🚀 go-pugleaf

On 2/04/2012 12:17 PM, Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax wrote:
> 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.
>
>
Oh, the external thread you are seeing is just for a hollow conical 
sleeve to make it look less like a spark plug. I just throw them away, 
have ignored the thread for so long it's 'invisible'.

I think the larger batteries have it, the little ones don't.