What's a "Skidiot?"

[x1134x]

I think I might be one w/out even knowing it. where is a list of
mountain biker "ethics" or "do's and don'ts" so that I can know which
ones I may be and which ones I just don't give a flying Vandeman about.
.. . .

[pauly]

On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 23:06:13 -0700, x1134x wrote
(in article om>):

> I think I might be one w/out even knowing it. where is a list of
> mountain biker "ethics" or "do's and don'ts" so that I can know which
> ones I may be and which ones I just don't give a flying Vandeman about.
> . . .
>

An idiot who can't/won't control his brakes and ruins the trails by skidding
around turns and down steep sections

Paul

[Dave Dowler]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>I think I might be one w/out even knowing it. where is a list of
> mountain biker "ethics" or "do's and don'ts"
>
http://www.imba.com/about/trail_rules.html

[Shawn]

x1134x wrote:
> I think I might be one w/out even knowing it. where is a list of
> mountain biker "ethics" or "do's and don'ts" so that I can know which
> ones I may be and which ones I just don't give a flying Vandeman about.
> . . .
>
A skidiot is someone who thinks the front brake will "throw me over the
bars". Relying solely on the comparatively weak back brake, s/he/it
ends up skidding constantly in a vain, marginally controlled attempt to
maintain a safe speed down hills and around corners. This person is
annoying to ride with (and soon lectured by me and others) and
frightening to be seen coming down a steep descent toward you.
Alternatively, its a young male rider who can control his bike fine, but
loves locking up the rear wheel and crossing the bike up at every
chance. This person is just an immature doof.
Both types are hazards on the trail and cause considerable trail damage.
I truly hope you're neither, but if your the first form, get out and
start experimenting with your front brake. It's phenomenally powerful.
With practice you'll find it even works better on sketchy, loose steep
descents...with practice!
If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
across JD on the trail before you do.

Shawn

[MattB]

Shawn wrote:
> x1134x wrote:
>
>> I think I might be one w/out even knowing it. where is a list of
>> mountain biker "ethics" or "do's and don'ts" so that I can know which
>> ones I may be and which ones I just don't give a flying Vandeman about.
>> . . .
>>
> A skidiot is someone who thinks the front brake will "throw me over the
> bars". Relying solely on the comparatively weak back brake, s/he/it
> ends up skidding constantly in a vain, marginally controlled attempt to
> maintain a safe speed down hills and around corners. This person is
> annoying to ride with (and soon lectured by me and others) and
> frightening to be seen coming down a steep descent toward you.
> Alternatively, its a young male rider who can control his bike fine, but
> loves locking up the rear wheel and crossing the bike up at every
> chance. This person is just an immature doof.
> Both types are hazards on the trail and cause considerable trail damage.
> I truly hope you're neither, but if your the first form, get out and
> start experimenting with your front brake. It's phenomenally powerful.
> With practice you'll find it even works better on sketchy, loose steep
> descents...with practice!
> If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
> across JD on the trail before you do.
>
> Shawn

Very good summary! Spot on.
The second type of skidiot is almost always sure to have one of those
silly "No Fear" or "Tough Guy Club" stickers on their vehicle too. That
makes them easy to spot at trailheads.

Matt

[small change]

MattB wrote:
about. . . .
>>>

> Very good summary! Spot on.
> The second type of skidiot is almost always sure to have one of those
> silly "No Fear" or "Tough Guy Club" stickers on their vehicle too.
> That makes them easy to spot at trailheads.
>
> Matt

some people skid out of ignorance or lack of skill, it's not always a matter
of attitude.

Penny

[TJ]

"MattB" > wrote in message
...
> Shawn wrote:
>> x1134x wrote:
>>
>>> I think I might be one w/out even knowing it. where is a list of
>>> mountain biker "ethics" or "do's and don'ts" so that I can know which
>>> ones I may be and which ones I just don't give a flying Vandeman about.
>>> . . .
>>>
>> A skidiot is someone who thinks the front brake will "throw me over the
>> bars". Relying solely on the comparatively weak back brake, s/he/it ends
>> up skidding constantly in a vain, marginally controlled attempt to
>> maintain a safe speed down hills and around corners. This person is
>> annoying to ride with (and soon lectured by me and others) and
>> frightening to be seen coming down a steep descent toward you.
>> Alternatively, its a young male rider who can control his bike fine, but
>> loves locking up the rear wheel and crossing the bike up at every chance.
>> This person is just an immature doof.
>> Both types are hazards on the trail and cause considerable trail damage.
>> I truly hope you're neither, but if your the first form, get out and
>> start experimenting with your front brake. It's phenomenally powerful.
>> With practice you'll find it even works better on sketchy, loose steep
>> descents...with practice!
>> If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
>> across JD on the trail before you do.
>>
>> Shawn
>
> Very good summary! Spot on.
> The second type of skidiot is almost always sure to have one of those
> silly "No Fear" or "Tough Guy Club" stickers on their vehicle too. That
> makes them easy to spot at trailheads.
>
> Matt
ROTFLMAO They are the ones that also have a hat on backwards.

TJ

[MattB]

small change wrote:
> MattB wrote:
> about. . . .
>
>
>>Very good summary! Spot on.
>>The second type of skidiot is almost always sure to have one of those
>>silly "No Fear" or "Tough Guy Club" stickers on their vehicle too.
>>That makes them easy to spot at trailheads.
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> some people skid out of ignorance or lack of skill, it's not always a matter
> of attitude.
>
> Penny
>
>

Right. That's why I singled out the second group Shawn described for my
jab. He had already divided them into groups, the second of which has
the skills not to skid but does it anyway.

Matt

[Craig Brossman]

TJ wrote:
>>Very good summary! Spot on.
>>The second type of skidiot is almost always sure to have one of those
>>silly "No Fear" or "Tough Guy Club" stickers on their vehicle too. That
>>makes them easy to spot at trailheads.
>>
>>Matt
>
> ROTFLMAO They are the ones that also have a hat on backwards.
>
> TJ
>
>

I have probably posted this before, but a good friend of mine states:
"Wearing your hat backwards is the international sign for 'you'll never
take orders from me'".


--
Craig Brossman, Durango Colorado

Owner/Operator of the Pekingnese Ranch.

[x1134x]

HMM. . . it appears as though I qualify. I *DO* wear my hat backwards.
.. . . but hey! I don't want it to get blown off by the wind and have to
go back for it. . . .

I set my brakes up VERY well, and yes the back one *WILL* lock up, if I
really reef on it, but the front one won't (because I don't want to go
over the handlebars, but it still grips well, and i can go from approx
25 mph, to slow enough to pass a family and their baby stroller safely
quite quickly without locking them up. I usually use both breaks
always.

I was envisioning a SKIDIOT to be someone who loses control of their
bike and it goes SKIDDING down the hill withouth them. (I've witnessed
a few of those in my few outings)

PS Hey paladin, I can make it to table rock's summit w/out stopping on
my BSO now! AND I found a shortcut from the penitentary to table rock
road.

[small change]

They recently had a clinic for Dh racers and wanna bees at the local ski
lift hill. My gf helped out, and she had pretty good tales of the main guy
working with the mainly-teen group to break them of the skidding habit. The
more you could stop WITHOUT skidding on the Dh skills course, the cooler he
made you out to be, so the kids were soon working on a new kind of stopping.
Cool.

penny

[x1134x]

well, I read the do's & don'ts and agree with all of them exept the
"Never Scare Animals." one. Sure, don't startle a horse cuz you'll
either get the rider bucked off, or get kicked in the teeth, but if
there's a sage chicken in the trail, I'm just helping it hone it's
fight/flight insticts. And if there's a bug on the trail . . .SQUISH!
I'm sure bug guts have some erosion fighting properties. . . <g>

In tucson AZ there was a problem recently with mountian lions coming
down out of the higher elevations in search for food, because of the
drought. Bleeding heart sierra club types saw the emaciated (starving)
animals and started putting out meat for them. Many had to be
tranquilized and relocated, and they were back within days, and had to
be put down. My point here is if you get wildlife used to the fact
that a predator as large as a human on a bicycle will stop and yeild to
them, this would be doing them a great disservice as they will become
less compelled to run from humans and other large predators.

Another item that I thought SHOULD be on the do's and dont's was:

7. Never wear spandex shorts. Your are riding a TRAIL not a tour
race. No one wants to see your large a$$. If you wear spandex for
support, wear gym shorts over them please! Its a matter of decency. If
you wear only spandex shorts, I must quote Jim Rome: "*You*, are a
LOSER!" There is *one* exeption to this rule: If you are female AND
you have a nice butt, go ahead and wear only spandex shorts with our
thanks.

The only excuse I can think of for a male to wear spandex only is when
you are actively participating in a race. you may need the reduced
wind resistance. When you are training for a race however, you should
train with additional wind resistance and save the people driving down
the road from having eye damage or worse, a wreck from wretching at the
site of your a$$ crack. Think of swimmers, they only shave their
bodies right before their competition, and train with the extra
resistance of hair at all other times.

x1134x

[x1134x]

I must add that I only wear the hat backwards when going downhill, and
I wear it like a *white* man at all other times.

[x1134x]

>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
>across JD on the trail before you do.


I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle
finger and then been driven off on.

[MattB]

x1134x wrote:
> I must add that I only wear the hat backwards when going downhill, and
> I wear it like a *white* man at all other times.
>

No reason to make cracks like that, and you should be wearing your
helmet anyway.

Matt (it seems silly hat wearing transcends race and socioeconomic
status, despite stereotypes)

[MattB]

x1134x wrote:
> well, I read the do's & don'ts and agree with all of them exept the
> "Never Scare Animals." one. Sure, don't startle a horse cuz you'll
> either get the rider bucked off, or get kicked in the teeth, but if
> there's a sage chicken in the trail, I'm just helping it hone it's
> fight/flight insticts. And if there's a bug on the trail . . .SQUISH!
> I'm sure bug guts have some erosion fighting properties. . . <g>
>
> In tucson AZ there was a problem recently with mountian lions coming
> down out of the higher elevations in search for food, because of the
> drought. Bleeding heart sierra club types saw the emaciated (starving)
> animals and started putting out meat for them. Many had to be
> tranquilized and relocated, and they were back within days, and had to
> be put down. My point here is if you get wildlife used to the fact
> that a predator as large as a human on a bicycle will stop and yeild to
> them, this would be doing them a great disservice as they will become
> less compelled to run from humans and other large predators.
>
> Another item that I thought SHOULD be on the do's and dont's was:
>
> 7. Never wear spandex shorts. Your are riding a TRAIL not a tour
> race. No one wants to see your large a$$. If you wear spandex for
> support, wear gym shorts over them please! Its a matter of decency. If
> you wear only spandex shorts, I must quote Jim Rome: "*You*, are a
> LOSER!" There is *one* exeption to this rule: If you are female AND
> you have a nice butt, go ahead and wear only spandex shorts with our
> thanks.
>
> The only excuse I can think of for a male to wear spandex only is when
> you are actively participating in a race. you may need the reduced
> wind resistance. When you are training for a race however, you should
> train with additional wind resistance and save the people driving down
> the road from having eye damage or worse, a wreck from wretching at the
> site of your a$$ crack. Think of swimmers, they only shave their
> bodies right before their competition, and train with the extra
> resistance of hair at all other times.
>
> x1134x
>

How about if you want to ride in the same gear you race in, so you know
how your junk will (or won't) be supported or chaffed. How about if it's
really hot outside and those are your coolest (as in temperature)
option? How about if all your other shorts are in the wash? What if your
baggies catch on the nose of your seat, giving anyone following more of
an eye full than spandex would have?

You were complaining about us being elitist because we don't think BSOs
are worthy of the trails. At least that argument was based on function,
though I imagine you might disagree. I'm not saying fat guys (or anyone)
should always wear spandex, but sometimes it's the right tool for the
job, even when I'm not racing (which is most of the time).

I usually wear baggies, but they're not always the best choice or
available and that's when I wear the spandex shorts. If you don't like
it then don't look.

Matt (I've been accused of making spandex look baggy too)

[MattB]

x1134x wrote:
>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
>>across JD on the trail before you do.
>
>
>
> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle
> finger and then been driven off on.
>

I wouldn't.

Matt

[small change]

x1134x wrote:
> well, I read the do's & don'ts and agree with all of them exept the
> "Never Scare Animals." one. Sure, don't startle a horse cuz you'll
> either get the rider bucked off, or get kicked in the teeth, but if
> there's a sage chicken in the trail, I'm just helping it hone it's
> fight/flight insticts. And if there's a bug on the trail . . .SQUISH!
> I'm sure bug guts have some erosion fighting properties. . . <g>
>
> In tucson AZ there was a problem recently with mountian lions coming
> down out of the higher elevations in search for food, because of the
> drought. Bleeding heart sierra club types saw the emaciated
> (starving) animals and started putting out meat for them. Many had
> to be tranquilized and relocated, and they were back within days, and
> had to be put down. My point here is if you get wildlife used to the
> fact that a predator as large as a human on a bicycle will stop and
> yeild to them, this would be doing them a great disservice as they
> will become less compelled to run from humans and other large
> predators.
>
> Another item that I thought SHOULD be on the do's and dont's was:
>
> 7. Never wear spandex shorts. Your are riding a TRAIL not a tour
> race. No one wants to see your large a$$. If you wear spandex for
> support, wear gym shorts over them please! Its a matter of decency.
> If you wear only spandex shorts, I must quote Jim Rome: "*You*, are a
> LOSER!" There is *one* exeption to this rule: If you are female AND
> you have a nice butt, go ahead and wear only spandex shorts with our
> thanks.
>
> The only excuse I can think of for a male to wear spandex only is when
> you are actively participating in a race. you may need the reduced
> wind resistance. When you are training for a race however, you should
> train with additional wind resistance and save the people driving down
> the road from having eye damage or worse, a wreck from wretching at
> the site of your a$$ crack. Think of swimmers, they only shave their
> bodies right before their competition, and train with the extra
> resistance of hair at all other times.
>
> x1134x

my, my, a little opininated?

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
>
> 7. Never wear spandex shorts.

8. Never listen to anonymous e-tards in usenet. Likely as not, they
don't have the first ****ing clue what they are talking about.

E.P.

[Slack]

x1134x wrote:
>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
>>across JD on the trail before you do.
>
>
>
> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle
> finger and then been driven off on.
>

I'm sure it has happened on many occasions since he's such a scrawny
little twerp.

--
Slack

[Ride-A-Lot]

x1134x wrote:
>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
>>across JD on the trail before you do.
>
>
>
> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle
> finger and then been driven off on.
>

Just let me know where and when so I can sell tickets to your funeral.
It should be enough notice to you that the man rides trails you and I
wouldn't walk on a fully rigid single speed. I think that's hint enough
to watch who you are picking fights with. You seem to want people to
like you here, yet you are trying awfully hard to start things. I think
Chris (Paladin) has been trying his best to show you the light. You are
either blind or a total ****tard.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

[Craig Brossman]

wrote:
> x1134x wrote:
>
>>7. Never wear spandex shorts.
>
>
> 8. Never listen to anonymous e-tards in usenet. Likely as not, they
> don't have the first ****ing clue what they are talking about.
>
> E.P.
>

I'm glad I read this response before I posted. I had no better words!

--
Craig Brossman, Durango Colorado

Owner/Operator of the Pekingnese Ranch.

[x1134x]

Wait a minute! I'm not saying that's what *I* would say, nor do I claim
to be a skidiot, because I'm not! (other than the hat backwards) I was
just wondering if it ever happened to him because obviously JD has a
reputation for confrontation, and I know alot of macho americans love
to beat their chests.

Do not include me in this group, if someone were yelling at me, and
they wanted to fight they would first be completely ignored, and second
they'd have to catch me because I would just ride off.

x1134x

[x1134x]

>Matt (I've been accused of making spandex look baggy too)

LOL, I'm sure there are many good reasons, but this was said
tongue-in-cheek for humor due to my anecdotal experience of being
grossed out by fat women and ugly men i meet out and about.

>my, my, a little opininated?

Nah just REALLY grossed out.

>8. Never listen to anonymous e-tards in usenet. Likely as not, they
>don't have the first ****ing clue what they are talking about.

AGAIN, This was said tongue in cheek for humor, but some people
obviously lack a sense of it.

[x1134x]

I guess i'm going to have to start adding TIC (tongue in cheek) or <g>
<grin> to all of my posts so you guys know I'm joking and not being
serious. JESUS!

x1134x

[Ride-A-Lot]

x1134x wrote:
> Do not include me in this group, if someone were yelling at me, and
> they wanted to fight they would first be completely ignored, and second
> they'd have to catch me because I would just ride off.

LOL! JD would catch you. Even on a singlespeed.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

[x1134x]

Matt, Also if you just follow rule number 3 from the site DaveD posted:

3. Control Your Bicycle!
Inattention for even a second can cause problems. Obey all bicycle
speed regulations and recommendations.

There is no need for a helmet.

x1134x

[x1134x]

I believe you, although there would be no need because I'm not a
skidiot. And he wouldn't need to yell @ me.

x1134x

[gabrielle]

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:18:00 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:

> x1134x wrote:
>>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
>>>across JD on the trail before you do.
>>
>> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
>> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
>> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
>> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle
>> finger and then been driven off on.
>>
>
> Just let me know where and when so I can sell tickets to your funeral.
No ****, put me on the "will-call" list right now.

gabrielle

[gabrielle]

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 15:54:03 -0700, x1134x wrote:
> There is *one* exeption to this rule: If you are female AND
> you have a nice butt, go ahead and wear only spandex shorts with our
> thanks.

I'll wear them without your thanks, TYVM.

gabrielle

[Westie]

x1134x wrote:
> well, I read the do's & don'ts and agree with all of them exept the
> "Never Scare Animals." one. Sure, don't startle a horse cuz you'll
> either get the rider bucked off, or get kicked in the teeth, but if
> there's a sage chicken in the trail, I'm just helping it hone it's
> fight/flight insticts.

Actually, while you shouldn't startle a horse, just don't cruise quietly
up to it without making any noise either. Say Hello a couple of times,
mention the weather and pass comment about what a manificent beast the
horse is - or whatever. Plenty of horses just can't figure out what the
hell a bike actually is even when they are fully aware of it. They don't
know whether to stand or bolt. So talk to the riders and have a quick
conversation so that the stupid horse can figure out that you'e a funny
looking harmless human.
--
Westie

[small change]

x1134x wrote:
>> Matt (I've been accused of making spandex look baggy too)
>
> LOL, I'm sure there are many good reasons, but this was said
> tongue-in-cheek for humor due to my anecdotal experience of being
> grossed out by fat women and ugly men i meet out and about.
>
>> my, my, a little opininated?
>
> Nah just REALLY grossed out.

maybe you should quit looking in the mirror then.

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> >
> >8. Never listen to anonymous e-tards in usenet. Likely as not, they
> >don't have the first ****ing clue what they are talking about.
>
> AGAIN, This was said tongue in cheek for humor, but some people
> obviously lack a sense of it.

Oh, I'm *sure* it was quite humorous.

Obviously *one* of us inspired some grins.

Gosh, I wonder who that could have been...

E.P.

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

x1134x wrote:
> I must add that I only wear the hat backwards when going downhill, and
> I wear it like a *white* man at all other times.

Check out out guys, we have our own William Bennett right here!

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

[Shawn]

Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> x1134x wrote:
>
>>I must add that I only wear the hat backwards when going downhill, and
>>I wear it like a *white* man at all other times.
>
>
> Check out out guys, we have our own William Bennett right here!
>
LOL, good call.

Shawn

[x1134x]

Just calling you on trolling because that is what your post was, ad
hominem.

[x1134x]

>Check out out guys, we have our own William Bennett right here!

Again, someone who cannot see humor when its blocking the sun from both
eyes, I have many black friends many latino friends, many *white*
friends.

[x1134x]

>LOL, good call.

BAD call, it was a joke, and my black friend joe even laughed @ it.

[x1134x]

>I'll wear them without your thanks, TYVM.

How do you reject thanks? You really can't, its a non-material thing
that is *given*. . .

And I'll stare at your a$$ and other female protrubrances all I want.
(provided it's worth looking at). TYVM {:-)

I find it funny that when I was single, I couldn't hardly look a pretty
girl in the eyes, but now that I'm married, I'll stare them up and down
right in front of them. They know I'm undressing them with my eyes and
I have no problems with it.

x1134x

[x1134x]

>Actually, while you shouldn't startle a horse, just don't cruise quietly
>up to it without making any noise either.

I think that is the only way *to* startle a horse is to cruis quietly
up to it without making any noise. . ..

[spademan o---[) *]

Thats my cow approach technique as well, get some funny looks sometimes
but hey! the cows don't mind!

[Corvus Corvax]

x1134x wrote:
>
> And I'll stare at your a$$ and other female protrubrances all I want.
> (provided it's worth looking at). TYVM {:-)
>
> I find it funny that when I was single, I couldn't hardly look a pretty
> girl in the eyes, but now that I'm married, I'll stare them up and down
> right in front of them. They know I'm undressing them with my eyes and
> I have no problems with it.

Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.

I vote you "honorary skidiot".

CC

[MattB]

Corvus Corvax wrote:
> x1134x wrote:
>
>>And I'll stare at your a$$ and other female protrubrances all I want.
>>(provided it's worth looking at). TYVM {:-)
>>
>>I find it funny that when I was single, I couldn't hardly look a pretty
>>girl in the eyes, but now that I'm married, I'll stare them up and down
>>right in front of them. They know I'm undressing them with my eyes and
>>I have no problems with it.
>
>
> Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.
>
> I vote you "honorary skidiot".
>
> CC
>

Seconded.

[MattB]

x1134x wrote:
> Matt, Also if you just follow rule number 3 from the site DaveD posted:
>
> 3. Control Your Bicycle!
> Inattention for even a second can cause problems. Obey all bicycle
> speed regulations and recommendations.
>
> There is no need for a helmet.
>
> x1134x
>

OK. Then don't wear one.
So if something happens, who will be around to provide for your truck
and collection of expensive petro-toys?

Matt (not yet good enough to go helmetless)

[Ride-A-Lot]

MattB wrote:

> Matt (not yet good enough to go helmetless)

You'll never be good enough if you have to worry about that skidiot
riding on the same trail as you. Chances are he'll smash into you
before you smash into the ground.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

[MattB]

x1134x wrote:
>>Check out out guys, we have our own William Bennett right here!
>
>
> Again, someone who cannot see humor when its blocking the sun from both
> eyes, I have many black friends many latino friends, many *white*
> friends.
>

Hmmm. I guess I'm just humorless.

It's great that you're so multicultural and all, but what might seem
appropriate and humorous face to face with friends may not seem so funny
when posted on the Internet.

Matt

[MattB]

Ride-A-Lot wrote:
> MattB wrote:
>
>> Matt (not yet good enough to go helmetless)
>
>
> You'll never be good enough if you have to worry about that skidiot
> riding on the same trail as you. Chances are he'll smash into you
> before you smash into the ground.
>

Yup.

[x1134x]

>Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.

missed the part about "but now that I'm *married*" ?

I really couldn't care less about what other women think of me now.
And that was the point of what I was saying.

x1134x

[Corvus Corvax]

x1134x wrote:
> >Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.
>
> missed the part about "but now that I'm *married*" ?

I got that part.

> I really couldn't care less about what other women think of me now.
> And that was the point of what I was saying.

I got that part too. I'm very impressed.

CC

[Shawn]

x1134x wrote:
>>Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.
>
>
> missed the part about "but now that I'm *married*" ?
>
> I really couldn't care less about what other women think of me now.
> And that was the point of what I was saying.

So you're sexist too?

Shawn

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> Just calling you on trolling because that is what your post was, ad
> hominem.

LOL! Irony.

E.P.

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> >Check out out guys, we have our own William Bennett right here!
>
> Again, someone who cannot see humor when its blocking the sun from both
> eyes, I have many black friends many latino friends, many *white*
> friends.

"Some of my best friends are black."

LOL - priceless.

E.P.

[x1134x]

First look up the definition of ad hominem, and you will realize that
you also then need to look up the definition of IRONY.

Because in no way did I attack you personally.

x1134x

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> First look up the definition of ad hominem, and you will realize that
> you also then need to look up the definition of IRONY.

Ad hominem means, literally, "to the man" in Latin.

The irony is that you seem to think your commentary is not "to the
man", while some other poster's is.

> Because in no way did I attack you personally.

What makes you think that you need to attack me personally for your
comments to be ad hominem?

Looks like one of us needs to go get his dictionary again.

LOL - irony on irony.

E.P.

[x1134x]

What part of:

> I really couldn't care less about what other women think of me now.

makes me sexist?

I could see *IF* i said something like: "women shouldn't have the right
to vote" or, "women should get back in the kitchen where they belong"
*THAT* would be sexist.

Try using logic before spouting your name calling piehole

x1134x

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
>
> Try using logic before spouting your name calling piehole

And the irony keeps on rolling along.

Damn, you're a hoot!

E.P.

[[email protected]]

MattB wrote:
> x1134x wrote:
> >>Check out out guys, we have our own William Bennett right here!
> >
> >
> > Again, someone who cannot see humor when its blocking the sun from both
> > eyes, I have many black friends many latino friends, many *white*
> > friends.
> >
>
> Hmmm. I guess I'm just humorless.

No - some stuff just ain't all that funny.

X-box here thinks he's pretty hot stuff now that he's got a 'net
connection in his double-wide.

No matter how hard you beat 'em, the stupid just sticks like glue.

E.P.

[Bill Sornson]

x1134x wrote:
> What part of:
>
>> I really couldn't care less about what other women think of me now.
>
> makes me sexist?
>
> I could see *IF* i said something like: "women shouldn't have the
> right to vote" or, "women should get back in the kitchen where they
> belong" *THAT* would be sexist.
>
> Try using logic before spouting your name calling piehole
>
> x1134x

Yo, 'X'. Stop talking.

Now.

Bill "free advice" S.

PS: Best advice would be to adopt a NEW anonymous user name and start over.
You've blown this one (so to speak).

[x1134x]

Just because people can't
A. Read
B. Understand English
C. Recognize humor

Doesn't mean I should get another user name. My name may change but my
opinions don't. Maybe I just need a different mountain biking forum
where there is a higher intelligence level.

Just because I'm accused of being something doesn't in fact make me
that.

1. I'm not a barney, (even though I ride a cheaper bicycle) lack of
money shouldn't make you an outcast
2. Not a racist, (I'm not a white person who avoids race jokes just so
I don't look racist. Listen to all the "white people" jokes chris rock
tells, no one accuses him of being racist)
3. I'm not a sexist. (if you like to look at women you are not sexist
you are *HETEROSEXUAL*)
4. I'm not a Skidiot, because I don't ruin trails with my mountain
bike.
5. I never said *I* would tell JD off if he yelled at me, I simply
asked if it had ever happened to him when he has done it in the past.
He would have no need to yell at me because of point number 4 above.

I do believe my opinion on how much bikes cost versus motorcycles got
me off on the wrong foot w/ alot of the elitists here who look down
their noses at a bike like mine, But i've definately found common
ground with the Vandemann haters here.

So no, I don't think i'll get a new username, I like mine just fine,
but thanx for the advice.

x1134x

[x1134x]

Directly from Dictionary.com:

ad hom·i·nem ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hm-nm, -nm)
adj.
Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason:
Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their
opponents' motives.

Usage Note: As the principal meaning of the preposition ad suggests,
the homo of ad hominem was originally the person to whom an argument
was addressed, not its subject.

When you make a post like:

>8. Never listen to anonymous e-tards in usenet. Likely as not, they
>don't have the first ****ing clue what they are talking about.

In a thread about wearing spandex shorts, you arent' really talking
about spandex shorts, in fact you don't even mention them. All you are
doing is attacking the debator and not discussing/arguing the subject
or substance of the debate. your post is simply AD HOMINEM.

you learn something every day don't you?

x1134x

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> >Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.
>
> missed the part about "but now that I'm *married*" ?

What difference does that make?

Do you think *that's* what's stopping the ladies from falling all over
you?

I'm guessing "personality."

Just a WAG.

>
> I really couldn't care less about what other women think of me now.

Liar.

> And that was the point of what I was saying.

IOW, just as pointless as the rest of your internet spew. Got it.

E.P.

[x1134x]

You *MUST* be reading these posts in order of post and not by thread
because you aren't even talking about what was being said.

> > >Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.

> > missed the part about "but now that I'm *married*" ?

>What difference does that make?

Hmm. . . .lets turn on our logic circuits for a second:

What difference would being married make about caring whether or not
women line up for "a prince like you" Perhaps that even if they WERE i
would shun them anyway because I'm monogamous? And perhaps even if
every other women in the world HATED MY GUTS, I'd still have a family?

>Liar.

Nope, not lying, I do not care what any other woman other than my wife
thinks of me.

x1134x

[Ride-A-Lot]

x1134x wrote:
<SNIPPED TO HERE>

I am not even going to bother commenting on the stuff above this as you
are sure to be humiliated within three minutes.

>
> I do believe my opinion on how much bikes cost versus motorcycles got
> me off on the wrong foot w/ alot of the elitists here who look down
> their noses at a bike like mine,

I don't think anyone looked down. I think if you look back they offered
advice on how to save your life when that POS busts in two and impales
your heart.

>But i've definately found common
> ground with the Vandemann haters here.

That's a good one. Being on that common ground usually lands you in the
kill file or ignore list of most mountain bikers in this newsgroup.
Take a look at the responders next time, silly man.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

[x1134x]

>I am not even going to bother commenting on the stuff above this as you
>are sure to be humiliated within three minutes.

I see, that would be to actually look at the logic of what was said in
this thread, and that would make people lose all footing to attack me
personally, becasue all 5 points are TRUE.

x1134x

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> You *MUST* be reading these posts in order of post and not by thread
> because you aren't even talking about what was being said.

Bzzzt! Wrong. (As usual.)

> > > >Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.
>
> > > missed the part about "but now that I'm *married*" ?
>
> >What difference does that make?
>
> Hmm. . . .lets turn on our logic circuits for a second:

Yes, let's...

> What difference would being married make about caring whether or not
> women line up for "a prince like you" Perhaps that even if they WERE i
> would shun them anyway because I'm monogamous?

Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
affairs with married men, right?

Logic, indeed.

> And perhaps even if
> every other women in the world HATED MY GUTS, I'd still have a family?

Non sequitur.

> >Liar.
>
> Nope, not lying, I do not care what any other woman other than my wife
> thinks of me.

So you say. I don't believe you. Clear enough?

E.P.

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> Directly from Dictionary.com:
>
> ad hom·i·nem ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hm-nm, -nm)
> adj.
> Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason:
> Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their
> opponents' motives.

This has relevance, how?

> Usage Note: As the principal meaning of the preposition ad suggests,
> the homo of ad hominem was originally the person to whom an argument
> was addressed, not its subject.

Uh, DUH.

> When you make a post like:
>
> >8. Never listen to anonymous e-tards in usenet. Likely as not, they
> >don't have the first ****ing clue what they are talking about.
>
> In a thread about wearing spandex shorts, you arent' really talking
> about spandex shorts, in fact you don't even mention them.

No ****, Sherlock. Boy, ain't you a brainy one!

I was talking about anonymous e-tards handing out advice on the
internet. Something contained within the thread! Imagine that.

> All you are
> doing is attacking the debator and not discussing/arguing the subject
> or substance of the debate.

Yeah, that's right. Life's tough all over, huh?

> your post is simply AD HOMINEM.

Are you gonna cry? Oh, don't cry. It's just the internet - don't you
have any sense of humor?

> you learn something every day don't you?

Sure do. Not in this thread, however.

E.P.

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> >I am not even going to bother commenting on the stuff above this as you
> >are sure to be humiliated within three minutes.
>
> I see, that would be to actually look at the logic of what was said in
> this thread,

You wouldn't know logic if it bit you directly in the ass.

But you are funny - pretending to be joking, then getting all whiney
when *you* become the subject of the jokes.

The more you type, the funnier it gets.

E.P.

[x1134x]

E.P.

If you were right, I'd agree with you.

x1134x

[x1134x]

E.P.

If you were right, I'd agree with you.

x1134x

[x1134x]

E.P.

If you were right, I'd agree with you.

x1134x

[x1134x]

E.P.

If you were right, I'd agree with you.

x1134x

[x1134x]

E.P.

If you were right, I'd agree with you.

x1134x

[JP]

"pauly" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 23:06:13 -0700, x1134x wrote
> (in article om>):
>
> > I think I might be one w/out even knowing it. where is a list of
> > mountain biker "ethics" or "do's and don'ts" so that I can know which
> > ones I may be and which ones I just don't give a flying Vandeman about.
> > . . .
> >
>
> An idiot who can't/won't control his brakes and ruins the trails by
skidding
> around turns and down steep sections
>
> Paul
>

Someone leaving evidence that he or she rode the trail.

JP

[x1134x]

>Someone leaving evidence that he or she rode the trail.

Then EVERYONE is a skidiot, until the next skidiot comes along and
changes the tire pattern left in the dirt.

x1134x

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> E.P.
>
> If you were right, I'd agree with you.

Wow, I'm honored. Going around all of usenet, humping my posts.

Congratulations - you've just graduated to Spankerski Jr. Now, stop
starching my cuff.

E.P.

P.S. Of course I'm right - that's why you don't have anything else to
say. :)

[x1134x]

E.P.

If you were right, I'd agree with you.

>P.S. Of course I'm right - that's why you don't have anything else to
>say. :)

Why don't you have anything else to say other than:

"You post anonymously, therefore you are wrong"

annoying isn't it?

makes you wish the person would stay on topic or STFU huh?

again,

If you were right, I'd agree with you.

x1134x

[[email protected]]

x1134x wrote:
> E.P.
>
> If you were right, I'd agree with you.
>
> >P.S. Of course I'm right - that's why you don't have anything else to
> >say. :)
>
> Why don't you have anything else to say other than:
>
> "You post anonymously, therefore you are wrong"

I have never said that.

To you or to anyone.

Chalk it up to your poor reading/comprehension skills.

Run along now - isn't it your nap time?

E.P.

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> >Check out out guys, we have our own William Bennett right here!
>
> Again, someone who cannot see humor when its blocking the sun from both
> eyes, I have many black friends many latino friends, many *white*
> friends.
>

Humor upon humor. Wasn't it funny that I made that comment? C'mon dude,
let's all lighten up! Funny funny world it is today!

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

[Tim]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> x1134x wrote:
>> E.P.
>>
>> If you were right, I'd agree with you.
>>
>> >P.S. Of course I'm right - that's why you don't have anything else to
>> >say. :)
>>
>> Why don't you have anything else to say other than:
>>
>> "You post anonymously, therefore you are wrong"
>
> I have never said that.
>
> To you or to anyone.
>
> Chalk it up to your poor reading/comprehension skills.
>
> Run along now - isn't it your nap time?
>
> E.P.

bwwaaahhha
>

[Dave W]

"Corvus Corvax" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> x1134x wrote:
>> >Smooooooth, man. I bet they're lining up for a Prince like you.
>>
>> missed the part about "but now that I'm *married*" ?
>
> I got that part.
>
>> I really couldn't care less about what other women think of me now.
>> And that was the point of what I was saying.
>
> I got that part too. I'm very impressed.
>
> CC
>

but it still didn't stop you did it....

[Dave W]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Wait a minute! I'm not saying that's what *I* would say, nor do I claim
> to be a skidiot, because I'm not! (other than the hat backwards) I was
> just wondering if it ever happened to him because obviously JD has a
> reputation for confrontation, and I know alot of macho americans love
> to beat their chests.
>
> Do not include me in this group, if someone were yelling at me, and
> they wanted to fight they would first be completely ignored, and second
> they'd have to catch me because I would just ride off.
>
> x1134x
>

JD has a reputation for confrontation??? that is what he'd like you to
believe here in USENET...by his own admission he doesn't act that way in
real life....

[Dave W]

"gabrielle" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:18:00 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>
>> x1134x wrote:
>>>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
>>>>across JD on the trail before you do.
>>>
>>> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
>>> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
>>> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
>>> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle
>>> finger and then been driven off on.
>>>
>>
>> Just let me know where and when so I can sell tickets to your funeral.
> No ****, put me on the "will-call" list right now.
>
> gabrielle

you people are so full of his ****....good god!

[[email protected]]

Dave W wrote:
> "gabrielle" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:18:00 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:
> >
> >> x1134x wrote:
> >>>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't run
> >>>>across JD on the trail before you do.
> >>>
> >>> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
> >>> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
> >>> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
> >>> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle
> >>> finger and then been driven off on.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Just let me know where and when so I can sell tickets to your funeral.
> > No ****, put me on the "will-call" list right now.
> >
> > gabrielle
>
> you people are so full of his ****....good god!

Naw - you're just mad 'cuz he called you on your crap.

Get over it already - isn't three/four years enough for an inferiority
complex?

Jeez, if you have such a hassle, get to L.A. and sort it out like a
real man. Quit whining in usenet, you pussy.

E.P.

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

x1134x wrote:
> E.P.
>
> If you were right, I'd agree with you.
>
> x1134x

Uh... how about I just call "Hitler" right now and end this thread?

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

[Tim]

On 2005-10-05, Phil, Squid-in-Training > wrote:
> x1134x wrote:
>> E.P.
>>
>> If you were right, I'd agree with you.
>>
>> x1134x
>
> Uh... how about I just call "Hitler" right now and end this thread?
>

Does Godwin's Law apply if attempted to be invoked to
deliberately kill a thread?

/me would cite Quirk's exception if it wouldn't make him feel
like a Usenet throwback.
--
Tim.

[JP]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> >Someone leaving evidence that he or she rode the trail.
>
> Then EVERYONE is a skidiot, until the next skidiot comes along and
> changes the tire pattern left in the dirt.
>
> x1134x
>

Not if one floats lightly x-man.
Do a few laps and see if you marked up the trail or not.
Not with the Honda of course.

[MattB]

Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> "x1134x" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>>Check out out guys, we have our own William Bennett right here!
>>
>>Again, someone who cannot see humor when its blocking the sun from both
>>eyes, I have many black friends many latino friends, many *white*
>>friends.
>>
>
>
> Humor upon humor. Wasn't it funny that I made that comment? C'mon dude,
> let's all lighten up! Funny funny world it is today!
>

I laughed a little, but not quite enough to actually post "LOL". Maybe
"LQ", but it didn't seem worth the effort.

Matt

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

Tim wrote:
> On 2005-10-05, Phil, Squid-in-Training
> > wrote:
>> x1134x wrote:
>>> E.P.
>>>
>>> If you were right, I'd agree with you.
>>>
>>> x1134x
>>
>> Uh... how about I just call "Hitler" right now and end this thread?
>>
>
> Does Godwin's Law apply if attempted to be invoked to
> deliberately kill a thread?
>
> /me would cite Quirk's exception if it wouldn't make him feel
> like a Usenet throwback.

Shhhh! This one's a prime candidate for Godwin sabotage! ;)

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

[JohnH]

x1134x wrote:
>> LOL, good call.
>
> BAD call, it was a joke, and my black friend joe even laughed @ it.


You must be for real, as you aren't a particularily clever troll; then again
that might be your schtick. Regardless, thanks for the entertainment,
you're hooking plenty of the regulars.

[[email protected]]

Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> >
> >
> > Does Godwin's Law apply if attempted to be invoked to
> > deliberately kill a thread?
> >
> > /me would cite Quirk's exception if it wouldn't make him feel
> > like a Usenet throwback.
>
> Shhhh! This one's a prime candidate for Godwin sabotage! ;)
>

Shut your cake hole, you godless Nazi! Hitler and the SS would be glad
to have your soul in hell with them!!!

There, that should just about do it...

E.P.

[x1134x]

Yup, I can't float above the dirt, my bike leaves tire tracks in the
dirt. Hey if you can ride a bike through the dirt and not leave a tire
track, you should try walking on water sometime. . . you probably *can*
and never knew it.

x1134x

[Shawn]

x1134x wrote:
> Yup, I can't float above the dirt, my bike leaves tire tracks in the
> dirt.

Dude, that's your problem! The rest of us have learned to levitate
above the dirt.
Keep working at it.

Shawn

[Shaun aRe]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
> deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
> affairs with married men, right?
>
> Logic, indeed.
>

Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far more
*and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.





Shaun aRe

[Ride-A-Lot]

Shaun aRe wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
>> deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
>> affairs with married men, right?
>>
>> Logic, indeed.
>>
>
> Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far more
> *and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.
>
>
>
>
>
> Shaun aRe
>
>

Yeah right. And I'm Brad Pitt.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

[JohnH]

>> Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not
>> a deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never
>> have affairs with married men, right?
>>
>> Logic, indeed.
>>
>
> Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far
> more *and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in
> fact.
>

Translation: his mom is now speaking to him! ;)

[[email protected]]

Shaun aRe wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
> > deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
> > affairs with married men, right?
> >
> > Logic, indeed.
> >
>
> Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far more
> *and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.

That has been my experience as well. And sometimes right in front of
my wife.

It's the weirdest damn thing ever.

E.P.

[MattB]

wrote:
> Shaun aRe wrote:
>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>
>>>Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
>>>deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
>>>affairs with married men, right?
>>>
>>>Logic, indeed.
>>>
>>
>>Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far more
>>*and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.
>
>
> That has been my experience as well. And sometimes right in front of
> my wife.
>
> It's the weirdest damn thing ever.
>
> E.P.
>

Huh. For me it's been about the same as before getting hitched. Some,
but not a whole lot.

Matt

[Slack]

JohnH wrote:
>>>Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not
>>>a deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never
>>>have affairs with married men, right?
>>>
>>>Logic, indeed.
>>>
>>
>>Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far
>>more *and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in
>>fact.
>>
>
>
> Translation: his mom is now speaking to him! ;)
>
>
:-) Excellent :-)

--
Slack

[gabrielle]

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:11:10 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:

> Yeah right. And I'm Brad Pitt.

Ok, now I'm *really* ****ed that you didn't show up at AMB-ID.

FEAR MY WRATH!!! ;)

gabrielle

[Shaun aRe]

"Ride-A-Lot" > wrote in message
...
> Shaun aRe wrote:
> > > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >> Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
> >> deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
> >> affairs with married men, right?
> >>
> >> Logic, indeed.
> >>
> >
> > Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far more
> > *and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Shaun aRe
> >
> >
>
> Yeah right.

****in 'A' it's right. Don't believe me? Ask my wife FFS.

> And I'm Brad Pitt.

'**** off Brad, you ugly cnut.' ',;~}~


Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

"JohnH" > wrote in message
...
>
> >> Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not
> >> a deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never
> >> have affairs with married men, right?
> >>
> >> Logic, indeed.
> >>
> >
> > Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far
> > more *and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in
> > fact.
> >
>
> Translation: his mom is now speaking to him! ;)

Then I'm a ****ing medium, Eejit.



Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

"Slack" > wrote in message
...
> JohnH wrote:
> >>>Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not
> >>>a deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never
> >>>have affairs with married men, right?
> >>>
> >>>Logic, indeed.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far
> >>more *and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in
> >>fact.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Translation: his mom is now speaking to him! ;)
> >
> >
> :-) Excellent :-)

(Shh...)


Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Shaun aRe wrote:
> > > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> > >
> > > Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
> > > deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
> > > affairs with married men, right?
> > >
> > > Logic, indeed.
> > >
> >
> > Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far more
> > *and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.
>
> That has been my experience as well. And sometimes right in front of
> my wife.

Yup indeedy. The drum, song and dance camp we both went to this last
August - I was flirted with outragiously. One point the woman came up where
we were sat by the fire, sat on Kath's foot, facing me, back to Kath,
flirting away - Kath thought it was freakin' hilarious (TF!).

I've heard theories advanced about this 'phenomenon', such as women see the
ring and feel safe flirting with you, knowing that's all there is to it, or
a married man that isn't looking for another woman gives off a certain vibe
etc. but none seem to quite wrap it all up.

I've never actually asked if this also happens with married women, but I've
not ever heard mention of it.

C'mon gals, speak UP!

> It's the weirdest damn thing ever.

Ain't it just - I coulda died when that lass sat on Kath's foot like that -
my face was burning LOL!


Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

"MattB" > wrote in message
...
> wrote:
> > Shaun aRe wrote:
> >
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >>
> >>>Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
> >>>deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
> >>>affairs with married men, right?
> >>>
> >>>Logic, indeed.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far more
> >>*and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.
> >
> >
> > That has been my experience as well. And sometimes right in front of
> > my wife.
> >
> > It's the weirdest damn thing ever.
> >
> > E.P.
> >
>
> Huh. For me it's been about the same as before getting hitched. Some,
> but not a whole lot.

Yeah Matt but you look repulsive. ',;~}~


Shaun aRe

[Ride-A-Lot]

gabrielle wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:11:10 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>
>> Yeah right. And I'm Brad Pitt.
>
> Ok, now I'm *really* ****ed that you didn't show up at AMB-ID.
>
> FEAR MY WRATH!!! ;)
>
> gabrielle

You don't want to **** off Angelina. She's a tough chick.

:)

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

[Shaun aRe]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Dave W wrote:
> > "gabrielle" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:18:00 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:
> > >
> > >> x1134x wrote:
> > >>>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't
run
> > >>>>across JD on the trail before you do.
> > >>>
> > >>> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
> > >>> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and
it's
> > >>> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
> > >>> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the
middle
> > >>> finger and then been driven off on.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Just let me know where and when so I can sell tickets to your
funeral.
> > > No ****, put me on the "will-call" list right now.
> > >
> > > gabrielle
> >
> > you people are so full of his ****....good god!
>
> Naw - you're just mad 'cuz he called you on your crap.

And you lot seem to have reading comrehension difficulties over this issue.

What bit of: "I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells
at skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional wrestler.
Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle finger and then
been driven off on."

Do you think is anything but questions and speculation? What bit of the
statment even *implies* the writer of it he's saying he'd have a go? Gee
Zeus...

> Get over it already - isn't three/four years enough for an inferiority
> complex?
>
> Jeez, if you have such a hassle, get to L.A. and sort it out like a
> real man. Quit whining in usenet, you pussy.

Right - real men drive across the country to fist fight over name calling.
FFS...


Shaun aRe - And Dave - you can STFU before you even *think* of piping up in
reply to this with 'Yeah, what Shaun said, see! Blah blah blah' y'hear now?
OK? Right - I'm done for now. Least until I come across the next knucklehead
post that is.

[Ride-A-Lot]

Shaun aRe wrote:
> Shaun aRe - And Dave - you can STFU before you even *think* of piping up in
> reply to this with 'Yeah, what Shaun said, see! Blah blah blah' y'hear now?
> OK? Right - I'm done for now. Least until I come across the next knucklehead
> post that is.
>
>

LOL. You are in rare form today. Keep it up - I like it.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

[Shaun aRe]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...

Right that does it - I'm back for this one:

> I usually use both breaks always.

You are a dumb-****-frog-brained Eejit with less command of the English
language and basic logic than GWB.

HTH, HAVVND. ',;~}~





Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I must add that I only wear the hat backwards when going downhill, and
> I wear it like a *white* man at all other times.

**** of and die you racist scum sucker.














Shaun aRe - Hells yes I bite.

[JohnH]

>
> Yup indeedy. The drum, song and dance camp we both went to this last
> August - I was flirted with outragiously. One point the woman came up
> where we were sat by the fire, sat on Kath's foot, facing me, back to
> Kath, flirting away - Kath thought it was freakin' hilarious (TF!).


I wouldn't give the time of day to someone so blatantly disrespectful to my
wife.

[Shaun aRe]

"Ride-A-Lot" > wrote in message
...
> Shaun aRe wrote:
> > Shaun aRe - And Dave - you can STFU before you even *think* of piping up
in
> > reply to this with 'Yeah, what Shaun said, see! Blah blah blah' y'hear
now?
> > OK? Right - I'm done for now. Least until I come across the next
knucklehead
> > post that is.
> >
> >
>
> LOL. You are in rare form today. Keep it up - I like it.

LIGAF? I'm just mad as hell that they put FAKE prawn sauce on my sammich
this lunch.





Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> >LOL, good call.
>
> BAD call, it was a joke, and my black friend joe even laughed @ it.

OMG, I *cannot believe* you just played >THAT< ****ing card - that's the
instant 'I lose the argument and all my of dignity I am truly and in actual
fact a full-on bigot' card, ya daft sod.








Shaun aRe - Boy is the world ever making a higher class of idiot these days.

[JohnH]

>> I usually use both breaks always.
>
> You are a dumb-****-frog-brained Eejit with less command of the
> English language and basic logic than GWB.
>
> HTH, HAVVND. ',;~}~

What have you got against frogs?

[Shaun aRe]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...



> I have many black friends many latino friends, many *white*
> friends.


OMG #(losing count)

Here's the skinny inside clue info on that for you, Mr. 'I need a 34 tooth
big cog for riding beer runs' - *They all, every ****ing last one of them,
hate you and know that you're and idiot*




Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> E.P.
>
> If you were right, I'd agree with you.
>
> x1134x

Like you'd know.






Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

> wrote in message
oups.com...

> Chalk it up to your poor reading/comprehension skills.

PKB dOoOd - see my post up-thread. Heh...





Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

"JohnH" > wrote in message
...
>
> >> I usually use both breaks always.
> >
> > You are a dumb-****-frog-brained Eejit with less command of the
> > English language and basic logic than GWB.
> >
> > HTH, HAVVND. ',;~}~
>
> What have you got against frogs?

Right now my penis.

****ing frogs.





Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

"JohnH" > wrote in message
...
>
> >
> > Yup indeedy. The drum, song and dance camp we both went to this last
> > August - I was flirted with outragiously. One point the woman came up
> > where we were sat by the fire, sat on Kath's foot, facing me, back to
> > Kath, flirting away - Kath thought it was freakin' hilarious (TF!).
>
>
> I wouldn't give the time of day to someone so blatantly disrespectful to
my
> wife.

*Oh*.





Shaun aRe

[GeeDubb]

"Ride-A-Lot" >
> You don't want to **** off Angelina. She's a tough chick.
>
> :)

but doesn't ride.......how tough can she be?


:-)

Gary (getting packed for a week in Colorado....bbrrrrrrrrrrr)

[Shaun aRe]

"x1134x" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I believe you, although there would be no need because I'm not a
> skidiot. And he wouldn't need to yell @ me.
>
> x1134x

Need? WTF is up with good old fashioned *want* these days?








Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

Pervert called Scottie. Likes to get spnacked a lot.







Shaun aRe

[Bill Sornson]

Shaun aRe wrote:

> Then I'm a ****ing medium, Eejit.

They sell pills for that now, Shaun.

(Sorry, mate -- had to be done.)

<EG>

[[email protected]]

Shaun aRe wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> >
> > Dave W wrote:
> > > "gabrielle" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:18:00 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> x1134x wrote:
> > > >>>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't
> run
> > > >>>>across JD on the trail before you do.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
> > > >>> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and
> it's
> > > >>> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
> > > >>> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the
> middle
> > > >>> finger and then been driven off on.
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> Just let me know where and when so I can sell tickets to your
> funeral.
> > > > No ****, put me on the "will-call" list right now.
> > > >
> > > > gabrielle
> > >
> > > you people are so full of his ****....good god!
> >
> > Naw - you're just mad 'cuz he called you on your crap.
>
> And you lot seem to have reading comrehension difficulties over this issue.

Hardly.

> What bit of: "I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells
> at skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional wrestler.
> Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle finger and then
> been driven off on."
>
> Do you think is anything but questions and speculation? What bit of the
> statment even *implies* the writer of it he's saying he'd have a go? Gee
> Zeus...

Talk about reading comprehension. I wasn't replying to *that*.

I'm replying to Dave's JD-leg-humping.

X-box's bull**** is just that. Another newbie troll.

> > Get over it already - isn't three/four years enough for an inferiority
> > complex?
> >
> > Jeez, if you have such a hassle, get to L.A. and sort it out like a
> > real man. Quit whining in usenet, you pussy.
>
> Right - real men drive across the country to fist fight over name calling.
> FFS...

It's easy to call names from behind a computer screen.

How many years has Dave been ****ing and moaning over JD, now?

If it's that damned important to him, then he should get in his car and
drive a little to settle his hassle once and for all. Or STFU about it
already.

I know you're a "last-word-in" kind of guy, so go ahead. :)

E.P.

[Dave W]

"Shaun aRe" > wrote in message
enews.net...
>
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>>
>> Dave W wrote:
>> > "gabrielle" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:18:00 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> x1134x wrote:
>> > >>>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you don't
> run
>> > >>>>across JD on the trail before you do.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
>> > >>> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and
> it's
>> > >>> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
>> > >>> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the
> middle
>> > >>> finger and then been driven off on.
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >> Just let me know where and when so I can sell tickets to your
> funeral.
>> > > No ****, put me on the "will-call" list right now.
>> > >
>> > > gabrielle
>> >
>> > you people are so full of his ****....good god!
>>
>> Naw - you're just mad 'cuz he called you on your crap.

Reallly, thanks for the ass-cessment.
>
> And you lot seem to have reading comrehension difficulties over this
> issue.
>
> What bit of: "I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he
> yells
> at skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional wrestler.
> Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle finger and
> then
> been driven off on."

At least...
>
> Do you think is anything but questions and speculation? What bit of the
> statment even *implies* the writer of it he's saying he'd have a go? Gee
> Zeus...

I wonder...

>
>> Get over it already - isn't three/four years enough for an inferiority
>> complex?

Are you ****ing joking?? Me, an inferiority complex? Concerning the Great
Oz??? puhleeeze...

>>
>> Jeez, if you have such a hassle, get to L.A. and sort it out like a
>> real man. Quit whining in usenet, you puss

F.O.A.D ****ant...I don't have a problem with him per se' just his attitudes
in this Forum, and over at MTBR...morte to the point, I have a problem with
all a select few of you seem like you'd rather lick his ass than call him on
his abusivness...some of you fit the mold perfectly as sheep...

[MattB]

Shaun aRe wrote:
> "MattB" > wrote in message
> ...
>
wrote:
>>
>>>Shaun aRe wrote:
>>>
>>>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not a
>>>>>deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
>>>>>affairs with married men, right?
>>>>>
>>>>>Logic, indeed.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far more
>>>>*and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.
>>>
>>>
>>>That has been my experience as well. And sometimes right in front of
>>>my wife.
>>>
>>>It's the weirdest damn thing ever.
>>>
>>>E.P.
>>>
>>
>>Huh. For me it's been about the same as before getting hitched. Some,
>>but not a whole lot.
>
>
> Yeah Matt but you look repulsive. ',;~}~
>
>
> Shaun aRe
>
>

And I'm glad you think so, you handsome devil, you!

Matt

[[email protected]]

Dave W wrote:
> >
> >> Get over it already - isn't three/four years enough for an inferiority
> >> complex?
>
> Are you ****ing joking?? Me, an inferiority complex? Concerning the Great
> Oz??? puhleeeze...

Yeah, you. You always have something to say - things you wouldn't dare
say to his face.

The way JD jumps on newbies is ****ty, but the way you constantly hump
him is pathetic.

It's been years now - get over it already.

E.P.

[[email protected]]

Shaun aRe wrote:
>
> Yup indeedy. The drum, song and dance camp we both went to this last
> August - I was flirted with outragiously. One point the woman came up where
> we were sat by the fire, sat on Kath's foot, facing me, back to Kath,
> flirting away - Kath thought it was freakin' hilarious (TF!).

Interesting. My wife also thinks it's funny. I guess she knows me
well enough to know I wouldn't even think of entertaining a notion of
taking up an implied offer.

Hmmm. Maybe I'm too predictable....

E.P.

[Ride-A-Lot]

GeeDubb wrote:
>
> "Ride-A-Lot" >
>> You don't want to **** off Angelina. She's a tough chick.
>>
>> :)
>
> but doesn't ride.......how tough can she be?\

Oh she can ride, alright ;)!!!!!! And all night long too!

>
>
> :-)
>
> Gary (getting packed for a week in Colorado....bbrrrrrrrrrrr)

You suck! I'm riding probably in pouring rain tomorrow with Lance.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

[MattB]

gabrielle wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:11:10 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>
>
>>Yeah right. And I'm Brad Pitt.
>
>
> Ok, now I'm *really* ****ed that you didn't show up at AMB-ID.
>
> FEAR MY WRATH!!! ;)
>
> gabrielle

As a Brad Pitt lookalike, that just makes me feel cheap.
You women are all the same...

Matt (coworkers were calling me Leonardo Pitt at our last get together)

[GeeDubb]

"Ride-A-Lot" > wrote in message
...
> GeeDubb wrote:
>>
>> "Ride-A-Lot" >
>>> You don't want to **** off Angelina. She's a tough chick.
>>>
>>> :)
>>
>> but doesn't ride.......how tough can she be?\
>
> Oh she can ride, alright ;)!!!!!! And all night long too!
>

(vibrator_noise.wav).........sorry, you asked for it!

>> :-)
>>
>> Gary (getting packed for a week in Colorado....bbrrrrrrrrrrr)
>
> You suck! I'm riding probably in pouring rain tomorrow with Lance.
>
rumor has it that it might snow next week in CO.......now where'd I put my
studded bike tires.....

Gary

[Shaun aRe]

"Bill Sornson" > wrote in message
...
> Shaun aRe wrote:
>
> > Then I'm a ****ing medium, Eejit.
>
> They sell pills for that now, Shaun.
>
> (Sorry, mate -- had to be done.)
>
> <EG>

I'm ill. I don't understand.





Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Shaun aRe wrote:
> > > wrote in message
> > ups.com...
> > >
> > > Dave W wrote:
> > > > "gabrielle" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > > On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:18:00 -0400, Ride-A-Lot wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> x1134x wrote:
> > > > >>>>If you're the latter, you'll need to grow up. Just hope you
don't
> > run
> > > > >>>>across JD on the trail before you do.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he yells at
> > > > >>> skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and
> > it's
> > > > >>> alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
> > > > >>> wrestler. Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the
> > middle
> > > > >>> finger and then been driven off on.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Just let me know where and when so I can sell tickets to your
> > funeral.
> > > > > No ****, put me on the "will-call" list right now.
> > > > >
> > > > > gabrielle
> > > >
> > > > you people are so full of his ****....good god!
> > >
> > > Naw - you're just mad 'cuz he called you on your crap.
> >
> > And you lot seem to have reading comrehension difficulties over this
issue.
>
> Hardly.
>
> > What bit of: "I wonder if JD has ever been told to FO or STFU when he
yells
> > at skidiots. Of course I have no idea of his physical stature, and it's
> > alot harder to tell someone off if they look like a professional
wrestler.
> > Maybe he's been told that he's "number one" with the middle finger and
then
> > been driven off on."
> >
> > Do you think is anything but questions and speculation? What bit of the
> > statment even *implies* the writer of it he's saying he'd have a go? Gee
> > Zeus...
>
> Talk about reading comprehension. I wasn't replying to *that*.
>
> I'm replying to Dave's JD-leg-humping.
>
> X-box's bull**** is just that. Another newbie troll.
>
> > > Get over it already - isn't three/four years enough for an inferiority
> > > complex?
> > >
> > > Jeez, if you have such a hassle, get to L.A. and sort it out like a
> > > real man. Quit whining in usenet, you pussy.
> >
> > Right - real men drive across the country to fist fight over name
calling.
> > FFS...
>
> It's easy to call names from behind a computer screen.
>
> How many years has Dave been ****ing and moaning over JD, now?
>
> If it's that damned important to him, then he should get in his car and
> drive a little to settle his hassle once and for all. Or STFU about it
> already.
>
> I know you're a "last-word-in" kind of guy, so go ahead. :)

'off'

',;~}~

[Shaun aRe]

"MattB" > wrote in message
...
> Shaun aRe wrote:
> > "MattB" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Shaun aRe wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Again, what difference does that make? A ring on your finger is not
a
> >>>>>deflector shield for women. I guess on your planet, women never have
> >>>>>affairs with married men, right?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Logic, indeed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Too right! Had TONS more female attention and been flirted with far
more
> >>>>*and* more heavily, *since* I got married, than ever before, in fact.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>That has been my experience as well. And sometimes right in front of
> >>>my wife.
> >>>
> >>>It's the weirdest damn thing ever.
> >>>
> >>>E.P.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Huh. For me it's been about the same as before getting hitched. Some,
> >>but not a whole lot.
> >
> >
> > Yeah Matt but you look repulsive. ',;~}~
> >
> >
> > Shaun aRe
> >
> >
>
> And I'm glad you think so, you handsome devil, you!

Cheers Matt. 'Bout time you joined the ranks and admitted that.

',;~}~


Shaun aRe

[Shaun aRe]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Shaun aRe wrote:
> >
> > Yup indeedy. The drum, song and dance camp we both went to this last
> > August - I was flirted with outragiously. One point the woman came up
where
> > we were sat by the fire, sat on Kath's foot, facing me, back to Kath,
> > flirting away - Kath thought it was freakin' hilarious (TF!).
>
> Interesting. My wife also thinks it's funny. I guess she knows me
> well enough to know I wouldn't even think of entertaining a notion of
> taking up an implied offer.

Aye, Kath knows me all too well too!

This lass, well it was obvious that she didn't know that Kath and I were
even together, let alone married. Straightened her out soon as though, I
introduced them. She looked a little stunned, then left shortly after,
heheheh...

> Hmmm. Maybe I'm too predictable....

Hey - if it's predictably faithful mate, that's a good thing.



Shaun aRe