On Feb 28, 2:26*am, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Feb 27, 8:10*pm, Dawlish wrote:





On Feb 27, 7:19*pm, Lawrence13 wrote:

Sorry about this as it seems to be dragging the group down and I'm
going to stop posting for good while as some people here become very
aggressive and nasty if you show any disagreement. The whole thing is
becoming ugly and I'm partly responsible as I get involved in these
ding dongs.

Mr Garvey is patently quite bonkers and once I stop posting he will
find somebody else to fall out with as that seems to be his nature.

*Paul Garvey has emailed threatening me with some sort of legal
action.

He claims I physically threatened him some time ago when basically he
was so arrogantly rude I offered him the opportunity to say it to me
man to man.

Okay a bit Macho and stupid but he really is to ready with insults and
general rudeness. I place this here as he is a madman and I want
everything open out in public, This is what he has just emailed me.

"I warned you last time, when you issued a verbal threat, that I would
act if you did anything similar. This afternoon, I registered your
details, two posts of threats of physical violence that you've been
silly enough to issue and this potential stalking. If you *ever*
decided to cross the moral boundary and holiday down here with intent
against me, the letter that is held by Jamie will show the intent was
planned.

One more actual threat of physical violence and Jamie sends the letter
on to the police. I can assure you they will pay you a visit.

I can't be clearer. Stick to the science and you'll have no problems.
issue threats, veiled, or otherwise and I will act. I've done it
before with great success, stopping what the police decribed as
"potentially dangerous" staking early on and I'll do it again."

Paul you need to see a therapist of some sort .

The idiot is silly enough to make private emails public. There is no
way he will *ever* try again to threaten me on here, as he has been
silly enough to do *twice* before.

You, Larry, need to think very carefully about your posting in the
future.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

* * *You really disappoint me. *I had thought you had abandoned your
overbearing *nature, at least on this group, and become more of a
logic disciplinarian who would shoot down unwarranted claims, and as
such to be welcomed. *There is something to be said for trying to
think the best of people but I now conclude that you don't deserve
such a benign view.
* * *I see no harm in Lawrie (that's Lawrie, not Larry, a cheap shot)
publicising your email. *Anyone who can write stuff like that needs to
be exposed. *Alan White was another recipient of your nastiness and
left the group as a result. *Well done! *Your email reveals you to be
a paranoid bully. *Do you think that Lawrie is seriously going to go
down to Devon just to bop you on the nose? *He would like to, of
course, and so would many others, including me. * But it's not going
to happen coz u aint wurf it. *That, like Lawrence's post, is of
course absurdly macho but it shows you what quite a number of people
think of you, viz. they want to hit you.
* * Go away - get treatment for your persecution complex. *You may
then be invited to re-engage with the world. *When you do, don't
pretend you know more about a subject than you actually do. *It really
gets on people's tits!
* * *In the next few days I'll probably get a visit from Surrey
Police. *It will go thus:

Cop: *Tudor Hughes?
*Me: *Yes
Cop: *We understand you may be part of a conspiracy to shout at Paul
Garvey, to *intimidate him with a trombone and possibly even poke him
in the tummy with it.
Me: * Well, yeah, sort of.
Cop: *We fully understand your point of view but would point out that
the last action is actually an offence and we would strongly advise
you not to do it, sir.
Me: * Yeah OK.
Cop: *Enjoy the rest of your day, sir.
Me: * Do you *have* to say that?
Cop: *Yeah, unfortunately we do. *Is this your car?

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.



Damn, I've disappointed someone.............

Larry, The bet stands. Either accept, or you really will be a
hypocrite. When you post your cherry picked idiocy, you'll see it
again. Think before you write when you get annoyed and consider
issuing your threats. Other people's opinions are other people's
opinions, but I take them seriously and I will do what I said I would.
I can't be clearer.

"Dawlish" wrote in message
...
On Feb 28, 2:26 am, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Feb 27, 8:10 pm, Dawlish wrote:





On Feb 27, 7:19 pm, Lawrence13 wrote:

Sorry about this as it seems to be dragging the group down and I'm
going to stop posting for good while as some people here become very
aggressive and nasty if you show any disagreement. The whole thing is
becoming ugly and I'm partly responsible as I get involved in these
ding dongs.

Mr Garvey is patently quite bonkers and once I stop posting he will
find somebody else to fall out with as that seems to be his nature.

Paul Garvey has emailed threatening me with some sort of legal
action.

He claims I physically threatened him some time ago when basically he
was so arrogantly rude I offered him the opportunity to say it to me
man to man.

Okay a bit Macho and stupid but he really is to ready with insults and
general rudeness. I place this here as he is a madman and I want
everything open out in public, This is what he has just emailed me.

"I warned you last time, when you issued a verbal threat, that I would
act if you did anything similar. This afternoon, I registered your
details, two posts of threats of physical violence that you've been
silly enough to issue and this potential stalking. If you *ever*
decided to cross the moral boundary and holiday down here with intent
against me, the letter that is held by Jamie will show the intent was
planned.

One more actual threat of physical violence and Jamie sends the letter
on to the police. I can assure you they will pay you a visit.

I can't be clearer. Stick to the science and you'll have no problems.
issue threats, veiled, or otherwise and I will act. I've done it
before with great success, stopping what the police decribed as
"potentially dangerous" staking early on and I'll do it again."

Paul you need to see a therapist of some sort .

The idiot is silly enough to make private emails public. There is no
way he will *ever* try again to threaten me on here, as he has been
silly enough to do *twice* before.

You, Larry, need to think very carefully about your posting in the
future.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You really disappoint me. I had thought you had abandoned your
overbearing nature, at least on this group, and become more of a
logic disciplinarian who would shoot down unwarranted claims, and as
such to be welcomed. There is something to be said for trying to
think the best of people but I now conclude that you don't deserve
such a benign view.
I see no harm in Lawrie (that's Lawrie, not Larry, a cheap shot)
publicising your email. Anyone who can write stuff like that needs to
be exposed. Alan White was another recipient of your nastiness and
left the group as a result. Well done! Your email reveals you to be
a paranoid bully. Do you think that Lawrie is seriously going to go
down to Devon just to bop you on the nose? He would like to, of
course, and so would many others, including me. But it's not going
to happen coz u aint wurf it. That, like Lawrence's post, is of
course absurdly macho but it shows you what quite a number of people
think of you, viz. they want to hit you.
Go away - get treatment for your persecution complex. You may
then be invited to re-engage with the world. When you do, don't
pretend you know more about a subject than you actually do. It really
gets on people's tits!
In the next few days I'll probably get a visit from Surrey
Police. It will go thus:

Cop: Tudor Hughes?
Me: Yes
Cop: We understand you may be part of a conspiracy to shout at Paul
Garvey, to intimidate him with a trombone and possibly even poke him
in the tummy with it.
Me: Well, yeah, sort of.
Cop: We fully understand your point of view but would point out that
the last action is actually an offence and we would strongly advise
you not to do it, sir.
Me: Yeah OK.
Cop: Enjoy the rest of your day, sir.
Me: Do you *have* to say that?
Cop: Yeah, unfortunately we do. Is this your car?

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.



Damn, I've disappointed someone.............

Larry, The bet stands. Either accept, or you really will be a
hypocrite. When you post your cherry picked idiocy, you'll see it
again. Think before you write when you get annoyed and consider
issuing your threats. Other people's opinions are other people's
opinions, but I take them seriously and I will do what I said I would.
I can't be clearer.


God this is sad, I thought i woke up on another
planet.......................perhaps i may have!

Case of wasting police time i would have thought.

Rob

"Dawlish" wrote in message
...

On Feb 27, 10:30 pm, "Eskimo Will" wrote:
"Mike McMillan" wrote in message

news:29655341.3706.1330373358873.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfy7...

I will be sorry if you go, I enjoy your posts.

Mike McMillan

Garden Isle

So do I, especially when we avoid stupid AGW arguments which are utterly
pointless and boring.
At least the weather looks like turning colder and more interesting next
week with some snow around!

Will
--



What on earth has it got to do with a behind the killfile 3rd party?

Surely Dawlish the question you need to answer for yourself is why you have
'previous' when it comes to people taking a dislike to you even when they've
never met you!

Personally I enjoy Lawrence's posts even if I might disagree with him on
occasions. I also enjoy some of yours but I know who I'd prefer to have a
drink with.

Tony

Which has what to do with weather?

Steve

On Feb 28, 9:25*am, "Tony Kenyon"
wrote:
"Dawlish" *wrote in message

...

On Feb 27, 10:30 pm, "Eskimo Will" wrote:









"Mike McMillan" wrote in message

news:29655341.3706.1330373358873.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfy7....

I will be sorry if you go, I enjoy your posts.

Mike McMillan

Garden Isle

So do I, especially when we avoid stupid AGW arguments which are utterly
pointless and boring.
At least the weather looks like turning colder and more interesting next
week with some snow around!

Will
--

What on earth has it got to do with a behind the killfile 3rd party?

Surely Dawlish the question you need to answer for yourself is why you have
'previous' when it comes to people taking a dislike to you even when they've
never met you!

Personally I enjoy Lawrence's posts *even if I might disagree with him on
occasions. I also enjoy some of yours but I know who I'd prefer to have a
drink with.

Tony

I would just like to urge everyone to do as I do and not to read
Dawlish's posts. When I did read then they were either bland and
uninformative, or rude and upsetting. So long as you don't read them
then you can't be upset by them. Moreover, you are not goaded into
replying to him and then recirculating his messages under your name.
It is too much to hope that everyone will ignore him and that he will
then go away. But at least you can protect yourself by not reading his
posts.

Cheers, Alastair.

On Feb 28, 2:26*am, Tudor Hughes wrote:

* * *In the next few days I'll probably get a visit from Surrey
Police. *It will go thus:

Cop: *Tudor Hughes?
*Me: *Yes
Cop: *We understand you may be part of a conspiracy to shout at Paul
Garvey, to *intimidate him with a trombone and possibly even poke him
in the tummy with it.
Me: * Well, yeah, sort of.
Cop: *We fully understand your point of view but would point out that
the last action is actually an offence and we would strongly advise
you not to do it, sir.
Me: * Yeah OK.
Cop: *Enjoy the rest of your day, sir.
Me: * Do you *have* to say that?
Cop: *Yeah, unfortunately we do. *Is this your car?

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

LOL,

Cheers, Alastair.

On 28/02/2012 12:35, Alastair wrote:
I would just like to urge everyone to do as I do and not to read
Dawlish's posts. When I did read then they were either bland and
uninformative, or rude and upsetting. So long as you don't read them
then you can't be upset by them. Moreover, you are not goaded into
replying to him and then recirculating his messages under your name.
It is too much to hope that everyone will ignore him and that he will
then go away. But at least you can protect yourself by not reading his
posts.

Hear, hear and triple hear!

Well said Alastair!

--
Wendy Tinley

Lawrence13 scrive:

Sorry about this as it seems to be dragging the group down and I'm going
to stop posting for good while ...


Don't stop posting Lawrence. I would get lonely.

--
Gianna
Peterhead, Scotland

buchan-meteo.org.uk

Wendy Tinley wrote:
On 28/02/2012 12:35, Alastair wrote:
I would just like to urge everyone to do as I do and not to read
Dawlish's posts. When I did read then they were either bland and
uninformative, or rude and upsetting. So long as you don't read them
then you can't be upset by them. Moreover, you are not goaded into
replying to him and then recirculating his messages under your name.
It is too much to hope that everyone will ignore him and that he will
then go away. But at least you can protect yourself by not reading
his posts.

Hear, hear and triple hear!

Well said Alastair!

Since I have killfiled him the only sight I have of his posts is when
another thoughtless person reproduces them and exposes them to everybody.
Unless of course I have killfiled that other person...

Roger

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 04:35:59 -0800, Alastair wrote:



I would just like to urge everyone to do as I do and not to read
Dawlish's posts. When I did read then they were either bland and
uninformative, or rude and upsetting. So long as you don't read them
then you can't be upset by them. Moreover, you are not goaded into
replying to him and then recirculating his messages under your name. It
is too much to hope that everyone will ignore him and that he will then
go away. But at least you can protect yourself by not reading his posts.

Cheers, Alastair.

I'd say read what you want. The problem's in the reaction, not the action.
I think Will has the right of it: Wu-wei

If all else fails try thinking of this when you read his posts:
http://xkcd.com/386/