Thread View: sci.engr
1 messages
1 total messages
Started by John Turmel
Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:51
P***-Boy Ryan p***ing off sci.engineering group
Author: John Turmel
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:51
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:51
76 lines
4184 bytes
4184 bytes
JCT: More discussion about discredited Socred pseudo- philosopher Bill Ryan's piss-possessed posts on sci.engr: >From: Brian Whatcott <betw...@sbcglobal.net> >Date: Tues, Sep 26 2006 11:30 pm >Groups: sci.engr BW: I realise it won't do any good, until someone takes up my offer of a reward for stopping Ryan from echoing Turmel but it made me feel a whole lot better to send a copy of Ryans P-Boy note back to his email address - for eac of his dumb copies. Dozens! Won't you join me? Brian Whatcott Altus OK --- >From: Brian Whatcott <betw...@sbcglobal.net> >Date: Fri, Oct 13 2006 12:19 am BW: As a follow on step, I copied his note to the yahoo abuse line with a request to handle the problem.. --- >From: Greg Locock <gregloc...@yahoo.com.au> >Date: Fri, Oct 13 2006 6:58 am >Groups: sci.engr GL: Hi Brian, You are a valued contributor to sci.engr.* and I always appreciate your posts. But in this case I have to disagree. Turmel is an egotistial loon, who has destroyed sci.engr, and adds zero to the newsgroup. While I agree, Ryan adds nothing positive to the group, he may, eventually, drive the completely useless Turmel away from posting here. He may not, but that seems to me to be a risk worth taking. Why do you think that the idiot Turmel has a right to free speech, whereas the monomaniac Ryan does not? Cheers Greg JCT: My posts prevent him from reading others'? My posts crowd out others'? --- >From: Brian Whatcott <betw...@sbcglobal.net> >Date: Fri, Oct 13 2006 7:57 am >Groups: sci.engr BW: Fair question: Ryan's vaporings are repetitious, Turmel's vaporings are different, every one. A pox on both of them. However, a spirit of free speech restrains one from censoring the endless variety of schlock from T. Ryans effusions are devoid of new meaning - a definition of noise. Brian Whatcott Altus OK --- >From: Greg Locock <gregloc...@yahoo.com.au> >Date: Fri, Oct 13 2006 6:24 pm >Groups: sci.engr GL: Fair enough, go for it. Sadly neither are really breaking any hard and fast rules. JCT: Actually, Brian's point is that "the endless variety of schlock from T. Ryans effusions are devoid of new meaning - a definition of noise." It's an abuse. GL: Still, it's an interesting experiment. Hmm, I wonder if anyone has tried reporting the contemptible fool Turmel to his ISP? So far as I am aware the T&Cs do theoretically forbid abuse of Usenet. Cheers JCT: Go ahead and form your complaint. Go ahead and make your case for abuse. Let's see you back up your beefs. I say you're a big mouth who can't frame an argument. Go ahead. Make your case! You choose to spout your vacuous mumblings to an engineering group. Act like an engineer and back up what you say. If you can. I bet you can't.
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads