On Jun 5, 2:08*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jun 4, 10:22*pm, "JCW" wrote:





"Dawlish" wrote in message

...
On Jun 4, 8:51 pm, Mike Tullett wrote:

Mike Tullett - Coleraine 55.13°N 6.69°W posted 04/06/2008 19:51:35 GMT

Thanks for making that and my IP address clear Mike. I understand the
process now. It's my choice to use google, as many others do on usenet
(are they all wrong too). Paul

Dear god, Paul, will you please get a life!

I was happy to see you posting somewhere again after you left TWO and I
appreciated seeing your interpretation of the models. Heck, I even enjoyed
the banter with Weatherlawyer! However if Mike didn't highlight your
misunderstandings of how the thread title works then I would have.

Don't have a go at him just because he was showing up the weaknesses of
Google! It's not the first time I've seen you post recently where you seem
to challenge the intent of a post, intentional or not. These guys have been
posting here a very long time as you know and you're among the very few to
react this way... This isn't TWO thank god - far more civil...at least it
was until now and for me to become embroiled well, hey....

I had noticed he had left off his threat to dog my heels like the ****
he is, so I baited him a bit. Then I thought: "Well he might genuinely
be an half wit." So I binned the post and the follow up to his half
wit twin, too.

So is he a dick-head or what?

I hope he's not going to start spamming the group with inundations
about MI5. I get the impression he is only a Valium away from that,
sometimes. Poor bugger.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There's the difficulty above. There is no "banter" with W; just a
desire on my part to monitor his theories - which appears to have got
so far under his skin that abuse, maliciousness and perversity have
multiplied and I'm now a regular in some of his other posts! I don't
"banter" with people who abuse me and others (not everyone; I know he
is just "perplexing" to some) and I'll only reply to W on this group.
Following him across the Internet universe is the style of a stalker
and I know it also annoys him that I won't do that. Not my problem
there!

Many people use web-based access to usenet, instead of a newsreader
group. In the first instance, it is easier and many stick to that.
Others on here do. Are they stupid? No, They just use it because of
it's initial ease of access and stick with it. It's inertia, I know,
Joe, but no-one follows every perfect solution; there are too many in
this life. I honestly think that it is your good self that needs to
"get a life" having seen you post, in response to me, just this once
here and the post is simply a snipe and nothing to do with the
weather. Does everyone have the highest paying current account from a
high street bank? Do you?

One problem with using a web-based access to usenet google groups is
when others use it to mischievous, or malicious advantage. I expected
that response Alan, but you miss the point that there was no need to
highlight the IP address again. I'm aware of that content, but it's
something I'd personally not do. Neither would I ever reveal an email
address of someone who has contacted me through usenet either
(contacting through the "reply to author" button is considered "bad
netiquette" according to some - each to their own on that one; I was
contacted half a dozen times before I contacted anyone else). John is
right. We've encountered a quirk of Google groups, but Google groups
access appears to be functioning OK otherwise. The mischievous, or
malicious advantage will be seen in what happens in response to my
last paragraph and new thread.

Anyway, to finish this, I'll start a new thread. Same title as this
one was previously. If the title is changed, maybe the same few who
feel it is fine to descend from the trees to criticise someone using
web-based access to usenet and therefore not fully understanding
newsreader access, will feel similarly moved to criticise the one who
alters it - but why do I doubt that they will do that. This kind of
activity spreads. There will be others waiting to change the title of
other people's threads now, especially the one who started this. If
that happens, it will benefit no-one. I'd never do it, even if I had
the means. If you few wish to continue talking about google groups and
pointing out how much better your access to them is than those who use
web-based access, fine, but apologies if I leave this discussion.

If you wish to talk about conditions around next Tuesday on the new
thread; great. If you wish to criticise anything about methodology or
accuracy of these forecasts; great, I'll enjoy the debate. If you wish
to post outright abuse and tell everyone you've been "baiting"; fine,
I'll just ignore you and you'll cement your reputation further. If you
wish to change the thread title, that will say far more about the
person that does, than it would ever say about anyone else on here.

Here goes.

Paul