Energy Gel - Maltodextrin vs. Brown Rice Syrup

[[email protected]]

Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
maltodextrin or real honey in others?
Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks

[RicodJour]

On Dec 12, 12:41 pm, wrote:
> Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
> health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
> maltodextrin or real honey in others?
> Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks

In my opinion I have no experience in either muck. Energy gel is
pablum for adults with weak teeth and sore gums. Eat something
crunchy - you're teeth will thank you.

R

[SLAVE of THE STATE]

On Dec 12, 9:41 am, wrote:
> Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
> health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
> maltodextrin or real honey in others?
> Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks

I don't know what the sugars are in brown rice syrup or honey.
Maltodextrin is established as easily digestible by most people. It
works for me. You'll have to test it for yourself. I think I
remember that all carbs are basically 4 Cal/gram, so on that primitive
basis they are all equal.

Digestibility is a different matter. A lot of people have stomach
upset with when there is too high a concentration of fructose. Good
drinks for me always had less than 2% for a 7% solution, but they did
have some fructose. One doc -- M Colgan, IIRC -- wrote that fructose
preferentially restored liver glycogen, and that is why it was
included. I don't know about that for racers, as you ought to be
burning more than you can restore anyway. (Post-race/train recovery
is another matter.)


For 7% solutions, I suppose basic glucose is good, although gatorade
which is sucrose seems fine. For concentrated drinks, bars, or gels,
I would look for maltodextrin as the primary energy content.

Make sure your frame is not a compact. You want a frame pump and
large 30oz Zefal bottles.

[[email protected]]

On Dec 12, 12:06 pm, SLAVE of THE STATE > wrote:
> On Dec 12, 9:41 am, wrote:
>
> > Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
> > health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
> > maltodextrin or real honey in others?
> > Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks
>
> I don't know what the sugars are in brown rice syrup or honey.
> Maltodextrin is established as easily digestible by most people. It
> works for me. You'll have to test it for yourself. I think I
> remember that all carbs are basically 4 Cal/gram, so on that primitive
> basis they are all equal.
>
> Digestibility is a different matter. A lot of people have stomach
> upset with when there is too high a concentration of fructose. Good
> drinks for me always had less than 2% for a 7% solution, but they did
> have some fructose. One doc -- M Colgan, IIRC -- wrote that fructose
> preferentially restored liver glycogen, and that is why it was
> included. I don't know about that for racers, as you ought to be
> burning more than you can restore anyway. (Post-race/train recovery
> is another matter.)
>
> For 7% solutions, I suppose basic glucose is good, although gatorade
> which is sucrose seems fine. For concentrated drinks, bars, or gels,
> I would look for maltodextrin as the primary energy content.
>
> Make sure your frame is not a compact. You want a frame pump and
> large 30oz Zefal bottles.

Brown rice syrup is composed of about 50% complex carbohydrates that
don't digest especially rapidly but 45% of what's left is maltose
which is two glucose molecules strung together and then the remainder
is glucose. This is NOT a particularly good energy supply on the bike
because it causes a jump and subsequent drop in your blood sugar from
insulin.

Real(tm) honey is a third fructose and another third glucose. Another
10% is various other sugars none of which you want in your system if
you're making a sustained physical effort.

Maltodextrin is a polysaccharide that doesn't cause that insulin
problem.

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

wrote:

> Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
> health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
> maltodextrin or real honey in others?
> Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks
>


Dude,

Why not save yourself the anguish of trying to figure out all that
nonsense and just cleave the oxygen atom on the hydroxide molecule in
the CLIF bar and run the whole thing through the accelerator at your
local universities physics department.

After doing that, drop the entire batch into a stainless tub with
liquid nitrogen to max out the carbohydrate density.

The night before a race, thaw it out. This will give you an extra 2.3
watts (sustained) during the Thursday night crit. You should be able to
see this on your SRM graphs.

That's what most people I know do.

Once you upgrade to Cat. 3, you'll need to move closer to an operational
nuclear reactor in order to get your hands on some uranium to split
atoms in order to harness energy from those CLIF bars more efficiently.


Magilla

[SLAVE of THE STATE]

On Dec 12, 12:50 pm, wrote:
> On Dec 12, 12:06 pm, SLAVE of THE STATE > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 12, 9:41 am, wrote:
>
> > > Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
> > > health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
> > > maltodextrin or real honey in others?
> > > Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks
>
> > I don't know what the sugars are in brown rice syrup or honey.
> > Maltodextrin is established as easily digestible by most people. It
> > works for me. You'll have to test it for yourself. I think I
> > remember that all carbs are basically 4 Cal/gram, so on that primitive
> > basis they are all equal.
>
> > Digestibility is a different matter. A lot of people have stomach
> > upset with when there is too high a concentration of fructose. Good
> > drinks for me always had less than 2% for a 7% solution, but they did
> > have some fructose. One doc -- M Colgan, IIRC -- wrote that fructose
> > preferentially restored liver glycogen, and that is why it was
> > included. I don't know about that for racers, as you ought to be
> > burning more than you can restore anyway. (Post-race/train recovery
> > is another matter.)
>
> > For 7% solutions, I suppose basic glucose is good, although gatorade
> > which is sucrose seems fine. For concentrated drinks, bars, or gels,
> > I would look for maltodextrin as the primary energy content.
>
> > Make sure your frame is not a compact. You want a frame pump and
> > large 30oz Zefal bottles.
>
> Brown rice syrup is composed of about 50% complex carbohydrates that
> don't digest especially rapidly but 45% of what's left is maltose
> which is two glucose molecules strung together and then the remainder
> is glucose. This is NOT a particularly good energy supply on the bike
> because it causes a jump and subsequent drop in your blood sugar from
> insulin.
>
> Real(tm) honey is a third fructose and another third glucose. Another
> 10% is various other sugars none of which you want in your system if
> you're making a sustained physical effort.

What is the other 24%? I can't use honey on a bike.

> Maltodextrin is a polysaccharide that doesn't cause that insulin
> problem.

Okay. In layman's terms (my terms), I call polysaccharides "complex
carbs." They have the advantage of not tasting sweet. UltraFuel, for
example, is mostly maltodextrin with a dash of simple sugars and fruit
flavoring added for taste. Otherwise it would be unbearably sweet.
(Even for me.)

[[email protected]]

On Dec 12, 3:05 pm, SLAVE of THE STATE > wrote:
> On Dec 12, 12:50 pm, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 12, 12:06 pm, SLAVE of THE STATE > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 12, 9:41 am, wrote:
>
> > > > Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
> > > > health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
> > > > maltodextrin or real honey in others?
> > > > Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks
>
> > > I don't know what the sugars are in brown rice syrup or honey.
> > > Maltodextrin is established as easily digestible by most people. It
> > > works for me. You'll have to test it for yourself. I think I
> > > remember that all carbs are basically 4 Cal/gram, so on that primitive
> > > basis they are all equal.
>
> > > Digestibility is a different matter. A lot of people have stomach
> > > upset with when there is too high a concentration of fructose. Good
> > > drinks for me always had less than 2% for a 7% solution, but they did
> > > have some fructose. One doc -- M Colgan, IIRC -- wrote that fructose
> > > preferentially restored liver glycogen, and that is why it was
> > > included. I don't know about that for racers, as you ought to be
> > > burning more than you can restore anyway. (Post-race/train recovery
> > > is another matter.)
>
> > > For 7% solutions, I suppose basic glucose is good, although gatorade
> > > which is sucrose seems fine. For concentrated drinks, bars, or gels,
> > > I would look for maltodextrin as the primary energy content.
>
> > > Make sure your frame is not a compact. You want a frame pump and
> > > large 30oz Zefal bottles.
>
> > Brown rice syrup is composed of about 50% complex carbohydrates that
> > don't digest especially rapidly but 45% of what's left is maltose
> > which is two glucose molecules strung together and then the remainder
> > is glucose. This is NOT a particularly good energy supply on the bike
> > because it causes a jump and subsequent drop in your blood sugar from
> > insulin.
>
> > Real(tm) honey is a third fructose and another third glucose. Another
> > 10% is various other sugars none of which you want in your system if
> > you're making a sustained physical effort.
>
> What is the other 24%? I can't use honey on a bike.

Water

> > Maltodextrin is a polysaccharide that doesn't cause that insulin
> > problem.
>
> Okay. In layman's terms (my terms), I call polysaccharides "complex
> carbs." They have the advantage of not tasting sweet. UltraFuel, for
> example, is mostly maltodextrin with a dash of simple sugars and fruit
> flavoring added for taste. Otherwise it would be unbearably sweet.
> (Even for me.)

Maltodextrin is a rapidly absorbed carb. It is absorbed as rapidly as
glucose without the insulin high-low. Hammer Gel for instance works
really well. One of the things about it is that you remain neutral so
it is difficult to understand that the stuff is actually working
unless you have experimented a lot to see how well it does work. Most
of the other gels have some glucose, caffeine, etc in there so that
you feel a shot after ingesting it and think that it is really hot
stuff. Problem is that it often has that run down shortly after the
high due to the insulin overload. Maltodextrin works without feeling
like it's working - you just seem to keep functioning at the same
level without the usual drop in energy.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:41:53 -0800 (PST), wrote:

>Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
>health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
>maltodextrin or real honey in others?
>Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks

Try it and see what you like. In warm weather or in situations where
you'll use a lot of gels, I think less sweet is better as you can get
annoyed by sweet taste.

Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
fuel.

[[email protected]]

<snip>
On Dec 12, 6:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

> Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
> them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
> fuel.

That's a good one...just like the guys who use testosterone, steroids,
blood (their own or someone else's), amphetemines, etc etc etc.
Just take it, don't think about it.
ABS

[[email protected]]

On Dec 12, 7:15 pm, wrote:
> <snip>
> On Dec 12, 6:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>
> > Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
> > them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
> > fuel.
>
> That's a good one...just like the guys who use testosterone, steroids,
> blood (their own or someone else's), amphetemines, etc etc etc.
> Just take it, don't think about it.
> ABS

Obviously you haven't spent much time around here. John is the real
thing - a good racer who is completely on the up and up.

[Scott]

On Dec 12, 7:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson >
wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:41:53 -0800 (PST), wrote:
> >Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
> >health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
> >maltodextrin or real honey in others?
> >Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks
>
> Try it and see what you like. In warm weather or in situations where
> you'll use a lot of gels, I think less sweet is better as you can get
> annoyed by sweet taste.
>
> Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
> them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
> fuel.

I'm not sure I agree with your 'racing fuel' only declaration. I
generally get my calories during rides from drink mixes and an energy
bar now and then. But, I find that when doing base miles during the
winter if I drink enough liquid to get my calorie requirements from
drink mixes I overhydrate and therefore have to stop waaaay to often
to relieve myself. Something about the combination of reduced demands
for fluids coupled w/ the effects of the colder weather, but... who
wants to be looking for convenience stores or construction site
portapotties all the time???

So, I use gels during the winter a lot more than any other time since
I can get more calories w/ less fluids using gels than any other way.

S.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:11:30 -0800 (PST), Scott
> wrote:

>On Dec 12, 7:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson >
>wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:41:53 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>> >Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
>> >health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
>> >maltodextrin or real honey in others?
>> >Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks
>>
>> Try it and see what you like. In warm weather or in situations where
>> you'll use a lot of gels, I think less sweet is better as you can get
>> annoyed by sweet taste.
>>
>> Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
>> them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
>> fuel.
>
>I'm not sure I agree with your 'racing fuel' only declaration. I
>generally get my calories during rides from drink mixes and an energy
>bar now and then. But, I find that when doing base miles during the
>winter if I drink enough liquid to get my calorie requirements from
>drink mixes I overhydrate and therefore have to stop waaaay to often
>to relieve myself. Something about the combination of reduced demands
>for fluids coupled w/ the effects of the colder weather, but... who
>wants to be looking for convenience stores or construction site
>portapotties all the time???

Eat normal solid food with fiber. more micronutrients, etc. Fruit,
bread, crackers, nuts, sandwiches, etc,

Gels (and some energy bars) have two big advantages over such food --
easier to carry/store and easier to digest. But if you're doing
endurance riding, normal food shouldn't be a problem and can be
healthier if you choose right. And cheaper.

[Scott]

On Dec 13, 9:18 am, John Forrest Tomlinson >
wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:11:30 -0800 (PST), Scott
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On Dec 12, 7:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson >
> >wrote:
> >> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:41:53 -0800 (PST), wrote:
> >> >Regarding energy gel packets such as Clif and others. Are their any
> >> >health and energy delivery benefits of brown rice syrup in Clif vs.
> >> >maltodextrin or real honey in others?
> >> >Please share your experiences and opinions. Thanks
>
> >> Try it and see what you like. In warm weather or in situations where
> >> you'll use a lot of gels, I think less sweet is better as you can get
> >> annoyed by sweet taste.
>
> >> Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
> >> them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
> >> fuel.
>
> >I'm not sure I agree with your 'racing fuel' only declaration. I
> >generally get my calories during rides from drink mixes and an energy
> >bar now and then. But, I find that when doing base miles during the
> >winter if I drink enough liquid to get my calorie requirements from
> >drink mixes I overhydrate and therefore have to stop waaaay to often
> >to relieve myself. Something about the combination of reduced demands
> >for fluids coupled w/ the effects of the colder weather, but... who
> >wants to be looking for convenience stores or construction site
> >portapotties all the time???
>
> Eat normal solid food with fiber. more micronutrients, etc. Fruit,
> bread, crackers, nuts, sandwiches, etc,
>
> Gels (and some energy bars) have two big advantages over such food --
> easier to carry/store and easier to digest. But if you're doing
> endurance riding, normal food shouldn't be a problem and can be
> healthier if you choose right. And cheaper. - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Cheaper, yes... but still brings up the problem of requiring more
water to wash it down, and thus more stops. As for the simplicity of
use and ease of carrying them, nothing beats gels. Who wants to lug
peanut butter sandwiches around with them while riding?

Okay, don't answer that, I know there are folks out there w/ huge
packs hanging from their saddles who'll carry anything/everything.

Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other than
racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but certainly not such
a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race use only'.

[[email protected]]

On Dec 13, 6:06 am, wrote:
> On Dec 12, 7:15 pm, wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > On Dec 12, 6:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>
> > > Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
> > > them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
> > > fuel.
>
> > That's a good one...just like the guys who use testosterone, steroids,
> > blood (their own or someone else's), amphetemines, etc etc etc.
> > Just take it, don't think about it.
> > ABS
>
> Obviously you haven't spent much time around here. John is the real
> thing - a good racer who is completely on the up and up.

My comment wasn't meant as an aspersion on anyone's
character, just a seemingly cavalier statement.
Obviously...um...I was wrong.
ABS

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:49:52 -0800 (PST), Scott
> wrote:

>Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other than
>racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but certainly not such
>a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race use only'.

Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.

[Scott]

On Dec 13, 11:42 am, John Forrest Tomlinson >
wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:49:52 -0800 (PST), Scott
>
> > wrote:
> >Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
> >sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other than
> >racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but certainly not such
> >a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race use only'.
>
> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.

I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.

S.

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

wrote:

> On Dec 12, 7:15 pm, wrote:
>
>><snip>
>>On Dec 12, 6:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
>>>them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
>>>fuel.
>>
>>That's a good one...just like the guys who use testosterone, steroids,
>>blood (their own or someone else's), amphetemines, etc etc etc.
>>Just take it, don't think about it.
>>ABS
>
>
> Obviously you haven't spent much time around here. John is the real
> thing - a good racer who is completely on the up and up.


How good can he be, Jackass, if he's never dabbled in the hot sauce?

Magilla

[webhead[_2_]]

The Glycemic Index is measured in rest and consumed pure.

This being said, the insulin response to carbohydrate intake during
exercise is a lot complexer.
It's not only digestibility and rate of digestion and uptake but also
the rate of stomach clearance. Sure enough if you eat some glucose and
your blood sugar will rise sharp but add some fat to that and it won't
rise as fast simply because fat makes stomach clearance slow down. (by
inducing a higher tonus in the pyloric sphincter if you must know)
An added problem would be that your digestive system doesn't respond
anything like it during exercise then when at rest, mainly because of
reduced bloodflow in the entire gastrointestinal system.

In short, modest glucose intake during exercise doesn't cause a high
insulin peak and blood sugar drop as a result. There's no reason not
to use glucose as an energy source.
Whether the slow digestable carbohydrates offer an advantage in
performance or not is heavily debated. In all likelihood it will
provide you with the exact same energy and results. It is however very
much recommended to keep your simple carb intake prior to a race or
training as low as possible. Prior means at rest and that WILL yield
an insuline peak and blood sugar rebound drop.

Honey is a great low GI product and mixes rather well with things like
a twist of lemon juice. Try and see if you can hold it down on the
road, there's no rule of what can an cannot be tolerated, it basically
depends on your own body. The rule of thumb about the 7% solution is
somewhat arbitrary, I once read an article about how that exact number
came into play.

More information about sugars and exercise here :
http://www.runnersweb.com/running/news/rw_news_20060620_ERB_Carbohydrates.html

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:35:11 -0500, MagillaGorilla
> wrote:

wrote:
>
>> On Dec 12, 7:15 pm, wrote:
>>
>>><snip>
>>>On Dec 12, 6:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
>>>>them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
>>>>fuel.
>>>
>>>That's a good one...just like the guys who use testosterone, steroids,
>>>blood (their own or someone else's), amphetemines, etc etc etc.
>>>Just take it, don't think about it.
>>>ABS
>>
>>
>> Obviously you haven't spent much time around here. John is the real
>> thing - a good racer who is completely on the up and up.
>
>
>How good can he be, Jackass, if he's never dabbled in the hot sauce?

I worse than a has been, worse than a never was...I'm a never coulda..

JT

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:24:33 -0800 (PST), webhead >
wrote:

>The Glycemic Index is measured in rest and consumed pure.
>
>This being said, the insulin response to carbohydrate intake during
>exercise is a lot complexer.
>It's not only digestibility and rate of digestion and uptake but also
>the rate of stomach clearance. Sure enough if you eat some glucose and
>your blood sugar will rise sharp but add some fat to that and it won't
>rise as fast simply because fat makes stomach clearance slow down. (by
>inducing a higher tonus in the pyloric sphincter if you must know)
>An added problem would be that your digestive system doesn't respond
>anything like it during exercise then when at rest, mainly because of
>reduced bloodflow in the entire gastrointestinal system.
>
>In short, modest glucose intake during exercise doesn't cause a high
>insulin peak and blood sugar drop as a result. There's no reason not
>to use glucose as an energy source.
>Whether the slow digestable carbohydrates offer an advantage in
>performance or not is heavily debated. In all likelihood it will
>provide you with the exact same energy and results. It is however very
>much recommended to keep your simple carb intake prior to a race or
>training as low as possible. Prior means at rest and that WILL yield
>an insuline peak and blood sugar rebound drop.
>
>Honey is a great low GI product and mixes rather well with things like
>a twist of lemon juice. Try and see if you can hold it down on the
>road, there's no rule of what can an cannot be tolerated, it basically
>depends on your own body. The rule of thumb about the 7% solution is
>somewhat arbitrary, I once read an article about how that exact number
>came into play.
>
>More information about sugars and exercise here :
>http://www.runnersweb.com/running/news/rw_news_20060620_ERB_Carbohydrates.html

When I was cash poor in college there were "free" honey packets in my
school's cafeteria and I used to take some to mix with water for use
out riding.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:02:24 -0800 (PST), Scott
> wrote:

>On Dec 13, 11:42 am, John Forrest Tomlinson >
>wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:49:52 -0800 (PST), Scott
>>
>> > wrote:
>> >Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>> >sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other than
>> >racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but certainly not such
>> >a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race use only'.
>>
>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>
>I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.

Who did I call a name?

[Paul Myron Hobson]

> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:02:24 -0800 (PST), Scott
> > wrote:
>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
^^^^^^^^^^^

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> Who did I call a name?

No one. That's the point.

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

webhead wrote:
> The Glycemic Index is measured in rest and consumed pure.
>
> This being said, the insulin response to carbohydrate intake during
> exercise is a lot complexer.
> It's not only digestibility and rate of digestion and uptake but also
> the rate of stomach clearance. Sure enough if you eat some glucose and
> your blood sugar will rise sharp but add some fat to that and it won't
> rise as fast simply because fat makes stomach clearance slow down. (by
> inducing a higher tonus in the pyloric sphincter if you must know)
> An added problem would be that your digestive system doesn't respond
> anything like it during exercise then when at rest, mainly because of
> reduced bloodflow in the entire gastrointestinal system.
>
> In short, modest glucose intake during exercise doesn't cause a high
> insulin peak and blood sugar drop as a result. There's no reason not
> to use glucose as an energy source.
> Whether the slow digestable carbohydrates offer an advantage in
> performance or not is heavily debated. In all likelihood it will
> provide you with the exact same energy and results. It is however very
> much recommended to keep your simple carb intake prior to a race or
> training as low as possible. Prior means at rest and that WILL yield
> an insuline peak and blood sugar rebound drop.
>
> Honey is a great low GI product and mixes rather well with things like
> a twist of lemon juice. Try and see if you can hold it down on the
> road, there's no rule of what can an cannot be tolerated, it basically
> depends on your own body. The rule of thumb about the 7% solution is
> somewhat arbitrary, I once read an article about how that exact number
> came into play.
>
> More information about sugars and exercise here :
> http://www.runnersweb.com/running/news/rw_news_20060620_ERB_Carbohydrates.html



Why write all this when you can just call him a cocksucker?

Magilla

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:13:09 -0500, Paul Myron Hobson
> wrote:

>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:02:24 -0800 (PST), Scott
>> > wrote:
>>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>>> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> Who did I call a name?
>
>No one. That's the point.

Thanks, I see now.

[[email protected]]

John Forrest Tomlinson writes:

>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other
>>>> than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race
>>>> use only'.

>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.

>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.

> Who did I call a name?

Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so you
might write:

Whom did I call a name?

unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
bell tolls".

Jobst Brandt

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:35:11 -0500, MagillaGorilla
> > wrote:
>
>
wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Dec 12, 7:15 pm, wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>On Dec 12, 6:39 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Gels are racing fuel - only use them in training enough to get used to
>>>>>them to see what you like. Don't think about health effects of racing
>>>>>fuel.
>>>>
>>>>That's a good one...just like the guys who use testosterone, steroids,
>>>>blood (their own or someone else's), amphetemines, etc etc etc.
>>>>Just take it, don't think about it.
>>>>ABS
>>>
>>>
>>>Obviously you haven't spent much time around here. John is the real
>>>thing - a good racer who is completely on the up and up.
>>
>>
>>How good can he be, Jackass, if he's never dabbled in the hot sauce?
>
>
> I worse than a has been, worse than a never was...I'm a never coulda..
>
> JT


Come to the Magilla training camp in the Canary Islands this January and
I'll make you a star, JT. After you book your flight, tell USADA
you'll be in Hawaii for those 2 weeks so they know where to send the mules.

Magilla

[[email protected]]

John Forrest Tomlinson writes:

>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other
>>>> than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race
>>>> use only'.

>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.

>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.

> Who did I call a name?

These days of GWB, pretending not to know the English language is
fashionable, However, you say you went to college, so you might write:

Whom did I call a name?

unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
bell tolls".

Jobst Brandt

[Scott]

On Dec 13, 3:45 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson >
wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:02:24 -0800 (PST), Scott
>
> > wrote:
> >On Dec 13, 11:42 am, John Forrest Tomlinson >
> >wrote:
> >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:49:52 -0800 (PST), Scott
>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
> >> >sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other than
> >> >racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but certainly not such
> >> >a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race use only'.
>
> >> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>
> >I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
> >didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>
> Who did I call a name?

You didn't. That was the point.

[TM]

> wrote in message
...
> John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>
>>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other
>>>>> than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race
>>>>> use only'.
>
>>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>
>>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>>> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>
>> Who did I call a name?
>
> Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
> language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so you
> might write:
>
> Whom did I call a name?
>
> unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
> bell tolls".
>
> Jobst Brandt
>

What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on usenet, but
comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine instead?

[[email protected]]

On Dec 13, 5:45 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson >
wrote:

> When I was cash poor in college there were "free" honey packets in my
> school's cafeteria and I used to take some to mix with water for use
> out riding.

dumbass,

if you go to taco bell they'll give you free packets of hot sauce.

[Dave]

TM wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>>
>>>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other
>>>>>> than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race
>>>>>> use only'.
>>>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>>>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>>>> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>>> Who did I call a name?
>> Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
>> language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so you
>> might write:
>>
>> Whom did I call a name?
>>
>> unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
>> bell tolls".
>>
>> Jobst Brandt
>>
>
> What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on usenet, but
> comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine instead?
>
>
>

pedantic

[[email protected]]

A shy person snipes anonymously:

>>>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for
>>>>>> 'other than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for
>>>>>> 'race use only'.

>>>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.

>>>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone
>>>> that didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.

>>> Who did I call a name?

>> Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
>> language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so
>> you might write:

>> Whom did I call a name?

>> unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
>> bell tolls".

> What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on
> usenet, but comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine
> instead?

As I said, poor english is fashionable these days and not in fashion
magazines. So who are you to complain... anonymously at that?

Jobst Brandt

[SLAVE of THE STATE]

On Dec 13, 3:34 pm, wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
> >>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
> >>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other
> >>>> than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
> >>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race
> >>>> use only'.
> >>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
> >> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
> >> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
> > Who did I call a name?
>
> These days of GWB, pretending not to know the English language is
> fashionable, However, you say you went to college, so you might write:
>
> Whom did I call a name?
>
> unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
> bell tolls".

jaggar,

Who knows, who cares? That's no pretence, and George is not
pretending.

If you want to get it right, it is John Donne in 1623, not Ernie in
1940.
http://incompetech.com/authors/donne/bell.html

Anywho, or maybe you would say anywhom, or maybe you wouldn't say it
that way at all, if you want to get all modern on GWB and the rest of
us, you could step right on up to Metallica. Neither Metallica nor
Ernie sprinkle sugar on their rides with whoever, whomever. But the
snacks are nonetheless healthy.

----------------------------
Metallica -- For Whom The Bell Tolls (5:23)
Make his fight on the hill in the early day
Constant chill deep inside
Shouting gun, on they run through the endless grey
On the fight, for they are right, yes, by whos to say?
For a hill men would kill, why? they do not know
Suffered wounds test there their pride
Men of five, still alive through the raging glow
Gone insane from the pain that they surely know
[chorus:]
For whom the bell tolls
Time marches on
For whom the bell tolls

Take a look to the sky just before you die
It is the last time you will
Blackened roar massive roar fills the crumbling sky
Shattered goal fills his soul with a ruthless cry
Stranger now, are his eyes, to this mystery
He hears the silence so loud
Crack of dawn, all is gone except the will to be
Now they will see what will be, blinded eyes to see
[chorus]

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 14 Dec 2007 01:18:52 GMT, wrote:

>A shy person snipes anonymously:
>
>>>>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for
>>>>>>> 'other than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for
>>>>>>> 'race use only'.
>
>>>>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>
>>>>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone
>>>>> that didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>
>>>> Who did I call a name?
>
>>> Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
>>> language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so
>>> you might write:
>
>>> Whom did I call a name?
>
>>> unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
>>> bell tolls".
>
>> What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on
>> usenet, but comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine
>> instead?
>
>As I said, poor english is fashionable these days and not in fashion
>magazines. So who are you to complain... anonymously at that?

Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
and anonymous? I don't think you do.

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 13, 6:50 pm, "TM" > wrote:
> > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>
> >>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
> >>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other
> >>>>> than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
> >>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race
> >>>>> use only'.
>
> >>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>
> >>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
> >>> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>
> >> Who did I call a name?
>
> > Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
> > language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so you
> > might write:
>
> > Whom did I call a name?
>
> > unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
> > bell tolls".
>
> > Jobst Brandt
>
> What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on usenet, but
> comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine instead?

"Jobst Brandt"!

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
> ...
> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
> and anonymous? I don't think you do.

What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

[[email protected]]

John Forrest Tomlinson writes:

>> A shy person snipes anonymously:

>>>>>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>>>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for
>>>>>>>> 'other than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>>>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for
>>>>>>>> 'race use only'.

>>>>>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.

>>>>>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone
>>>>>> that didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.

>>>>> Who did I call a name?

>>>> Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
>>>> language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so
>>>> you might write:

>>>> Whom did I call a name?

>>>> unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
>>>> bell tolls".

>>> What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on
>>> usenet, but comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine
>>> instead?

>> As I said, poor english is fashionable these days and not in fashion
>> magazines. So who are you to complain... anonymously at that?

> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
> and anonymous? I don't think you do.

Illiterate people sign with an "X" which is not a pseudonym, nor are
the symbols writers use to remain anonymous, and who give no return
address.

Jobst Brandt

[Howard Kveck]

In article >,
Tom Sherman > wrote:

> John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
> > ...
> > Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
> > and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>
> What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
> cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.

Well, I'm not sure what "accountability" you're referring to. What's the
difference between a person who posts consistently with the same pseudonym and
someone who posts with his or her "real" name? Use of a "real" name doesn't make the
post any more or less valid. Unless by "accountability" you mean that knowing a
"real" name would let you find out where the poster lives and you could go kick their
ass or some other such nonsense.

Get over it.

--
tanx,
Howard

Safe when used as directed...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

[Tom Kunich]

"Tom Sherman" > wrote in message
...
> John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
>> ...
>> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
>> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>
> What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are cowardly
> ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.

Hear hear.

[RicodJour]

On Dec 13, 6:34 pm, wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>
> > Who did I call a name?
>
> These days of GWB, pretending not to know the English language is
> fashionable, However, you say you went to college, so you might write:
>
> Whom did I call a name?
>
> unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
> bell tolls".

If you doth use words such as doth, fine, use whom. Otherwise whom
and its ilk are stupid words and an anchor on attempts to streamline
the language. An engineer would know this.

R

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

Scott wrote:

> On Dec 13, 11:42 am, John Forrest Tomlinson >
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:49:52 -0800 (PST), Scott
>>
> wrote:
>>
>>>Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other than
>>>racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but certainly not such
>>>a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race use only'.
>>
>>Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>
>
> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
> didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>
> S.


Not so fast. Tell us why your mother named you after a roll of toilet
paper.

Magilla

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

Scott wrote:

> On Dec 13, 3:45 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson >
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:02:24 -0800 (PST), Scott
>>
> wrote:
>>
>>>On Dec 13, 11:42 am, John Forrest Tomlinson >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:49:52 -0800 (PST), Scott
>>
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>>>sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other than
>>>>>racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but certainly not such
>>>>>a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race use only'.
>>
>>>>Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>>
>>>I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>>>didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>>
>>Who did I call a name?
>
>
> You didn't. That was the point.


Get a room, Team Bareback. Call the front desk and have them send up a
jar of Vaseline.

Magilla

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

TM wrote:

> > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>>
>>
>>>>>>Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>>>>sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for 'other
>>>>>>than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>>>>certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for 'race
>>>>>>use only'.
>>
>>>>>Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>>
>>>>I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone that
>>>>didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>>
>>>Who did I call a name?
>>
>>Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
>>language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so you
>>might write:
>>
>>Whom did I call a name?
>>
>>unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
>>bell tolls".
>>
>>Jobst Brandt
>>
>
>
> What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on usenet, but
> comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine instead?



I'm not quite sure. But if you give me an address, I'll send Scott
Mercer Terminator over her house and have him bash her ****ing skull in.

Magilla

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

Tom Sherman wrote:

> John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
>
>> ...
>> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
>> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>
>
> What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
> cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.
>


Define accountability. How's bout I come over to where you live and
kick the tread off your Sherman tank attitude.

Don't try to be a hero. Just shut your ****ing mouth and open up the
register.

Magilla

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

MagillaGorilla wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>
>> John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
>>> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>>
>>
>> What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
>> cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.
>>
>
>
> Define accountability. How's bout I come over to where you live and
> kick the tread off your Sherman tank attitude.
>
> Don't try to be a hero. Just shut your ****ing mouth and open up the
> register.

You are amusing when you bark on the Internet. ;)

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

[webhead[_2_]]

Great, and I actually tried to keep it relevant to the original post.
Silly me.

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

webhead who? wrote:
> Great, and I actually tried to keep it relevant to the original post.
> Silly me.

Welcome to Usenet!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

[Donald Munro]

Sandy wrote:
> Have you thought, perhaps, of using the appropriate punctuation? A comma
> would have been appropriate, not little dots running in a row. Perhaps
> you need to send your stuff to a copyeditor

VeloPress or Addison Wesley ?

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:24:50 -0600, Tom Sherman
> wrote:

>John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
>> ...
>> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
>> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>
>What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
>cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.

There's a difference. If some is consistent in use of a pseudonym,
they develop a reputation in the forum in which they use it, which
helps other people judge the validity of what they say. They also
have to be consistent over time.

If someone is anonymous they can argue inconsistently, attack other
people from both sides, etc.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 14 Dec 2007 03:28:35 GMT, wrote:

>John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>
>>> A shy person snipes anonymously:
>
>>>>>>>>> Regardless, even with all the benefits to be derived from other
>>>>>>>>> sources, gels are still an acceptable source of energy for
>>>>>>>>> 'other than racing' situations. Maybe not the best choice, but
>>>>>>>>> certainly not such a poor choice as to declare them fit for
>>>>>>>>> 'race use only'.
>
>>>>>>>> Right. I'm only commenting on what is wise, not what is possible.
>
>>>>>>> I understand. It has been nice to trade comments with someone
>>>>>>> that didn't result in name calling, sort of caught me off guard.
>
>>>>>> Who did I call a name?
>
>>>>> Although these days of GWB, pretending not to know the English
>>>>> language is fashionable. However, you say you went to college, so
>>>>> you might write:
>
>>>>> Whom did I call a name?
>
>>>>> unless you believe Ernest Hemingway got it wrong with "For whom the
>>>>> bell tolls".
>
>>>> What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on
>>>> usenet, but comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine
>>>> instead?
>
>>> As I said, poor english is fashionable these days and not in fashion
>>> magazines. So who are you to complain... anonymously at that?
>
>> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
>> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>
>Illiterate people sign with an "X" which is not a pseudonym, nor are
>the symbols writers use to remain anonymous, and who give no return
>address.

Nice dodge attempt. Your dodging (and the statement about "no return
address) suggests you're trying to avoid the fact that you've been
misusing the term "anonymous" in usenet for years.

Hahaha.

Signed

Mr. X

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 14, 12:17 am, MagillaGorilla > wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
> > John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
>
> >> ...
> >> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
> >> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>
> > What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
> > cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.
>
> Define accountability.

Don't ask too much. Sherman is just parroting what he hears from his
Usenet heroes/role models ("Anonymous! Anonymous!" gripes one. "A shy
person! A shy person!" caws the other).

[Tom Kunich]

"Tom Sherman" > wrote in message
...
> MagillaGorilla wrote:
>
> You are amusing when you bark on the Internet. ;)

Do like I've done and filter out any message from Magilla. Aside from having
30% fewer messages to read, most of the loonie tunes are gone as well. HC is
rapidly approaching that stage as well.

[TM]

> wrote in message
...
>A shy person snipes anonymously:
<snip>
>> What's the proper English term for someone who tries to troll on
>> usenet, but comes across as an old lady who edits a fashion magazine
>> instead?
>
<snip off topic part of answer>

> Jobst Brandt
>

Correct. 'Hans Jobst' would have also counted.

[MagillaGorilla[_2_]]

Tom Sherman wrote:

> MagillaGorilla wrote:
>
>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>
>>> John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
>>>
>>>> ...
>>>> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
>>>> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
>>> cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Define accountability. How's bout I come over to where you live and
>> kick the tread off your Sherman tank attitude.
>>
>> Don't try to be a hero. Just shut your ****ing mouth and open up the
>> register.
>
>
> You are amusing when you bark on the Internet. ;)
>


I love all you Ken Pappy tools - Kuneyisland Psyclone for one - who get
their labia wet when people post under pseudonyms. Most of you people in
here sound like that lady yelling outside the Postal bus.

And then when I ask what's your problem with it, you Beetlejuices start
talking about personal "accountability" and "say it to my face" and
"let's meet at the cafe in Saulsalito."

All you stalker types are the reason why Sylvester Stallone has to put a
clause in the maid contract that says they're not allowed to make eye
contact.


Magilla

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Tom Kunich wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" > wrote in message
> ...
>> MagillaGorilla wrote:
>>
>> You are amusing when you bark on the Internet. ;)
>
> Do like I've done and filter out any message from Magilla. Aside from
> having 30% fewer messages to read, most of the loonie tunes are gone as
> well. HC is rapidly approaching that stage as well.

I am only seeing this since it was cross-posted to rec.bicycles.misc;
besides which, being barked at on Usenet does not really bother me.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

[Tom Sherman[_2_]]

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> On Dec 14, 12:17 am, MagillaGorilla > wrote:
>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>> John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
>>>> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
>>> What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
>>> cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.
>> Define accountability.
>
> Don't ask too much. Sherman is just parroting what he hears from his
> Usenet heroes/role models ("Anonymous! Anonymous!" gripes one. "A shy
> person! A shy person!" caws the other).

And Zarkie Bicycle is just venting at anyone more intelligent, educated
or successful than he is.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

[Ozark Bicycle]

Just keep telling yourself that, Sheman. Eventually, perhaps, you'll
convince yourself......

In the meantime, just mimic your Usenet heroes.

On Dec 14, 7:42 pm, Tom Sherman >
wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > On Dec 14, 12:17 am, MagillaGorilla > wrote:
> >> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>> John Forrest Tomlinson, using his real name, wrote:
> >>>> ...
> >>>> Speaking of language, do you know the difference between pseudonymous
> >>>> and anonymous? I don't think you do.
> >>> What difference does it make? Both pseudonymous and anonymous are
> >>> cowardly ways to avoid accountability for what the person posts.
> >> Define accountability.
>
> > Don't ask too much. Sherman is just parroting what he hears from his
> > Usenet heroes/role models ("Anonymous! Anonymous!" gripes one. "A shy
> > person! A shy person!" caws the other).
>
> And Zarkie Bicycle is just venting at anyone more intelligent, educated
> or successful than he is.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> "Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
> differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
> excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

[Justa Lurker]

Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> And Zarkie Bicycle is just venting at anyone more intelligent, educated
> or successful than he is.
>

Doesn't narrow it down much, does it ?