact, the only two posts in USENET that contain the words "broom
    >cupboard" and were written by me were two posts in which I was
    >backquoting you.

So you did understand my use of the term?

    >In the part of the world where I grew up, we don't have or talk about
    >broom cupboards, so even were I inclined to speak in that figurative
    >way, it's not an expression that I'd be likely to use.

You claim to live in what is sometimes referred to as a broom
cupboard, you said that French CEO's live in similar poverty and in
similar sized dwellings to you.
--
Martin

Mxsmanic

[email protected] writes:

    > So you did understand my use of the term?

No, I simply never used it myself, in contrast to your claim. A classic
example of projection.

    > You claim to live in what is sometimes referred to as a broom
    > cupboard, you said that French CEO's live in similar poverty and in
    > similar sized dwellings to you.

Where did I say that French CEOs have accommodations similar to mine?

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Keith Willshaw

"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > JohnT writes:
    >> Here in England, there have been occasions when a highly-regarded (by
    >> some)
    >> manager/coach has been appointed to a football club and the club has then
    >> gone
    >> into steep decline. This prompted the expression (used by players within
    >> the
    >> club) to any new manager who was an unknown quantity - "show us your
    >> medals". On
    >> this subject, and on various others, you make statements which brook no
    >> argument
    >> and there is never any possibility in your own mind that any other
    >> opinion may
    >> have validity. I don't think that I am the only one who views your
    >> perorations
    >> here as akin to you pulling out the pin and throwing the hand grenade
    >> vertically. But I do accept that I may be wrong, so please show us your
    >> medals.
    > Instead of asking for credentials, why not just read what I say and
    > evaluate that on its own merit?

We have

    > I explain things. You can decide
    > whether the explanation makes sense or not yourself.

It doesnt.

Keith

JohnT

"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > JohnT writes:
    >> Here in England, there have been occasions when a highly-regarded (by some)
    >> manager/coach has been appointed to a football club and the club has then
    >> gone
    >> into steep decline. This prompted the expression (used by players within the
    >> club) to any new manager who was an unknown quantity - "show us your medals".
    >> On
    >> this subject, and on various others, you make statements which brook no
    >> argument
    >> and there is never any possibility in your own mind that any other opinion
    >> may
    >> have validity. I don't think that I am the only one who views your
    >> perorations
    >> here as akin to you pulling out the pin and throwing the hand grenade
    >> vertically. But I do accept that I may be wrong, so please show us your
    >> medals.
    > Instead of asking for credentials, why not just read what I say and
    > evaluate that on its own merit? I explain things. You can decide
    > whether the explanation makes sense or not yourself.
I have done so. You expound on many subjects about which I have little or no
knowledge. Problem is that on most of those subjects I think I know at least as
much as you do. Your reply to my question does nothing to reassure me that you
do know anything about anything.

JohnT