🚀 go-pugleaf

On 2/04/2012 1:03 PM, jg wrote:
> On 2/04/2012 10:00 AM, Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax wrote:
>> On 2/04/2012 11:34 AM, jg wrote:
>>> On 2/04/2012 9:03 AM, Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax wrote:
>>>> On 2/04/2012 9:37 AM, jg wrote:
>>>>> On 1/04/2012 10:01 PM, Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/04/2012 5:27 PM, Spartan613 wrote:
>>>>>>> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillard_lies@promises.are.invalid>
>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>> message news:jl8d3a$gja$2@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>> On 1/04/2012 8:14 AM, Gillard Lies. Labor Dies. wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 1 Apr 2012 00:28 someone claiming to be Oy Rool Out a
>>>>>>>>> Carbon
>>>>>>>>> Tax
>>>>>>>>> posting as gillard_lies@promises.are.invalid posted:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think earth hour is silly, not sure what it's supposed to
>>>>>>>>>>> prove to
>>>>>>>>>>> whom, but if it doesn't make people appreciate where their
>>>>>>>>>>> energy
>>>>>>>>>>> comes
>>>>>>>>>>> from now I can't see much point at all.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's like lots of fuzzy green things. It enables people to feel
>>>>>>>>>> good
>>>>>>>>>> about themselves, and more pious than those who didn't. Then it's
>>>>>>>>>> back
>>>>>>>>>> into the SUV next day. Whoops! Forgot about it again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I felt good about it last night.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I raced around the house, turned on the ac, and made sure all
>>>>>>>>> lights
>>>>>>>>> were on
>>>>>>>>> as well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gee, and I even slept well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I hope Flannery didn't find out about it. He would tell his Earth
>>>>>>>> monster Gaia when he talks to it (it has developed consciousness
>>>>>>>> now,
>>>>>>>> you know) and you will get demerits placed against your name, come
>>>>>>>> Gaia's Judgement Day.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> "If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to
>>>>>>>> drop
>>>>>>>> for about a thousand years. "
>>>>>>>> -- Tim (it ain't a gonna rain no more) Flannery
>>>>>>>> - Australian Climate Commissar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Seen that fuckwit Brown's latest offerings?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Aliens aren't contacting us because they "extincted" themselves
>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>> not being Green enough, and,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> His Watermelon one world government where the Chinese and Indians
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> be able to vote us into slavery through their massive population
>>>>>>> (not so
>>>>>>> Green, but Bob doesn't seem to notice) voting advantage.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All this delivered while wearing his trademark Cheshire cat grin and
>>>>>>> disturbing and disturbed loopy eyes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The thing is a freak. Does us all a favour, Tasmania, it was a good
>>>>>>> joke, but the joke's over. Get rid of him.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Brilliantly thought through, wasn't it... "one person one vote one
>>>>>> value" Chinks RuLe oK!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So it wouldn't be like the UN general assembly, with one vote per
>>>>> member
>>>>> country?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So it's not really utopian democratic global government after all? Just
>>>> a purely elitist UN dictatorship? What about the poor non-member
>>>> countries? What about those who haven't signed up to, say, the UN
>>>> Refugee Convention? Do they get to have a vote or don't they "qualify"?
>>>> And what happened to the one *person* one vote? How do we know the
>>>> member country representative will be voting on behalf of all
>>>> persons of
>>>> their member country? It would seem impossible if the votes in that
>>>> country varied in any way from unanimity. Sounds even more poorly
>>>> thought through than it first appears. Oh dear. :-(
>>>>
>>>
>>> Would you prefer the UN was one vote one person? 193 countries seem ok
>>> with it the way it is.
>>>
>>
>> I'd prefer the UN had as little input to world affairs as possible. It
>> is Brown pretending that UN government would be some new all-embracing
>> global democracy. Sounds like it would boil things down to 193 votes
>> representing 7 billion people. Then again, that's Brown logic for you.
>>
>> ASIDE: Do you know what the _external_ threads are for on these
>> batteries?
>> http://www.healthcabin.net/index.php?main_page=popup_image&pID=7966
>>
>> (just above the button) A different style/brand of cartomizer? A
>> different charger adaptor?
>>
>
> I'm pretty sure everything with 510 in the name has the same threads.
> Only time I have heard of something not fitting is here-
> http://ecigz.com.au/store/UNIQUE-510-MODEL/New-Design-510-Atomiser/prod_224.html
>
> and I really can't work out what they are on about, but I suspect even
> those don't refer to battery thread compatibility.

That would be the internal thread which is Joye 510-compatible. That 
external thread is about 10mm. I've not seen anything big enough to 
carry a mating internal 10mm thread. Just curious actually.


-- 
"If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop
for about a thousand years. "
-- Tim (it ain't a gonna rain no more) Flannery
- Australian Climate Commissar