CHOKE on this!

Well, I tried to reason, but you'd rather take shots at me

By the way, I didn't even start this thread, so how about lambasting the rest
of them while you're at it. Hey, it's lonely down here in the dungeon of
your displeasure.

Natalie, sighing at the human capacity to attack

 

I am interested in your comment that it "takes about 3.5 modern diesel cars
to create as much particulate pollution as a single cigarette". Based on
what duration of runtime or miles or gallons of fuel or whatever is a
cigarette worse than 3.5 diesel automobiles? I'm not arguing, just asking
for clarification on something that sounds quite extraordinary.

 

That does not strike me as gentle advice, any more on topic than the rest of
the thread, or anything but a personal attack, but as long as we are giving
advice, the best way to make a thread go away is to ignore it.

 

Natalie, you simply cannot rationalize your propagation of such an intrusive
topic in an automotive NG. Your persecution complex goes hand-in-hand with
your intrusive behaviour. Trust your instincts grasshopper - if you think
you've dragged this string on long enough, you probably have!

Nat, (May I call you Nat?) you may not have started this thread, but you
have certainly been keeping it going. Isn't it time to give it up? We all
know your opinions inside out and we are exhausted.

Funny how you consider yourself as being attacked, when it is you who
perpetuate an OT post. We were feeling the same. *sigh*

 

But you are trying to reason with a mind that chose to add an additional 204
off topic words to this thread in an effort to defend the notion of staying
on topic :^)

You know...."do as I say, not as I do".

 

"Hagrinas O.T. Mivali" <> continued spewing OT
diatribe when she/he wrote in message

Lest there be any doubt whatsoever, that last post was directed at you as
well! ;-) Don't let the screen door hit your butt as you leave the room!

 

Hey, he knows all about me. You should listen, since he thinks he can help
you all by ridding Usenet of this OT plague! The irony here is so amazing I
can hardly believe it. Here is yet another wannabe netcop who's going on the
offensive for something that has been around since the inception of Usenet.
OT netkkkops are always so quick to forget that while a forum may be created
for discussion of a particular subject, it's also another mode of
socialization. I have yet to see any forums that do not allow off-topic
discussion (they try, but to no avail). Most insist that the thread is
marked OT, but that's about it. I really was trying to be nice and maybe a
bit helpful, and as usual, there's a turd in the punchbowl who overreacts and
attacks. He/she/it should just frequent moderated NGs and see all the
netkkkopping anyone could want...

and like all netkkkops, he keeps reading the thread. Go figure.

*rolling eyes*

Natalie

 

LOL yup

Natalie

 

Oh man! What the hell do I know. I am just commenting with tongue in cheek
on the article posted by Philip. I don't really take it at face value. Draw
your own conclusion from the article.

Huw

 

Bradburn! When did you learn to count? Shame on you for not telling Mamma!

 

Nat, don't get too excited that Bradburn agreed with you. His meds haven't
kicked in yet!

 

Lie number one - I never said I was going on too long. You pulled that outta
your ass

No, you may call me Mrs. Larkowski, and just stop reading it! You can
killfile me and then you don't have to worry about seeing *any* of my
comments. For that matter, kill the others that are contributing to the
thread that you now are keeping alive as well! Sheesh - you will see
off-topic stuff in any unmoderated forum. If it really bothers you that
much, you're in for a lot of grief.

I never personally attacked you, but with that condescending shit you said
earlier, you certainly attacked me.

OT posts will never disappear from the whole of Usenet. Deal with it, as you
seem to be the only one really upset about it.

Natalie

 

That's it Nat. When you sense that you've lost a battle of wits (One that
you were completely unarmed for!), don't respond to the one who has
outwitted you, just talk to the air and hope that your ilk will join the
chorus! LMAO!!!

 

Rolling eyes not withstanding, there are 10 or 11 groups this is being
posted to so I don't which one he is actually concerned with, but if the
charter for the group in question exists (and for many groups they don't)
and the charter dictates that OT posts are not allowed, then one should
desist. After all newgroups basically work on the honor system and that is
the only thing that keeps unmoderated groups effective.

I suggest he post the charter here for you to see, and then you can strike
that group from the cross-posting list. If he can't, then it would appear
you haven't done anything remotely wrong.

 

Oooh! Temper, temper!

My gosh Nat, with all your aggresive talk of "killfile me", "kill the
others", we can only hope that you don't have a pointy object in your hand!

Hmmm, could I buy a vowel? What the hell are you talking about? What
personal attack? Quote?

No Nat, I'm not the only one upset about it. I am the only one to challenge
it and that's a big difference. The rest have probably either filtered the
thread or killfiled us both. That's reality!

 

Bradburn, you are such a wuss! Take your meds now honey!

 

That would depend on your state's laws. I found AZ too smoky for my
likings. It would have been nice to be able to sell a million dollars in
real estate and buy an equivalent house in Phoenix with more land for
$135,000, but the idea of not being able to go to a restaurant was not my
idea of where I'd like to live. I found myself walking out of too many
restaurants right after walking in because they made no attempt to segregate
the smokers (if that's even possible.)

If that was true, then 2 in 3 were not smoking. There were also some
potential customers who stayed away because of the smoky atmosphere. I used
to stay away from bowling alleys for the same reason. Now I take my kids,
and kids have birthday parties there. The percentage who smoked did not
necessarily reflect the percentage of potential customers who smoked.

The idea of the California law was not to protect the bar patrons. It was to
protect employees. I think it's still theoretically possible to open a bar
and allow smoking if the owner is the bartender and there are no employees.
(Possibly, other family members could work there.) I haven't paid much
attention to that aspect of the law since it was passed years ago, but I
wouldn't rule out the possiblity of a group of bartenders owning something
jointly and having enough owners to cover all shifts. I don't know of any
bars like that, but if I got that aspect of the law right, they would be
able to allow smoking as long as they had a sign in the entrance that says
that they allow smoking and that it's a substance known to the state of
California to cause cancer, etc.

We'll have to respectfully disagree and leave it at that, then.

This thread did start with a study that aluded to that, at least with
respect to cars. I don't know if there is comprehensive data, but I do know
that I've never come home stinking of exhaust from driving behind another
car. I've had occasions where the person in front of me is a gross polluter,
and I had to switch to recirc, but I've had far more occasions when I had to
do it because somebody in the car in front of me lit up at a red light and
had the window open.

I don't know if *I* get more toxicity from machine exhaust than from
cigarettes, but if I do, it's because I'm not around cigarettes as much. I
do know that if I were in an open room such as a garage with a car's engine
running, I'd be bothered less than if a single person were smoking. The
former would not make me cough, smell up my clothes, or give me a headache.

I think New England is a beautiful place. I haven't been there in a while
though.

In the 70's, I had friends whose parents smoked around them and around other
children. I can't see that happening today, and I don't know if your
parents would react the same way today either.

You could try discussing the benefits of not smoking rather than the scare
tactics and see if it works. In my case, it would be none of my business,
but as a health care worker, it would be reasonable.

 

Even if I had, he didn't say it in the same way you did. There is no need to
be nasty, but this guy feels there is

Natalie

 

Whew! That's quite a statement Hag! (May I call you Hag?) AZ is a pretty big
state! You're not generalizing are you? Couldn't find a single smokefree
spot in the state! Let me tell you Hag, your opinion is really important to
us all now. You really have our attention.

P.S. I'm breaking for dinner. Please feel free to bless us with your inane
comments and I will show you how silly you are when I return. Later Dude!

 

And the true troll has shown himself to be such. Hey, I know cross-posting
is a no-no, so I'm with him there, but OT posts are not a part of any of
these NGs he's ALSO cross-posting on. I'll concede to that, and will only
post to the Toyota NG after this reply (It's the only car one I'm subscribed
to anyway).

Natalie, plonking yet another twerp and moving on