|
General » rec.autos.driving » political sign damage on interstate
| political sign damage on interstate [message #792934] |
Sun, 03 February 2008 16:28 |
|
Would like some opinions on this incident. A political sign left over
from a local campaign was abandoned and punctured my fuel tank on an
interstate highway. Basic information on this incident at :
http://groups.google.com/group/mcdowellsignscrewedupmycar/we b/general-information-and-chronology?hl=en
Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually have
some responsibilty for damages? Minor deductable costs but was more
the point of the possible recovery of damages. Any opinions?
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #792944 ] |
Sun, 03 February 2008 17:47 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #792954 ] |
Sun, 03 February 2008 19:59 |
|
On Feb 3, 11:47=EF=BF=BDam, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 07:28:04 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >Would like some opinions on this incident. A political sign left over
> >from a local campaign was abandoned and punctured my fuel tank on an
> >interstate highway. Basic information on this incident at :
>
> > http://groups.google.com/group/mcdowellsignscrewedupmycar/we b/general...
>
> > Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually have
> >some responsibilty for damages? Minor deductable costs but was more
> >the point of the possible recovery of damages. Any opinions?
>
> My opinion is that this is a highly-elaborate troll. You went to a
> heck of a lot of effort to set up that web site to support your
> ridiculous complaint. However, the Mother of All Elaborate Trolls is
> still CalQaeda.
>
> That, BTW, is the *only* category where calrog.com actually does beat
> all the competition. :)
> --
> Please don't give financial rewards to trolls -
> DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
This is real and not troll. It might be trivial to some and really
expected the group would be to temporarily transfer pictures.
You dont like the complaint? dont respond.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #792986 ] |
Sun, 03 February 2008 22:58 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #792999 ] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 00:08 |
|
On Feb 3, 4:58=EF=BF=BDpm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:59:22 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 3, 11:47?am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 07:28:04 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >> > Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually have=
> >> >some responsibilty for damages? Any opinions?
>
> >> My opinion is that this is a highly-elaborate troll. You went to a
> >> heck of a lot of effort to set up that web site to support your
> >> ridiculous complaint. However, the Mother of All Elaborate Trolls is
> >> still CalQaeda.
>
> >> That, BTW, is the *only* category where calrog.com actually does beat
> >> all the competition. :)
>
> >This is real and not troll. It might be trivial to some and really
> >expected the group would be to temporarily transfer pictures.
>
> >You dont like the complaint? dont respond.
>
> If you don't like my opinion, then don't ask for it, dumbass.
> --
> Please don't give financial rewards to trolls -
> DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hey Shithead! I just asked this group for an opinion. Not a big deal
it would seem. You did not offer one and just acted like an arrogant
asshole.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793000 ] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 00:31 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793030 ] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 05:20 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793038 ] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 06:06 |
|
On Feb 3, 8:20 pm, Ashton Crusher <d... [at] moore.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:31:59 -0800, Scott in SoCal
>
>
>
> <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 15:08:25 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
> ><mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>On Feb 3, 4:58?pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:59:22 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >>> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >>> >On Feb 3, 11:47?am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 07:28:04 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >>> >> > Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually have
> >>> >> >some responsibilty for damages? Any opinions?
>
> >>> >> My opinion is that this is a highly-elaborate troll.
>
> >>> >This is real and not troll. It might be trivial to some and really
> >>> >expected the group would be to temporarily transfer pictures.
>
> >>> >You dont like the complaint? dont respond.
>
> >>> If you don't like my opinion, then don't ask for it, dumbass.
>
> >>Hey Shithead! I just asked this group for an opinion.
>
> >And you got one. You just didn't like it.
>
> >>You did not offer one
>
> >Sure I did. Go back and re-read the line quoted above that begins with
> >"My opinion is..."
>
> >However, since you didn't like my original opinion, I have another
> >opinion for you: you're an incompetent fuck driver who ran over a
> >piece of easily-avoidable road debris and damaged his own car. An
> >opinion that, I suspect, is shared by just about everyone else here.
>
> Not shared by me. Most localities have laws that require political
> signs be removed within XX days of the election. I think this would
> be a good case for small claims court; too many of the candidates fail
> to clean up their mess, esp those who lose the election.
That doesn't imply that folks in cars have no responsibility to avoid
debris in the road.
If the candidate didn't put the sign there, then he isn't responsible
for damages.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793062 ] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 14:27 |
|
On Feb 3, 6:31=A0pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 15:08:25 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 3, 4:58?pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:59:22 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >> >On Feb 3, 11:47?am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 07:28:04 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >> >> > Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually h=
ave
> >> >> >some responsibilty for damages? Any opinions?
>
> >> >> My opinion is that this is a highly-elaborate troll.
>
> >> >This is real and not troll. It might be trivial to some and really
> >> >expected the group would be to temporarily transfer pictures.
>
> >> >You dont like the complaint? dont respond.
>
> >> If you don't like my opinion, then don't ask for it, dumbass.
>
> >Hey Shithead! I just asked this group for an opinion.
>
> And you got one. You just didn't like it.
>
> >You did not offer one
>
> Sure I did. Go back and re-read the line quoted above that begins with
> "My opinion is..."
>
> However, since you didn't like my original opinion, I have another
> opinion for you: you're an incompetent fuck driver who ran over a
> piece of easily-avoidable road debris and damaged his own car. An
> opinion that, I suspect, is shared by just about everyone else here.
> --
> Please don't give financial rewards to trolls -
> DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
x2
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793074 ] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 16:05 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793124 ] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 23:05 |
|
On Feb 3, 9:28 am, "mellow... [at] aol.com" <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> Would like some opinions on this incident. A political sign left over
> from a local campaign was abandoned and punctured my fuel tank on an
> interstate highway. Basic information on this incident at :
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/mcdowellsignscrewedupmycar/we b/general...
>
> Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually have
> some responsibilty for damages? Minor deductable costs but was more
> the point of the possible recovery of damages. Any opinions?
Yeah; spinning your wheels. Go to the local government's council or
board or whatever and ask for your $100. Take earplugs if you don't
want to hear the laughter.
--
C.R. Krieger
(Not a lawyer on TV ...)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793137 ] |
Tue, 05 February 2008 01:22 |
|
On Feb 3, 9:28=A0am, "mellow... [at] aol.com" <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> Would like some opinions on this incident. A political sign left over
> from a local campaign was abandoned and punctured my fuel tank on an
> interstate highway. Basic information on this incident at :
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/mcdowellsignscrewedupmycar/we b/general...
>
> =A0Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually have
> some responsibilty for damages? Minor deductable costs but was more
> the point of the possible recovery of damages. Any opinions?
A political sign remnant would be no different than other debris on
the highway, which should usually be reasonable avoidable to contact
on the road. That's why you'd carry comprehensive insurance. Any
court action to expect results other than what is normally expected on
a comp claim would be treated as a potential candidate for a Stella
Award (named for the litigant in the infamous McD's coffee case).
It would be equivalent to suing DNR for deer in the highway.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793143 ] |
Tue, 05 February 2008 01:57 |
|
On Feb 4, 7:22=EF=BF=BDpm, MLOM <gr... [at] netzero.net> wrote:
> On Feb 3, 9:28=EF=BF=BDam, "mellow... [at] aol.com" <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Would like some opinions on this incident. A political sign left over
> > from a local campaign was abandoned and punctured my fuel tank on an
> > interstate highway. Basic information on this incident at :
>
> > http://groups.google.com/group/mcdowellsignscrewedupmycar/we b/general...
>
> > =EF=BF=BDAm I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actuall=
y have
> > some responsibilty for damages? Minor deductable costs but was more
> > the point of the possible recovery of damages. Any opinions?
>
> A political sign remnant would be no different than other debris on
> the highway, which should usually be reasonable avoidable to contact
> on the road. =EF=BF=BDThat's why you'd carry comprehensive insurance. =EF=
=BF=BDAny
> court action to expect results other than what is normally expected on
> a comp claim would be treated as a potential candidate for a Stella
> Award (named for the litigant in the infamous McD's coffee case).
>
> It would be equivalent to suing DNR for deer in the highway.
Well put as is the advise in several other groups. Thanks.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793395 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 06:25 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793396 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 06:27 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793397 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 06:30 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793398 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 06:40 |
|
On Feb 6, 9:25 pm, Ashton Crusher <d... [at] moore.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 21:06:52 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
>
>
>
> <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 3, 8:20 pm, Ashton Crusher <d... [at] moore.net> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:31:59 -0800, Scott in SoCal
>
> >> <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 15:08:25 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
> >> ><mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> >>On Feb 3, 4:58?pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >>> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:59:22 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >> >>> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >On Feb 3, 11:47?am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 07:28:04 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >> >>> >> > Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually have
> >> >>> >> >some responsibilty for damages? Any opinions?
>
> >> >>> >> My opinion is that this is a highly-elaborate troll.
>
> >> >>> >This is real and not troll. It might be trivial to some and really
> >> >>> >expected the group would be to temporarily transfer pictures.
>
> >> >>> >You dont like the complaint? dont respond.
>
> >> >>> If you don't like my opinion, then don't ask for it, dumbass.
>
> >> >>Hey Shithead! I just asked this group for an opinion.
>
> >> >And you got one. You just didn't like it.
>
> >> >>You did not offer one
>
> >> >Sure I did. Go back and re-read the line quoted above that begins with
> >> >"My opinion is..."
>
> >> >However, since you didn't like my original opinion, I have another
> >> >opinion for you: you're an incompetent fuck driver who ran over a
> >> >piece of easily-avoidable road debris and damaged his own car. An
> >> >opinion that, I suspect, is shared by just about everyone else here.
>
> >> Not shared by me. Most localities have laws that require political
> >> signs be removed within XX days of the election. I think this would
> >> be a good case for small claims court; too many of the candidates fail
> >> to clean up their mess, esp those who lose the election.
>
> >That doesn't imply that folks in cars have no responsibility to avoid
> >debris in the road.
>
> >If the candidate didn't put the sign there, then he isn't responsible
> >for damages.
>
> >E.P.
>
> The candidate is responsible for his signs. They aren't put there by
> non-partisan elves.
So, if a Trinitron falls off a truck and damages your car, you sue
Sony, right?
And it couldn't POSSIBLY be that a politcal opponent, or someone
favoring a political opponent plucked the sign out of the ground and
threw it into the road, right?
Is the candidate responsible for that?
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793399 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 06:42 |
|
On Feb 6, 9:30 pm, Ashton Crusher <d... [at] moore.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:22:48 -0800 (PST), MLOM <gr... [at] netzero.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Feb 3, 9:28 am, "mellow... [at] aol.com" <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >> Would like some opinions on this incident. A political sign left over
> >> from a local campaign was abandoned and punctured my fuel tank on an
> >> interstate highway. Basic information on this incident at :
>
> >> http://groups.google.com/group/mcdowellsignscrewedupmycar/we b/general...
>
> >> Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually have
> >> some responsibilty for damages? Minor deductable costs but was more
> >> the point of the possible recovery of damages. Any opinions?
>
> >A political sign remnant would be no different than other debris on
> >the highway, which should usually be reasonable avoidable to contact
> >on the road. That's why you'd carry comprehensive insurance. Any
> >court action to expect results other than what is normally expected on
> >a comp claim would be treated as a potential candidate for a Stella
> >Award (named for the litigant in the infamous McD's coffee case).
>
> >It would be equivalent to suing DNR for deer in the highway.
>
> If the deer was actually owned by someone, not just a wild deer, and
> depending on the state laws, a person who hit it might very well have
> an excellent case against the owner of the deer.
>
> The main reason you rarely can sue over debris on the highway is
> because you have no way to prove who is responsible for it being
> there. Most debris has no name tag attached.
And, in the case of this sign, you have no idea who put it there. Or
if the wind put it there.
Just because it has a name on it doesn't mean that person put it
there.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793407 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 08:11 |
|
On Feb 6, 9:27 pm, Ashton Crusher <d... [at] moore.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 07:05:49 -0800, Scott in SoCal
>
>
>
> <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:20:08 -0700, Ashton Crusher <d... [at] moore.net>
> >wrote:
>
> >>>However, since you didn't like my original opinion, I have another
> >>>opinion for you: you're an incompetent fuck driver who ran over a
> >>>piece of easily-avoidable road debris and damaged his own car. An
> >>>opinion that, I suspect, is shared by just about everyone else here.
>
> >>Not shared by me. Most localities have laws that require political
> >>signs be removed within XX days of the election.
>
> >The fact that it was a political sign is completely irrelevant. It
> >could have been any other piece of road debris and the OP would have
> >still hit it and damaged his car.
>
> >If a Trinitron TV had fallen off the back of a pickup truck and the OP
> >had struck it, the OP would be asking if he has a legal case against
> >Sony. And the answer would be the same.
>
> Wow, what a mess of an analogy. The OP isn't trying to sue the
> PRINTER of the signs. The proper analogy would be if ANY TV had
> fallen off the back of a pickup truck and the OP had struck it, the OP
> would have a legal case against teh OWNER of the TV.
No, just the *transporter* of the T.V. Those might be the same
person, but might not be.
The person(s) directly responsible for leaving the debris in the
roadway is the one to go after, not the person who paid to have the
advertising done. If IKEA has a billboard space rented, and the
billboard falls on your car, IKEA is not the responsible party.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793433 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 15:56 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793435 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 16:03 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793494 ] |
Fri, 08 February 2008 02:38 |
|
On Feb 3, 6:31=EF=BF=BDpm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 15:08:25 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 3, 4:58?pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:59:22 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >> >On Feb 3, 11:47?am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 07:28:04 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> >> >> > Am I spinning my wheels, or does the political campaign actually h=
ave
> >> >> >some responsibilty for damages? Any opinions?
>
> >> >> My opinion is that this is a highly-elaborate troll.
>
> >> >This is real and not troll. It might be trivial to some and really
> >> >expected the group would be to temporarily transfer pictures.
>
> >> >You dont like the complaint? dont respond.
>
> >> If you don't like my opinion, then don't ask for it, dumbass.
>
> >Hey Shithead! I just asked this group for an opinion.
>
> And you got one. You just didn't like it.
>
> >You did not offer one
>
> Sure I did. Go back and re-read the line quoted above that begins with
> "My opinion is..."
>
> However, since you didn't like my original opinion, I have another
> opinion for you: you're an incompetent fuck driver who ran over a
> piece of easily-avoidable road debris and damaged his own car. An
> opinion that, I suspect, is shared by just about everyone else here.
> --
> Please don't give financial rewards to trolls -
> DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Scott:
Simple question that most responded well even if they don't consider
the complaint relevant. That is except for you that starts name
calling from the safety of your keyboard. Obviously something is wrong
with you and if you wish to be of use to newsgroups why don't you go
on a crusade against the viagra and cialis spammers if that is not
beyond your capabilities. Better yet, stop whining on the computer,
turn it off, and go out and get some fresh air.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793508 ] |
Fri, 08 February 2008 04:53 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793663 ] |
Sat, 09 February 2008 14:45 |
|
On Feb 7, 10:53=EF=BF=BDpm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:38:09 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> >Simple question that most responded well even if they don't consider
> >the complaint relevant. That is except for you that starts name
> >calling from the safety of your keyboard.
>
> Like when you called me "asshole" and "shithead," tough guy?
>
> >Obviously something is wrong
> >with you and if you wish to be of use to newsgroups why don't you go
> >on a crusade against the viagra and cialis spammers if that is not
> >beyond your capabilities. Better yet, stop whining on the computer,
> >turn it off, and go out and get some fresh air.
>
> For your part, you should try to develop a thicker skin before you
> attempt to post to USENET again. You can dish it out but you can't
> take it.
> --
> Please don't give financial rewards to trolls -
> DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Actually have utilized USENET for number of years. If you scroll back
to the original post you see this started off as just a question on an
incident. Not the biggest issue in the world but one that I thought
was appropriate for driving or legal newsgroups. Some thought it was
possible I might be right and some had opposite opinions. Obviously,
anyone in a newsgroup should expect this. As a vet of active and
National Guard service developed a thicker skin than a wimp like you
can probably imagine. The problem with you is you came on like one of
those mousy little dogs that yap and snarl when a visitor comes into
its house. You started with the name calling without any logic or even
familiarity of my driving.
I would say shithead and asshole is a bit mild and appropriate on your
posts. Seems that this thread served the purpose and personally have
better things to do than trade insults with one mroe keyboard
commando. So again, why not pursue the real spammers like the viagra
and nigerian fortune hunters. Let relevant threads live on and ones
that you feel are inappropriate die in cyberspace. As one person
stated: "breathe in, breathe out, and go on". Try it and attempt to do
something worthwhile with your pathetic life.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793681 ] |
Sat, 09 February 2008 19:45 |
|
On Feb 9, 5:45 am, "mellow... [at] aol.com" <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 10:53=EF=BF=BDpm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote=
:
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:38:09 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> > <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> > >Simple question that most responded well even if they don't consider
> > >the complaint relevant. That is except for you that starts name
> > >calling from the safety of your keyboard.
>
> > Like when you called me "asshole" and "shithead," tough guy?
>
> > >Obviously something is wrong
> > >with you and if you wish to be of use to newsgroups why don't you go
> > >on a crusade against the viagra and cialis spammers if that is not
> > >beyond your capabilities. Better yet, stop whining on the computer,
> > >turn it off, and go out and get some fresh air.
>
> > For your part, you should try to develop a thicker skin before you
> > attempt to post to USENET again. You can dish it out but you can't
> > take it.
> > --
> > Please don't give financial rewards to trolls -
> > DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
>
> Actually have utilized USENET for number of years.
Then why argue? If you are experienced, and have a thick skin, then
you take what you like, and leave the rest. You fired the first name-
call, which doesn't sound much like a thick skin to me.
When you ask a question in public, be prepared for answers that you
don't like, aren't relevant, and are just a means by which people pass
time. If you don't like those conditions, Usenet is not for you.
I do like your keyboard commando quip. Mostly for it's hilarious
irony, but still an apt description of some of the pimply nerds that
act all tough over the internet.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793701 ] |
Sat, 09 February 2008 22:28 |
|
On Feb 9, 1:45=C2=A0pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 9, 5:45 am, "mellow... [at] aol.com" <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 7, 10:53=EF=BF=BDpm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wro=
te:
>
> > > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:38:09 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> > > <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> > > >Simple question that most responded well even if they don't consider
> > > >the complaint relevant. That is except for you that starts name
> > > >calling from the safety of your keyboard.
>
> > > Like when you called me "asshole" and "shithead," tough guy?
>
> > > >Obviously something is wrong
> > > >with you and if you wish to be of use to newsgroups why don't you go
> > > >on a crusade against the viagra and cialis spammers if that is not
> > > >beyond your capabilities. Better yet, stop whining on the computer,
> > > >turn it off, and go out and get some fresh air.
>
> > > For your part, you should try to develop a thicker skin before you
> > > attempt to post to USENET again. You can dish it out but you can't
> > > take it.
> > > --
> > > Please don't give financial rewards to trolls -
> > > DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
>
> > Actually have utilized USENET for number of years.
>
> Then why argue? =C2=A0If you are experienced, and have a thick skin, then
> you take what you like, and leave the rest. =C2=A0You fired the first name=
-
> call, which doesn't sound much like a thick skin to me.
>
> When you ask a question in public, be prepared for answers that you
> don't like, aren't relevant, and are just a means by which people pass
> time. =C2=A0If you don't like those conditions, Usenet is not for you.
>
> I do like your keyboard commando quip. =C2=A0Mostly for it's hilarious
> irony, but still an apt description of some of the pimply nerds that
> act all tough over the internet.
>
> E.P.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not worth much more effort but here is Scott's first response to my
original question:
"My opinion is that this is a highly-elaborate troll. You went to a
heck of a lot of effort to set up that web site to support your
ridiculous complaint. However, the Mother of All Elaborate Trolls is
still CalQaeda."
Fairly minor stuff till his second post:
"If you don't like my opinion, then don't ask for it, dumbass."
Here is Scotts third post:
"However, since you didn't like my original opinion, I have another
opinion for you: you're an incompetent fuck driver who ran over a
piece of easily-avoidable road debris and damaged his own car. An
opinion that, I suspect, is shared by just about everyone else here."
Obviously, most seemed to just respond reasonably. But see Scott
doesnt really bother posting much of his own stuff, just whines about
everyone else.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793710 ] |
Sun, 10 February 2008 00:01 |
|
On Feb 9, 1:28 pm, "mellow... [at] aol.com" <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> On Feb 9, 1:45 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I do like your keyboard commando quip. Mostly for it's hilarious
> > irony, but still an apt description of some of the pimply nerds that
> > act all tough over the internet.
>
> > E.P.
> Not worth much more effort but here is Scott's first response to my
> original question:
>
> "My opinion is that this is a highly-elaborate troll. You went to a
> heck of a lot of effort to set up that web site to support your
> ridiculous complaint. However, the Mother of All Elaborate Trolls is
> still CalQaeda."
Yeah, no name calling. His opinion was that it was a troll post. I'm
beginning to agree.
> Fairly minor stuff till his second post:
>
> "If you don't like my opinion, then don't ask for it, dumbass."
In response to your name-calling, right?
> Here is Scotts third post:
>
> "However, since you didn't like my original opinion, I have another
> opinion for you: you're an incompetent fuck driver who ran over a
> piece of easily-avoidable road debris and damaged his own car. An
> opinion that, I suspect, is shared by just about everyone else here."
Actually, I agree with that opinion. I have no idea how people run
over stuff in the road. Seriously.
> Obviously, most seemed to just respond reasonably. But see Scott
> doesnt really bother posting much of his own stuff, just whines about
> everyone else.
If that's your assessment, then you don't know anything about Scott.
You're making yourself look even more foolish. Cut your losses.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #793962 ] |
Mon, 11 February 2008 23:04 |
|
On Feb 9, 8:45=C2=A0am, "mellow... [at] aol.com" <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 10:53=EF=BF=BDpm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote=
:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:38:09 -0800 (PST), "mellow... [at] aol.com"
>
> > <mellow... [at] aol.com> wrote:
> > >Simple question that most responded well even if they don't consider
> > >the complaint relevant. That is except for you that starts name
> > >calling from the safety of your keyboard.
>
> > Like when you called me "asshole" and "shithead," tough guy?
>
> > >Obviously something is wrong
> > >with you and if you wish to be of use to newsgroups why don't you go
> > >on a crusade against the viagra and cialis spammers if that is not
> > >beyond your capabilities. Better yet, stop whining on the computer,
> > >turn it off, and go out and get some fresh air.
>
> > For your part, you should try to develop a thicker skin before you
> > attempt to post to USENET again. You can dish it out but you can't
> > take it.
> > --
> > Please don't give financial rewards to trolls -
> > DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
>
> Actually have utilized USENET for number of years. If you scroll back
> to the original post you see this started off as just a question on an
> incident. Not the biggest issue in the world but one that I thought
> was appropriate for driving or legal newsgroups. Some thought it was
> possible I might be right and some had opposite opinions. Obviously,
> anyone in a newsgroup should expect this. As a vet of active and
> National Guard service developed a thicker skin than a wimp like you
> can probably imagine. The problem with you is you came on like one of
> those mousy little dogs that yap and snarl when a visitor comes into
> its house. You started with the name calling without any logic or even
> familiarity of my driving.
>
> I would say shithead and asshole is a bit mild and appropriate on your
> posts. Seems that this thread served the purpose and personally have
> better things to do than trade insults with one mroe keyboard
> commando. So again, why not pursue the real spammers like the viagra
> and nigerian fortune hunters. Let relevant threads live on and ones
> that you feel are inappropriate die in cyberspace. As one person
> stated: "breathe in, breathe out, and go on". Try it and attempt to do
> something worthwhile with your pathetic life.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Whoops, meant HIS posts.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794114 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 06:43 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794115 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 06:45 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794117 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 06:48 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794118 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 06:55 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794120 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 06:57 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794127 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 07:18 |
|
On Feb 12, 9:43 pm, Ashton Crusher <d... [at] moore.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 06:56:36 -0800, Scott in SoCal
>
>
>
> <scottenazt... [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:25:25 -0700, Ashton Crusher <d... [at] moore.net>
> >wrote:
>
> >>On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 21:06:52 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
> >><gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>If the candidate didn't put the sign there, then he isn't responsible
> >>>for damages.
>
> >>The candidate is responsible for his signs. They aren't put there by
> >>non-partisan elves.
>
> >So if I put up a sign that says "Vote for Ashton Crusher for USENET
> >Kook of the Year" and that sign blows into the road and damages a
> >vehicle, YOU are responsible for the damage?
>
> If I authorized you to put the sign up I *might* be. It's up to a
> court to decide but if the damage was significant it would be worth
> taking to court.
>
> If a truck drops gravel in front of you and breaks your windshield
> they are responsible for it. Same principle
Actually, in a lot of places, they aren't.
It gets termed "road hazard", unless you can prove that the load was
improperly secured.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794136 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 15:27 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794137 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 15:32 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794138 ] |
Wed, 13 February 2008 15:33 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794212 ] |
Thu, 14 February 2008 07:50 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794213 ] |
Thu, 14 February 2008 07:50 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: political sign damage on interstate [message #794214 ] |
Thu, 14 February 2008 08:05 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Thu Jan 8 02:30:04 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.16032 Sekunden |
