Discussion:
TDF and FIA
(too old to reply)
CS
2017-07-05 07:51:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
FB
2017-07-05 11:23:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
coincidence or not, it happened in Vittel...

FB
Brian W Lawrence
2017-07-05 12:26:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Heron McKeister
2017-07-05 12:34:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Brian W Lawrence
2017-07-05 12:51:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Heron McKeister
2017-07-05 13:09:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
News
2017-07-05 13:20:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Brian W Lawrence
2017-07-05 13:38:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Bigbird
2017-07-05 16:42:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he might
ban you.
Brian W Lawrence
2017-07-05 16:54:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually
nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he might
ban you.
Hah!



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Heron McKeister
2017-07-05 17:54:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do
virtually
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm
done.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works;
he might
Post by Bigbird
ban you.
Hah!
keep working at it - you may be able to one day form a
complete thought.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Heron McKeister
2017-07-05 17:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do
virtually
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no
harm done.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might
Post by Bigbird
ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Heron McKeister
2017-07-05 17:57:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by CS
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do
virtually
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought
not.
Post by CS
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss -
no
Post by CS
harm done.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your
paygrade.
Post by CS
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet
works; he
Post by CS
might
Post by Bigbird
ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescient and accurate dullard.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
~misfit~
2017-07-06 00:17:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually
nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss -
no
Post by Heron McKeister
harm done.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he might
ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescient and accurate dullard.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Yet this non-post follow-up would seem to prove otherwise.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Heron McKeister
2017-07-06 01:51:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss -
no
Post by Heron McKeister
harm done.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he might
ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescient and accurate dullard.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Yet this non-post follow-up would seem to prove otherwise.
call me lazy - i chose to only change the typo - look again.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
~misfit~
2017-07-06 06:48:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss -
no
Post by Heron McKeister
harm done.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescient and accurate dullard.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Yet this non-post follow-up would seem to prove otherwise.
call me lazy - i chose to only change the typo - look again.
Changing quoted text (especially without explaination) is a no-no for
usenet. That shows the validity of your claims I guess.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Heron McKeister
2017-07-06 13:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
says...
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do
virtually
Post by ~misfit~
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss -
no
Post by Heron McKeister
harm done.
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your
paygrade.
Post by ~misfit~
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by News
Another Dunning-Kruger superlative.
Indeed. Those guys were on to something.
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet
works; he
Post by ~misfit~
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescient and accurate dullard.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Yet this non-post follow-up would seem to prove otherwise.
call me lazy - i chose to only change the typo - look again.
Changing quoted text (especially without explaination) is a
no-no for
Post by ~misfit~
usenet. That shows the validity of your claims I guess.
my statement was about usenet functioning i made no claim nor
care an iota about netiquette.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Bigbird
2017-07-06 08:54:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might
Post by Bigbird
ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature as I am not
aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.

Your command of English appears borne of random and contextually
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.

What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or is that
something that you intend to unveil at some future time, perhaps in the
horizons of your own little mind.
Heron McKeister
2017-07-06 13:38:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet
works; he
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
might
Post by Bigbird
ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature
as I am not
Post by Bigbird
aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and
contextually
Post by Bigbird
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or
is that
Post by Bigbird
something that you intend to unveil at some future time,
perhaps in the
Post by Bigbird
horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
C***@Invisible.man
2017-07-06 17:10:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:38:16 -0500, Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet
works; he
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
might
Post by Bigbird
ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature
as I am not
Post by Bigbird
aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and
contextually
Post by Bigbird
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or
is that
Post by Bigbird
something that you intend to unveil at some future time,
perhaps in the
Post by Bigbird
horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
Didn't I tell you, see what I meant now? He's a self appointed
tin god that believes that others owe him an explanation with
the actual fact being no one could care less what he has to say.
--
It's difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.
~misfit~
2017-07-07 05:00:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by C***@Invisible.man
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:38:16 -0500, Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature
as I am not
Post by Bigbird
aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and contextually
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or
is that
Post by Bigbird
something that you intend to unveil at some future time, perhaps in
the horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
Didn't I tell you, see what I meant now? He's a self appointed
tin god that believes that others owe him an explanation with
the actual fact being no one could care less what he has to say.
Get a room - although you can probably just reach under the desk to get your
hands on 'Hairy Arse' - figuratively and literally...
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
C***@Invisible.man
2017-07-07 16:01:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 17:00:37 +1200, "~misfit~"
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:38:16 -0500, Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature
as I am not
Post by Bigbird
aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and contextually
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or
is that
Post by Bigbird
something that you intend to unveil at some future time, perhaps in
the horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
Didn't I tell you, see what I meant now? He's a self appointed
tin god that believes that others owe him an explanation with
the actual fact being no one could care less what he has to say.
Get a room - although you can probably just reach under the desk to get your
hands on 'Hairy Arse' - figuratively and literally...
In your dreams ass clown; and you know what they say, a dream is a
wish YOUR heart makes. Btw, are you still having sex with those poor
animals, yes or no?
--
It's difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.
~misfit~
2017-07-08 05:56:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by C***@Invisible.man
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 17:00:37 +1200, "~misfit~"
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:38:16 -0500, Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature
as I am not
Post by Bigbird
aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and contextually
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or
is that
Post by Bigbird
something that you intend to unveil at some future time, perhaps
in the horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
Didn't I tell you, see what I meant now? He's a self appointed
tin god that believes that others owe him an explanation with
the actual fact being no one could care less what he has to say.
Get a room - although you can probably just reach under the desk to
get your hands on 'Hairy Arse' - figuratively and literally...
In your dreams ass clown; and you know what they say,
No I don't. I don't listen to 'them'.
Post by C***@Invisible.man
a dream is a wish YOUR heart makes.
Maybe if you live in a fantsasy greeting-card world. (Hmmm, which regular on
rasf1 does this sound like....)
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Btw, are you still having sex with those poor
animals, yes or no?
They're only poor because you didn't pay them last night.

Two muppets both calling me a clown - co-incidence? I don't think so.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Heron McKeister
2017-07-08 06:41:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 17:00:37 +1200, "~misfit~"
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:38:16 -0500, Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet
works; he
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by Bigbird
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat
premature
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by Bigbird
as I am not
Post by Bigbird
aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and
contextually
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by Bigbird
Post by Bigbird
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven
claims or
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by Bigbird
is that
Post by Bigbird
something that you intend to unveil at some future
time, perhaps
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by Bigbird
Post by Bigbird
in the horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go
fuck off
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Didn't I tell you, see what I meant now? He's a self
appointed
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
tin god that believes that others owe him an explanation
with
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
the actual fact being no one could care less what he has
to say.
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
Get a room - although you can probably just reach under
the desk to
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Post by ~misfit~
get your hands on 'Hairy Arse' - figuratively and
literally...
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
In your dreams ass clown; and you know what they say,
No I don't. I don't listen to 'them'.
Post by C***@Invisible.man
a dream is a wish YOUR heart makes.
Maybe if you live in a fantsasy greeting-card world. (Hmmm,
which regular on
Post by ~misfit~
rasf1 does this sound like....)
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Btw, are you still having sex with those poor
animals, yes or no?
They're only poor because you didn't pay them last night.
Two muppets both calling me a clown - co-incidence? I don't
think so.

likely no more of a coincidence than multiple people calling
trump a whack job. see if your dumbass can figure out why.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
~misfit~
2017-07-08 14:47:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 17:00:37 +1200, "~misfit~"
Post by ~misfit~
Post by C***@Invisible.man
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:38:16 -0500, Heron McKeister
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature as I
am not aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and contextually
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or is
that something that you intend to unveil at some future time,
perhaps in the horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
Didn't I tell you, see what I meant now? He's a self appointed
tin god that believes that others owe him an explanation with
the actual fact being no one could care less what he has to say.
Get a room - although you can probably just reach under the desk to
get your hands on 'Hairy Arse' - figuratively and literally...
In your dreams ass clown; and you know what they say,
No I don't. I don't listen to 'them'.
Post by C***@Invisible.man
a dream is a wish YOUR heart makes.
Maybe if you live in a fantsasy greeting-card world. (Hmmm, which
regular on rasf1 does this sound like....)
Post by C***@Invisible.man
Btw, are you still having sex with those poor
animals, yes or no?
They're only poor because you didn't pay them last night.
Two muppets both calling me a clown - co-incidence? I don't think so.
likely no more of a coincidence than multiple people calling
trump a whack job. see if your dumbass can figure out why.
Answering replies to the other muppet now - and I see you both <cough>
continuing with the ad hominem. Not that I blame you - it seems it's your
comfort zone.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
~misfit~
2017-07-07 04:57:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature as I am
not aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and contextually
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or is that
something that you intend to unveil at some future time, perhaps in
the horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
And yet you *did* answer to him. If he were to "fuck off" would you follow?
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Heron McKeister
2017-07-07 11:56:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <ojn44l$qrc$***@dont-email.me>, ***@gmail.com
says...
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature as I am
not aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and contextually
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or is that
something that you intend to unveil at some future time, perhaps in
the horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
And yet you *did* answer to him. If he were to "fuck off" would you follow?
no, drug addled clown boy, telling someone to fuck off ISNT
answering to them.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
~misfit~
2017-07-08 05:53:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
says...
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Bigbird
Go easy, Heron is the guy who knows how the internet works; he
might ban you.
the statement was usenet not internet and has proven
to be both prescience and accurate dullard.
Your claim to be an accurate dullard is somewhat premature as I am
not aware you have proven to be anything but the dullard.
Your command of English appears borne of random and contextually
inaccurate selections from a thesaurus.
What do you imagine prescient about your unproven claims or is that
something that you intend to unveil at some future time, perhaps in
the horizons of your own little mind.
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
And yet you *did* answer to him. If he were to "fuck off" would you follow?
no, drug addled clown boy, telling someone to fuck off ISNT
answering to them.
Oh the irony! Someone who doesn't understand how usenet works...

As for the "clown boy" thing you really need to stop spying on your mother
(aka "the bearded lady") and I playing dress-up.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Bigbird
2017-07-07 05:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
arent you important though. i dont answer to you go fuck off
Lol, you pwn the internets, make me.
You and you and the other you.

:)

The thing is, you say dumb things and provoke others on usenet you
can't prevent those others from responding. The better option is not to
say the dumb thing in the first place. But I shouldn't need to tell the
self procalimed usenet prophet that.

You and your alter ego's chose to weigh in with ignorant ad hominen;
complaining when you reap the benefits looks really puny.
Brian W Lawrence
2017-07-05 13:37:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
It was a metaphor with no intrinsic value.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Heron McKeister
2017-07-05 13:45:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
It was a metaphor with no intrinsic value.
it comes as no surprise that one who doesnt understand
metaphors also doesnt begin to comprehend intrinsic value.
--
Lurking on Usenet since '88.
Brian W Lawrence
2017-07-05 14:07:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
It was a metaphor with no intrinsic value.
it comes as no surprise that one who doesnt understand
metaphors also doesnt begin to comprehend intrinsic value.
:-)



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Brian W Lawrence
2017-07-06 07:31:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
In what sport does that happen?
the concept of metaphors is clearly above your paygrade.
It was a metaphor with no intrinsic value.
it comes as no surprise that one who doesnt understand
metaphors also doesnt begin to comprehend intrinsic value.
:-)
.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Bobster
2017-07-08 12:20:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
Attempted Murder and Murder may be regarded differently in legal systems.
.
2017-07-08 12:30:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
Attempted Murder and Murder may be regarded differently in legal systems.
Admit it, an easy to understand point totally escaped your comprehension.
--
My mirror continues its finite yet unbounded journey.
Bigbird
2017-07-08 18:46:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Heron McKeister
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
by that logic, if you shoot to kill and miss - no harm done.
A bit like most of your posts. :)

Technically the logic is correct.
Grant
2017-07-06 01:43:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
Football for example if a fouled player retaliates he gets sent off. Even if
the retaliation amounts results in no harm.
I thought you were a sensible bloke.
Brian W Lawrence
2017-07-06 09:19:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Grant
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
Football for example if a fouled player retaliates he gets sent off. Even if
the retaliation amounts results in no harm.
I thought you were a sensible bloke.
What makes you think otherwise?

Sagan's action was judged to have resulted in Cavendish's broken
shoulder and was punished by disqualification from the Tour. If
Cav had got up and finished the stage the dq would probably not
have happened, though a reprimand or fine might have been deemed
appropriate.

Vettel's action was judged to be 'potentially dangerous' and he
was punished by the, in the opinion of some, a seemingly inadequate stop
and go penalty. That penalty was the maximum available to the stewards
short of disqualification. In the unlikely event that Hamilton had been
injured Vettel would certainly have been shown the black flag.
The difference was between actual physical injury and potential
injury.

Players sent off in football, rugby, hockey, ice hockey, etc.
have usually retaliated in such a way that they caused actual
injury - mostly minor in nature.

The 'no harm' phrase came from 'the Heron's' metaphor about
shooting people (which you snipped), my response about 'which sport' was
a literal one, 'in which sport do you try to shoot opponents'. Clearly
normally retaliation shows 'intent' not necessarily actual physical harm.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Grant
2017-07-07 17:00:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Grant
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
Football for example if a fouled player retaliates he gets sent off. Even if
the retaliation amounts results in no harm.
I thought you were a sensible bloke.
What makes you think otherwise?
Sagan's action was judged to have resulted in Cavendish's broken shoulder
and was punished by disqualification from the Tour. If
Cav had got up and finished the stage the dq would probably not
have happened, though a reprimand or fine might have been deemed
appropriate.
Vettel's action was judged to be 'potentially dangerous' and he
was punished by the, in the opinion of some, a seemingly inadequate stop
and go penalty. That penalty was the maximum available to the stewards
short of disqualification. In the unlikely event that Hamilton had been
injured Vettel would certainly have been shown the black flag.
The difference was between actual physical injury and potential
injury.
Players sent off in football, rugby, hockey, ice hockey, etc.
have usually retaliated in such a way that they caused actual
injury - mostly minor in nature.
The 'no harm' phrase came from 'the Heron's' metaphor about
shooting people (which you snipped), my response about 'which sport' was a
literal one, 'in which sport do you try to shoot opponents'. Clearly
normally retaliation shows 'intent' not necessarily actual physical harm.
"Vettel's action was judged to be 'potentially dangerous"
So he got lucky. Injury or damage was not done. Vettels state of mind is the
key to this and the appalling example that he set and the president that has
been set. All things being fair any driver can now deliberately drive in to
another and providing he doesn't cause injury or damage we receive a
relatively minor penalty. Especially if he "apologise profusely".
So free reign bumper cars that's fine until it all goes wrong and some one
gets hurt.
Vettel should have been mad an example of.
As for Sagan, you have no idea what the commissars decision would have been
if Cav and walked across the line. Sagan has a history of jumping on the
wheel of other riders without consideration of the consequences, until now
he's been lucky. Just like Vettel was in Aza.
~misfit~
2017-07-08 05:53:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Grant
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by Grant
Post by Brian W Lawrence
Post by CS
TDF disqualify Peter Sagan. FIA stewards do virtually nothing.
Does Hamilton have a broken shoulder? Thought not.
Football for example if a fouled player retaliates he gets sent off. Even if
the retaliation amounts results in no harm.
I thought you were a sensible bloke.
What makes you think otherwise?
Sagan's action was judged to have resulted in Cavendish's broken
shoulder and was punished by disqualification from the Tour. If
Cav had got up and finished the stage the dq would probably not
have happened, though a reprimand or fine might have been deemed
appropriate.
Vettel's action was judged to be 'potentially dangerous' and he
was punished by the, in the opinion of some, a seemingly inadequate
stop and go penalty. That penalty was the maximum available to the
stewards short of disqualification. In the unlikely event that
Hamilton had been injured Vettel would certainly have been shown the
black flag. The difference was between actual physical injury and
potential
injury.
Players sent off in football, rugby, hockey, ice hockey, etc.
have usually retaliated in such a way that they caused actual
injury - mostly minor in nature.
The 'no harm' phrase came from 'the Heron's' metaphor about
shooting people (which you snipped), my response about 'which sport'
was a literal one, 'in which sport do you try to shoot opponents'.
Clearly normally retaliation shows 'intent' not necessarily actual
physical harm.
"Vettel's action was judged to be 'potentially dangerous"
So he got lucky. Injury or damage was not done. Vettels state of mind
is the key to this and the appalling example that he set and the
president that has been set. All things being fair any driver can now
deliberately drive in to another and providing he doesn't cause
injury or damage we receive a relatively minor penalty. Especially if
he "apologise profusely".
So free reign bumper cars that's fine until it all goes wrong and
some one gets hurt.
Vettel should have been mad an example of.
As for Sagan, you have no idea what the commissars decision would
have been if Cav and walked across the line. Sagan has a history of
jumping on the wheel of other riders without consideration of the
consequences, until now he's been lucky. Just like Vettel was in Aza.
As an aside I just watched part of a fishing show on TV that I saw before I
started playing a video file. Now I'm no prude but I stopped watching it as
soon as the ad break came, despite the fact I used to spend a lot of time
(and money) fishing and it was interesting to me. I stopped watching because
I didn't like the regular beeping of swearing. Not just once or twice but
multiple times a minute. Swearing has its place (being in extremis) however
if used too often it just shows a limited vocabulary and low intellect.

There's a school of thought that says Vettel swears so much on team radio in
an attempt to discourage FOM from broadcasting his messages (and that he'd
like to be as cool as Kimi). Whatever his reasons (and I've heard the excuse
"these drivers learn their English from mechanics" too) I think that drivers
should be fined for excessive swearing on the radio (with concessions made
if it's mid-rollover or something) and in public at F1 weekends - a
'standard of conduct' clause if you will. F1 used to be classy but now it's
starting to sound like a low budget reality show.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Bobster
2017-07-08 12:17:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
As an aside I just watched part of a fishing show on TV that I saw before I
started playing a video file. Now I'm no prude but I stopped watching it as
soon as the ad break came, despite the fact I used to spend a lot of time
(and money) fishing and it was interesting to me. I stopped watching because
I didn't like the regular beeping of swearing. Not just once or twice but
multiple times a minute. Swearing has its place (being in extremis) however
if used too often it just shows a limited vocabulary and low intellect.
So no more knobby words from you, and you'll shun anybody given to them? Or you're just building up for another swipe at Vettel?
Post by ~misfit~
There's a school of thought that says Vettel swears so much on team radio in
an attempt to discourage FOM from broadcasting his messages (and that he'd
like to be as cool as Kimi). Whatever his reasons (and I've heard the excuse
"these drivers learn their English from mechanics" too) I think that drivers
should be fined for excessive swearing on the radio (with concessions made
if it's mid-rollover or something) and in public at F1 weekends - a
'standard of conduct' clause if you will. F1 used to be classy but now it's
starting to sound like a low budget reality show.
There are problems with people who don't speak English as a first language but get exposed to profanity on building sites or in garages. At one time there was a problem withe black men in South Africa, usually labourers, using the f... word around people who weren't expecting it. Some supervisor told him something was "fucked". Now when he's mowing your lawn and the mower won't play ball, he'll tell the lady of the house "the lawnmower is fucked!" - and both parties will be surprised.

So I think it does happen.

But Vettel is not some young guy in his first season in FF20000. He knows what those words mean, just as Senna and Piquet did.

Sports have profanity codes. Tennis used to caution players for first "audible obscenity" and then sanction on a repeat in the same match.

South African cricketer Kagiso Rabada (who went to a very good school and knows exactly what these words mean) has racked up enough penalty points, after yesterday telling Ben Stokes what he could do, that he has to miss a game. The words he used were picked up by on-field microphones and broadcast.

There will be a complaint, I'm sure, because the microphones were on. The players always want those mics on for a limited period of time and think it a bit rough if they get caught chucking cuss words around. To which one answer is - if you don't say it, a microphone can't catch you saying it.

The counter from the players will be that in the heat of the competition things do get said. I will long remember South African prop forward Balie Swart talking of the first time he played against the legendary All Black hooker Shaun Fitzpatrick. Swart said "I thought I knew my mother well, then I scrummed down against Fitzpatrick." (he also said "he's not so bad, really. If you hit him and he knew he was asking for it, he won't tell the ref")

The problem, for F1 and for cricket and for lots of sports, is that everything is now in the public domain - or should be regarded as such.

Swearing is not new to F1. I recall a report I read of Piquet's win at Canada in 1991 after Mansell's car stopped on the last lap. The report said something like 'when asked how he'd felt when he saw Mansell slowing he intimated that he'd found a cure for impotence."

The previous year there had been an infamous outburst from Senna (I think it was Autosport that observed that Senna had compared Balestre to "a quantity of used food".)

There was Kimi and his "I went for a shit."

There was Schumacher confronting Coulthard. There was Senna first giving Irvine a mouthful and then punching him.

It's now new, but the way in which everything is instantly public is. 20 years ago Rabada might still have told Stokes "fuck off", but the international TV audience wouldn't have heard it. There would have been no penalty.

I think there does need to be a deal of some kind where drivers know they can blow off steam and it will be kept private. I'd like to not see microphones and cameras in the garages. If Alonso wants to walk to the back of the garage and take a hammer and some choice words to the first thing he sees that bears a Honda logo, then, in that place, he should be able to. He should mind his Ps and Qs at press conferences.

In cricket it's generally been things that are done on the field of play or whilst otherwise on public view that get sanctioned. There was an issue some years ago with the then South African captain smashing a chair in a tunnel at a ground in Australia. The general view was that the ground were entitled to send him an invoice, but because it wasn't in public it was nothing for the match referee to deal with.

Drivers should certainly be told to not swear at press conferences and whilst on podiums. Heat of the moment issues need some leeway. Abuse of officials - as Vettel did to Whiting last year - should be a no-no.
Bigbird
2017-07-08 18:49:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
At one time there was a problem withe black men in South
Africa, usually labourers, using the f... word around people who
weren't expecting it. Some supervisor told him something was
"fucked". Now when he's mowing your lawn and the mower won't play
ball, he'll tell the lady of the house "the lawnmower is fucked!" -
and both parties will be surprised.
A nice little racist aside.

Bobster
2017-07-05 14:04:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go. IE he had to enter the pit lane, observing all the limits that apply, stop for 10 seconds and then exit, again paying attention to limits.

No work could be done on his car. If he needed to stop for tyres or whatever he would have to do that entirely separately.

It's about 30 seconds in real life, a race wrecker. Without Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
Bigbird
2017-07-05 16:57:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go.[snip]
It's about 30 seconds in [snip]
Baku
a race wrecker. Without
Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been
demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as say, a
puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly damaged diffuser.
Alan Baker
2017-07-05 21:17:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go.[snip]
It's about 30 seconds in [snip]
Baku
a race wrecker. Without
Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been
demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as say, a
puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly damaged diffuser.
And now you're expert enough to know how much time a damage diffuser
would cost, are you?

Clue time: Vettel was NOT penalized for that damage.
Bigbird
2017-07-05 22:02:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go.[snip]
It's about 30 seconds in [snip]
Baku
a race wrecker. Without
Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been
demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as say, a
puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly damaged diffuser.
And now you're expert enough to know how much time a damage diffuser
would cost, are you?
It is of no surprise that you misread what others have to say.

If we have learned anything about you over the last few days it is that
you don't have the wit to presume you know ANYTHING about what other
people know or mean.

Why don't you go and answer a few of the dozens of questions you have
run away from over this issue, pussy.
Post by Alan Baker
Clue time: Vettel was NOT penalized for that damage.
Clue time: your comments are completely and utterly irrlevant, as per
your MO.
Alan Baker
2017-07-05 22:39:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go.[snip]
It's about 30 seconds in [snip]
Baku
a race wrecker. Without
Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been
demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as say, a
puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly damaged diffuser.
And now you're expert enough to know how much time a damage diffuser
would cost, are you?
It is of no surprise that you misread what others have to say.
What did I misread?

You made a definite claim that a "badly damaged diffuser" (which you
can't substantiate) was more of a "race wrecker" than a what was
effectively 27 second penalty (17 seconds for the pitstop drive plus the
10 seconds stationary; yes: I checked the pitstop bogie time)

So explain how I misread what you wrote...
Post by Bigbird
If we have learned anything about you over the last few days it is that
you don't have the wit to presume you know ANYTHING about what other
people know or mean.
By all means explain what you meant by:

'2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as say, a
puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly damaged diffuser.'
Post by Bigbird
Why don't you go and answer a few of the dozens of questions you have
run away from over this issue, pussy.
Post by Alan Baker
Clue time: Vettel was NOT penalized for that damage.
Clue time: your comments are completely and utterly irrlevant, as per
your MO.
Awwww...Don't be like that!

:-)
Bigbird
2017-07-05 22:56:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as
say, a puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly damaged
diffuser.
And now you're expert enough to know how much time a damage
diffuser would cost, are you?
It is of no surprise that you misread what others have to say.
What did I misread?
You made a definite claim that a "badly damaged diffuser" (which you
can't substantiate) was more of a "race wrecker" than a what was
effectively 27 second penalty (17 seconds for the pitstop drive plus
the 10 seconds stationary; yes: I checked the pitstop bogie time)
So explain how I misread what you wrote...
Because that is your MO?

Because you lack the intelligence to read a full sentence and
comprehend it's meaning?

Because the synapses in your brain don't fire as they should?

WTF knows why you misread stuff. All anybody knows is that you do it
and usually it appears to be on purpose a it does here because your
inference and following assertion are so ridiculous that is the only
explanation... well that and that you are half-witted.

Let me just turn this around and see if the lights come on. Are you
claiming that a badly damaged diffuser cannot wreck a race?`

You pick fights, you lose, you runaway and then you are back again
picking fights you that you lost as soon as you hit send.

You may carry on if you insist on being made a fool, assuming that you
concede the reason for all the unanswered questions I referred to is
that you have no answers and you just need to move on to your next
defeat.
Alan Baker
2017-07-05 23:11:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as
say, a puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly damaged
diffuser.
And now you're expert enough to know how much time a damage
diffuser would cost, are you?
It is of no surprise that you misread what others have to say.
What did I misread?
You made a definite claim that a "badly damaged diffuser" (which you
can't substantiate) was more of a "race wrecker" than a what was
effectively 27 second penalty (17 seconds for the pitstop drive plus
the 10 seconds stationary; yes: I checked the pitstop bogie time)
So explain how I misread what you wrote...
Because that is your MO?
Because you lack the intelligence to read a full sentence and
comprehend it's meaning?
Because the synapses in your brain don't fire as they should?
WTF knows why you misread stuff. All anybody knows is that you do it
and usually it appears to be on purpose a it does here because your
inference and following assertion are so ridiculous that is the only
explanation... well that and that you are half-witted.
I notice you've done a lot of typing...

...but haven't actually explained what you meant when you said I misread
what you wrote.
Post by Bigbird
Let me just turn this around and see if the lights come on. Are you
claiming that a badly damaged diffuser cannot wreck a race?`
Nope.

But you're making the claim that Hamilton's diffuser damage was worse
than the penalty Vettel got in terms of time.
Post by Bigbird
You pick fights, you lose, you runaway and then you are back again
picking fights you that you lost as soon as you hit send.
You may carry on if you insist on being made a fool, assuming that you
concede the reason for all the unanswered questions I referred to is
that you have no answers and you just need to move on to your next
defeat.
What do you think "all the unanswered questions" comprises?

Don't be afraid to actually answer instead of yet another bunch of
verbiage to avoid answering.

:-)
Bigbird
2017-07-06 06:13:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as
say, a puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly
damaged diffuser.
And now you're expert enough to know how much time a damage
diffuser would cost, are you?
It is of no surprise that you misread what others have to say.
What did I misread?
You made a definite claim that a "badly damaged diffuser" (which
you can't substantiate) was more of a "race wrecker" than a what
was effectively 27 second penalty (17 seconds for the pitstop
drive plus the 10 seconds stationary; yes: I checked the pitstop
bogie time)
So explain how I misread what you wrote...
Because that is your MO?
Because you lack the intelligence to read a full sentence and
comprehend it's meaning?
Because the synapses in your brain don't fire as they should?
WTF knows why you misread stuff. All anybody knows is that you do it
and usually it appears to be on purpose a it does here because your
inference and following assertion are so ridiculous that is the only
explanation... well that and that you are half-witted.
I notice you've done a lot of typing...
Yup, shame you didn't comprehend it but that's alright most of it
wasn't for your amusement even if a more intelligent person would have
found it enlightening.
Post by Alan Baker
...but haven't actually explained what you meant when you said I
misread what you wrote.
LOL!

Yes I did. Very clearly. Re-read the last paragraph.

...but if you would like a simple answer to your inane question, then
yes I am expert enough to know that a badly damaged diffuser will wreck
a race...

...and before you ask I am also expert enough to know that a puncture
is likely to wreck a race and that a damaged suspension will almost
always end a race.

I am really quite the expert... well relative to a certain someone.
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Let me just turn this around and see if the lights come on. Are you
claiming that a badly damaged diffuser cannot wreck a race?`
Nope.
But you're making the claim that Hamilton's diffuser damage was worse
than the penalty Vettel got in terms of time.
Now that is a bare faced lie. Quote where I claim that?
I gave you the chance to correct yourself by assuming you had misread
but you are now lying.
~misfit~
2017-07-06 00:20:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
2nd to 5th... not really a race wrecker then; not as much as
say, a puncture or damaged suspension or even a badly damaged
diffuser.
And now you're expert enough to know how much time a damage
diffuser would cost, are you?
It is of no surprise that you misread what others have to say.
What did I misread?
You made a definite claim that a "badly damaged diffuser" (which you
can't substantiate) was more of a "race wrecker" than a what was
effectively 27 second penalty (17 seconds for the pitstop drive plus
the 10 seconds stationary; yes: I checked the pitstop bogie time)
So explain how I misread what you wrote...
Because that is your MO?
Because you lack the intelligence to read a full sentence and
comprehend it's meaning?
Because the synapses in your brain don't fire as they should?
WTF knows why you misread stuff. All anybody knows is that you do it
and usually it appears to be on purpose a it does here because your
inference and following assertion are so ridiculous that is the only
explanation... well that and that you are half-witted.
Let me just turn this around and see if the lights come on. Are you
claiming that a badly damaged diffuser cannot wreck a race?`
You pick fights, you lose, you runaway and then you are back again
picking fights you that you lost as soon as you hit send.
You may carry on if you insist on being made a fool, assuming that you
concede the reason for all the unanswered questions I referred to is
that you have no answers and you just need to move on to your next
defeat.
He doesn't need to be made a fool - he already is. (Unless you mean made
[more] public.) <g>
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
t***@gmail.com
2017-07-06 02:26:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
He doesn't need to be made a fool - he already is. (Unless you mean made
[more] public.) <g>
You stupid cunt.
t***@gmail.com
2017-07-06 02:44:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
He doesn't need to be made a fool - he already is. (Unless you mean made
[more] public.) <g>
Have some pride.
You scrotum licking, cornhole specialist.
Bigbird
2017-07-06 08:37:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
He doesn't need to be made a fool - he already is. (Unless you mean
made [more] public.) <g>
It's his insistence on persisting with such demonstrably false
assertions. You have to wonder whether it is purely trolling or he is
that thick-headed.
~misfit~
2017-07-07 04:54:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
He doesn't need to be made a fool - he already is. (Unless you mean
made [more] public.) <g>
It's his insistence on persisting with such demonstrably false
assertions. You have to wonder whether it is purely trolling or he is
that thick-headed.
Honestly especially with this dragging on so long I've been wondering if
there's a third option that involves mental illness. (Hence my opting out of
conversations with him a while back.) I hope it's just stupidity rather than
something more sinister.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Martin Harran
2017-07-05 21:12:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go. IE he had to enter the pit lane, observing all the limits that apply, stop for 10 seconds and then exit, again paying attention to limits.
No work could be done on his car. If he needed to stop for tyres or whatever he would have to do that entirely separately.
It's about 30 seconds in real life, a race wrecker. Without Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
Have I missed something here? I understood that the 10 sec stop and go
could be taken as part of a planned pitstop and if no pitstop was
planned then the driver could elect to skip the drive through [1] and
have 10 secs added to his time at the end of the race.

[1] I realise that there is a completely separate "drive through"
penalty.
Bigbird
2017-07-05 22:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Martin Harran
Post by Bobster
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go. IE he had to enter the pit
lane, observing all the limits that apply, stop for 10 seconds and
then exit, again paying attention to limits.
No work could be done on his car. If he needed to stop for tyres or
whatever he would have to do that entirely separately.
It's about 30 seconds in real life, a race wrecker. Without
Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been
demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
Have I missed something here? I understood that the 10 sec stop and go
could be taken as part of a planned pitstop and if no pitstop was
planned then the driver could elect to skip the drive through [1] and
have 10 secs added to his time at the end of the race.
[1] I realise that there is a completely separate "drive through"
penalty.
That would be "a ten second penalty" similar to "a five second penalty"

I have c&p the relevant section from the regs.

two things to note; I believe e) to i) are generally applicable to post
race investigations. Also there is no mention of being Black
Flagged/being disqualified from the race.


38.3 The stewards may impose any one of the penalties below on any
driver involved in an Incident :

a) A five second time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop
in his pit stop position for at least five seconds and then re-join the
race. The relevant driver may however elect not to stop, provided he
carries out no further pit stop before the end of the race. In such
cases five seconds will be added to the elapsed race time of the driver
concerned.

b) A ten second time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop
in his pit stop position for at least ten seconds and then re-join the
race. The relevant driver may however elect not to stop, provided he
carries out no further pit stop before the end of the race. In such
cases ten seconds will be added to the elapsed race time of the driver
concerned.

In both of the above cases the driver concerned must carry out the
penalty the next time he
enters the pit lane.

c) A drive-through penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane and
re-join the race without stopping.

d) A ten second stop-and-go time penalty. The driver must enter the pit
lane, stop in his pit stop position for at least ten seconds and then
re-join the race.

If any of the four penalties above are imposed upon a driver, and that
driver is unable to serve the penalty due to retirement from the race,
the stewards may impose a grid place penalty on the driver at his next
Event.

If any of the four penalties above are imposed during the last three
laps, or after the end of a race, Article 38.4(b) below will not apply
and five seconds will be added to the elapsed race time of the driver
concerned in the case of (a) above, 10 seconds in the case of (b), 20
seconds in the case of (c) and 30 seconds in the case of (d).

e) A time penalty.

f) A reprimand.

g) A drop of any number of grid positions at the driver’s next Event.

If any of the seven penalties above are imposed they shall not be
subject to appeal.

h) Disqualification from the results.

i) Suspension from the driver’s next Event.
Martin Harran
2017-07-06 08:46:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 22:23:12 -0000 (UTC), "Bigbird"
Post by Bigbird
Post by Martin Harran
Post by Bobster
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go. IE he had to enter the pit
lane, observing all the limits that apply, stop for 10 seconds and
then exit, again paying attention to limits.
No work could be done on his car. If he needed to stop for tyres or
whatever he would have to do that entirely separately.
It's about 30 seconds in real life, a race wrecker. Without
Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been
demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
Have I missed something here? I understood that the 10 sec stop and go
could be taken as part of a planned pitstop and if no pitstop was
planned then the driver could elect to skip the drive through [1] and
have 10 secs added to his time at the end of the race.
[1] I realise that there is a completely separate "drive through"
penalty.
That would be "a ten second penalty" similar to "a five second penalty"
I have c&p the relevant section from the regs.
two things to note; I believe e) to i) are generally applicable to post
race investigations. Also there is no mention of being Black
Flagged/being disqualified from the race.
38.3 The stewards may impose any one of the penalties below on any
a) A five second time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop
in his pit stop position for at least five seconds and then re-join the
race. The relevant driver may however elect not to stop, provided he
carries out no further pit stop before the end of the race. In such
cases five seconds will be added to the elapsed race time of the driver
concerned.
b) A ten second time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop
in his pit stop position for at least ten seconds and then re-join the
race. The relevant driver may however elect not to stop, provided he
carries out no further pit stop before the end of the race. In such
cases ten seconds will be added to the elapsed race time of the driver
concerned.
In both of the above cases the driver concerned must carry out the
penalty the next time he
enters the pit lane.
c) A drive-through penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane and
re-join the race without stopping.
d) A ten second stop-and-go time penalty. The driver must enter the pit
lane, stop in his pit stop position for at least ten seconds and then
re-join the race.
If any of the four penalties above are imposed upon a driver, and that
driver is unable to serve the penalty due to retirement from the race,
the stewards may impose a grid place penalty on the driver at his next
Event.
If any of the four penalties above are imposed during the last three
laps, or after the end of a race, Article 38.4(b) below will not apply
and five seconds will be added to the elapsed race time of the driver
concerned in the case of (a) above, 10 seconds in the case of (b), 20
seconds in the case of (c) and 30 seconds in the case of (d).
e) A time penalty.
f) A reprimand.
g) A drop of any number of grid positions at the driver’s next Event.
If any of the seven penalties above are imposed they shall not be
subject to appeal.
h) Disqualification from the results.
i) Suspension from the driver’s next Event.
Thank you. I didn't realise the difference between (b) and (d); the
latter, depending on the circuit,. is generally somewhere between 20
and 30 seconds overall so it is much more severe than I thought.
Bobster
2017-07-05 23:06:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Martin Harran
Post by Bobster
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go. IE he had to enter the pit lane, observing all the limits that apply, stop for 10 seconds and then exit, again paying attention to limits.
No work could be done on his car. If he needed to stop for tyres or whatever he would have to do that entirely separately.
It's about 30 seconds in real life, a race wrecker. Without Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
Have I missed something here? I understood that the 10 sec stop and go
could be taken as part of a planned pitstop and if no pitstop was
planned then the driver could elect to skip the drive through [1] and
have 10 secs added to his time at the end of the race.
[1] I realise that there is a completely separate "drive through"
penalty.
What Vettel got was the most severe penalty short of a DQ. The time cannot be added on, and it can't be combined with pit stop for work on the car.
Alan Baker
2017-07-05 23:16:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by Martin Harran
Post by Bobster
Vettel got a 10 second stop-and-go. IE he had to enter the pit lane, observing all the limits that apply, stop for 10 seconds and then exit, again paying attention to limits.
No work could be done on his car. If he needed to stop for tyres or whatever he would have to do that entirely separately.
It's about 30 seconds in real life, a race wrecker. Without Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
Have I missed something here? I understood that the 10 sec stop and go
could be taken as part of a planned pitstop and if no pitstop was
planned then the driver could elect to skip the drive through [1] and
have 10 secs added to his time at the end of the race.
[1] I realise that there is a completely separate "drive through"
penalty.
What Vettel got was the most severe penalty short of a DQ. The time cannot be added on, and it can't be combined with pit stop for work on the car.
Rule 38.4 (d):

'Whilst a car is stationary in the pit lane as a result of incurring a
time penalty under Article 38.3(d) above it may not be worked on.
However, if the engine stops it may be started after the time penalty
period has elapsed.'
Bobster
2017-07-07 06:38:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
It's about 30 seconds in real life, a race wrecker. Without Hamilton's cockpit surround coming loose, Vettel would have been demoted from 2nd to 5th and Hamilton would be leading the WDC.
In fact, it sent him down to 7th. Without Hamilton's problems he'd have been 8th.
Loading...