🚀 go-pugleaf

X-No-Archive
OK, I think I know what's going on here, JACKASS ;)
Don't make me lock my connection. ;)
DD (the real one).

nickarama2005@yahoo.com wrote:
> Király wrote:
> > DiscoDuck <fornewsgroups@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > > LOL.  Interesting that when someone thinks I'm right-correction-KNOWS I
> > > am correct, You assume it's me.
> > > You make me laugh.  I guess you want to try and erode my credibilty by
> > > suggesting this.  Good luck with that.
> >
> > IP address of posts in this thread made by DiscoDuck:  24.84.215.140
> > IP address of posts in this thread made by nickarama:  24.84.215.140
> >
> > This isn't the first time this little "coincidence" has happened.
> >
> > Two posts were made in this group on March 4th 2006.  One by DiscoDuck,
> > one by nickarama.  The IP addresses again are the same; 24.84.192.47.
> >
> > There is more evidence; But the real, obvious kicker is that you posted
> > from your nickarama account, and signed it DD.  Just look at the
> > headers and the body.
> >
> > Here it is again, in case you missed it:
> >
> > ---begin quoted post with message headers---
> >
> > |From: nickarama2005@yahoo.com
> > |Newsgroups: bc.cycling
> > |Subject: Re: Who pays more?
> > |Date: 7 Jun 2006 17:25:41 -0700
> > |Organization: http://groups.google.com
> > |Lines: 43
> > |Message-ID: <1149726341.251179.288020@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
> > |
> > |[snip]
> > |
> > |NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.84.215.140
> > |
> > |[snip]
> > |
> > |Thanks Nick.
> > |I find it unbelievable that some people are bent on saying the two are
> > |same.
> > |The two are no more the same as skateboarders and rollerbladers.
> > |DD
> >
> > ---end quoted post---
> >
> > If that's not proof that nickarama and DiscoDuck are the same person,
> > then I don't know what is.
> >
> > > Just come out and admit (at the very least) you were mistaken.  That
> > > indeed the two have different rights and obligations AND there are
> > > other differences.
> >
> > The MVA says they are the same.  DiscoDuck says they aren't.  The MVA
> > prevails.  It's right there in black and white.  You can argue and
> > disagree all you want but it doesn't change the law.
> >
> > > That the law you quoted pertained to highways only. You were wrong.
> >
> > Highways is what we were talking about.  We weren't talking about riding
> > in your backyard or on mountain trails.  We were talking obligations
> > and rights about riding bikes vs. those of driving cars.  Pretty much the
> > only place where you'll find both riding together are on highways.
> >
> > > Or do I have to come up with examples too?  I got one immediately off
> > > the top of my head.
> > > OK, here it goes (since I know you'll not admit you were wrong).
> > > Cars by law are required to have insurance.  Cyclists are not.
> > > Want more?
> >
> > Insurance is a legal requirement of operating a motor vehicle in a public
> > highway, yes.  So it a helmet for a cyclist.  Heavy trucks are also
> > subject to additional exterior lighting requirements that are required of
> > neither cars nor bikes.
> >
> > But neither the car insurance, nor the helmet, nor the truck lighting make
> > any difference on how the vehicle is to be driven/operated on highways,
> > which is what we were talking about, and to what the "same rights and
> > obligatins" refers.
> >
> > K.
>
> Yes, I am DD.  (Manacal laugh ).  You are all doomed.  I am he.  HA HA
> HA HA HA!!!!